Paper ID #15090Using Time More Efficiently: Converting an Interview Protocol to a SurveyDr. Paul B. Golter, Washington State University Paul B. Golter obtained an M.S. and Ph.D. from Washington State University and made the switch from Instructional Laboratory Supervisor to Post-Doctoral Research Associate on an engineering education project. His research area has been engineering education, specifically around the development and as- sessment of technologies to bring fluid mechanics and heat transfer laboratory experiences into the class- room.Dr. Olusola Adesope, Washington State University Dr. Olusola O. Adesope is
version of desktop learning modules.David B. Thiessen, Washington State University David B.Thiessen received his Ph.D. in Chemical Engineering from the University of Colorado in 1992 and has been at Washington State University since 1994. His research interests include fluid physics, acoustics, and engineering education.Prof. Bernard J. Van Wie, Washington State University Prof. Bernard J. Van Wie received his B.S., M.S. and Ph.D., and did his postdoctoral work at the University of Oklahoma where he also taught as a visiting lecturer. He has been on the Washington State University faculty for 32 years and for the past 18 years has focused on innovative pedagogy research and technical research in biotechnology. His 2007
, negative $25, and $100 per ton for P, P2, and P3, respectively. (Note that this means producing P2 actually results in a financial loss.) The direct treatment option costs $300 per ton of W. Raw materials arrive to the plant at a rate of 7,500 tons of X and 10,000 tons of Y per day. Assume all reactions run to completion. Determine how much of each product and treated waste should be created per day to maximize refinery profits.Process Control Example Develop the set of dynamic equations that describe two isothermal CSTRs in series, depicted in Figure 1 on the next page, using an actuator/process/sensor model approach. Assume that a single irreversible reaction A→B occurs in this system where the rate of reaction is given by r=kC
, L. T. N.; Rocha, L. M.; Nguyen, C. B. C.; Houchens, B. C.; Bautista-Chavez, A. M.: Volunteerism in Engineering Outreach: Motivations and Surprising Outcomes for Undergraduate Mentors. In Frontiers in Education Conference (FIE), 2014 IEEE, 2014; pp 1-8.2. Clary, E. G.; Snyder, M. The Motivations to Volunteer Theoretical and Practical Considerations. Current Directions in Psychological Science 1999, 8, 156-159.3. Lane, N. Benjamin Franklin, Civic Scientist. Physics Today 2003, 56, 41-46.4. Nae Grand Challenges for Engineering. http://www.engineeringchallenges.org/.5. National Academy of Engineering: Changing the Conversation: Messages for Improving PublicUnderstanding of Engineering The National
from position A to position B as shown in the diagram below. Calculate the pump work needed if the fluid is water. Calculate the pump work needed if the fluid is ketchup. Properties of the fluids are included.Experiment Procedure and ResultsFive gallons of Heinz Ketchup was purchased for the experiment, choosing a name brandfor its reputation of high viscosity.First, the students poured about 400 ml of ketchup into a 600 ml beaker and measured theviscosity from 20 to 200 rpm using a Brookfield viscometer. The students had used theviscometer in the previous semester, and were familiar with its operation. However, theyhad not found the flow characteristic index and flow behavior index for a non-Newtonianfluid. This experiment required
MethodsThe experimental protocol is as follows: a. Load alginate/drug solution into the syringe and remove bubbles. Place syringe into the syringe pump and set to a flow rate of 1 mL/min. b. Place beaker with 100 mL 6% calcium chloride solution underneath the pump set up. Start the pump and make a batch of 50 spherical beads. c. Turn off the pump and filter out the beads into a weigh boat. d. Repeat the process to fabricate a second batch of 50 beads. One of these batches will be for the controlled release experiment and the other will be used to calculate the maximum loading. e. Dry the excess solution on the surface of the spheres by blotting with a kimwipe and measure the
R. Sweet, Eds., Montreal, McGill- Queen's University Press, 2003, pp. 175-196.3. ABET, Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs, Baltimore: ABET, 2014, p. 3.4. Johri and B. Olds, Eds., Cambridge Handbook of Engineering Education Research, Cambridge: Cambridge, 2014, p. 736.5. D. Kolb, Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development, Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 1994.6. V. Gyn, "The Educational Orientation of Cooperative Education: A Critical Variable in Effectiveness," Journal of Cooperative Education, vol. XXX, no. 1, pp. 17-25, 1994.7. F. Ricks, "Principles for Structuring Cooperative Education Programs," Journal of Cooperative Education, vol. XXX1, no. 2-3, pp
. The control group had only traditionalinstruction (X1) and no prediction or reflection activities. A focus group of students wasassembled from those who participated in the prediction activities to further observe the impactof the activities on student learning.Table 1: Experimental Design. The same HECI test was administered pre- and post-instruction as a quantitativeform of observation (O1). In addition to traditional instruction (X1), the instruction received by Class B alsoincluded prediction activities (X2) and instruction in Class C also included reflection activities (X3). A voluntaryfocus group was assembled of students from Class B and Class C. HECI Traditional Prediction Reflection
) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory and freshman design laboratory. His research interests focus on undergraduate education, targeted drug delivery, photobioreactor design, and instrumentation. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 Implementation and Usage of an Online Environment in a Chemical Engineering CurriculumAbstractWe have developed an online system to serve as a hub for student activities in our chemicalengineering
. S., Shahid, A., & Bauer, K. W. 2002. Impact of undergraduate research experience inengineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(2), 151-157.8. Seymour, E., Hunter, A-B., Laursen, S. L., & Deantoni, T. 2004. Establishing the benefits of research experiencesfor undergraduates in the sciences: First findings from a three-year study. Science Education, 88, 493-534.9. Lopatto, D. 2007. Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. CBELife Sciences Education, 6, 297-306.10. Yoder, B. L. 2013. Engineering by the Numbers. American Society for Engineering Education. 37 pp.http://www.asee.org/papers-and-publications/publications/14_11-47.pdf11. URSSA, Undergraduate Research Student Self
choice to use theaforementioned equipment or their own, with the stipulation that the final product be in highdefinition. At [B], the faculty member made a number of iPads available to the students, alongwith tripods and microphones. Students who used the iPads were able to edit video directly onthe device using iMovie. A number of other apps, including TouchCast, Explain Everything, andStop Motion Studio were also made available but used less frequently that iMovie. At [C],students were given access to semiprofessional cameras and editing software on dedicatedmachines with either iMovie or Adobe Premiere installed, though most students used theirpersonal devices and editing software which came with their device or was provided byUniversity site
offered during the spring semester of the sophomore year. As can be observed from Figure 1A, the performance of students in the MEB course follows a general bell curve; however the Figure 1. Sophomore course statistics. Grade distributions for percentage of students with a students enrolled in the (A) Material & Energy Balance course and failing grade or a grade of W (B
Paper ID #15699A Chemical Engineering Success Course for Transfer StudentsDr. Taryn Melkus Bayles, University of Pittsburgh Taryn Bayles, Ph.D., is a NTS Professor of Chemical Engineering in the Chemical and Petroleum Engi- neering Department at the University of Pittsburgh, where she incorporates her industrial experience by bringing practical examples and interactive learning to help students understand fundamental engineering principles. Her current research focuses on engineering education, outreach and curriculum development. c American Society for Engineering Education, 2016 A
Paper ID #17462Teaching Chemical Engineering Courses in a Biomolecular Engineering Pro-gramProf. Faisal Shaikh, Milwaukee School of Engineering Dr. Faisal Shaikh joined MSOE about 6 years ago in a unique interdisciplinary engineering program called BioMolecular engineering. The program was a combination of molecular biology and chemical engineering and is unique in the nation. Being the lone chemical engineering faculty member in the pro- gram, he was tasked of developing a significant number of the core chemical engineering courses, albeit with a focus on biology. The program recently successfully went through the
Paper ID #14740How We Teach Process Control: 2015 Survey ResultsDr. David L. Silverstein P.E., University of Kentucky David L. Silverstein is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at the University of Kentucky. He is also the Director of the College of Engineering’s Extended Campus Programs in Paducah, Kentucky, where he has taught for 15 years. His PhD and MS studies in ChE were completed at Vanderbilt University, and his BSChE at the University of Alabama. Silverstein’s research interests include conceptual learning tools and training, and he has particular interests in faculty development. He is the recipient of several
Paper ID #15599Impacts of Engineering Engagement Activities for First-Year StudentsJacqueline K Burgher, Washington State University Jacqueline Burgher is a PhD Candidate at Washington State University in the Voiland School of Chemical and Biological Engineering. She received her bachelor’s degree from Anderson University, worked in industry, received an MBA from Anderson University and is currently working with Prof. Bernard J. Van Wie on fabricating, optimizing, and implementing a miniaturized gasification system for use in the engineering classroom.Prof. Bernard J. Van Wie, Washington State University Prof. Bernard
Paper ID #14724Hands-on, Screens-on, and Brains-on Activities for Important Concepts inHeat TransferDr. Margot A Vigeant, Bucknell University Margot Vigeant is a professor of chemical engineering and an associate dean of engineering at Bucknell University. She earned her B.S. in chemical engineering from Cornell University, and her M.S. and Ph.D., also in chemical engineering, from the University of Virginia. Her primary research focus is on engineering pedagogy at the undergraduate level. She is particularly interested in the teaching and learning of concepts related to thermodynamics. She is also interested in active
(using a cubic B-spline algorithm implemented via VisualBasic for Applications, or VBA) and then drawing the McCabe-Thiele diagram in MicrosoftExcel. In this way, the effect of changes to the operating conditions can be easily demonstrated.Furthermore, the method will locate the azeotrope if the system has one.The goals of this paper are to provide instructors a quick, automated method of generating aMcCabe-Thiele diagram for a nonideal binary system to facilitate classroom instruction, to aidstudents in learning about and manipulating these diagrams, and to demonstrate how to integrateVBA calculations (including the cubic B-splines) into an Excel worksheet.NotationVariable Definitiona,b,c,d Cubic equation coefficientsA The
engaged learning style preferencesacross the Felder-Silverman dimensions.With these observations, we became more interested in variability in student performance acrossdifferent sections of material balances, and whether faculty with “low performing” sectionsshared any similar features in their exams.Data on final grades were gathered for six faculty (aforementioned Faculty A through F) overfive semesters (Spring 2013, Fall 2013, Spring 2014, Fall 2014, and Spring 2015). Faculty B, C,and D taught the course twice in this time period, whereas Faculty A, E, and F each taught thecourse once. There is no statistically significant difference in final grade mean between FacultyA, B, C, and F. Faculty D adjusted raw scores up at the end of term for both
the pilot plant), and review of literature (multidisciplinary in nature). Two researchers acted as "clients", providing a charge to each team with a request for design recommendations. The charge memo provided a very open-ended design task (this is the second design course; the first is a much more traditional chemical engineering process design experience). b. Each team needed to work on a tight schedule to produce recommendations for the "client". While chemical engineering issues were the primary focus of the team's work, the context of the design challenge required understanding of multidisciplinary issues
were enrolled in some or all of the junior-level core courses in thefall of 2015, but this paper presents data only for the 48 who met the criteria of one of the“cohorts” described above. Two sections were offered for each of the fall junior-level corecourses, and each section contained exactly seven of the 14 summer cohort students and 16-18 of the 34 academic-year cohort students.Data: Course GradesTable 1 presents a comparison of the two cohorts using average course grades as the solemetric for student performance. The university scale for converting letter grades to gradepoint averages is A = 4.0, B = 3.0, C = 2.0, D = 1.0, F = 0.0. The university does use plus andminus modifiers (though there is no A+, F+ or F-), which are reflected in
. It makessense then that a polymer processing should not only teach this method, but provide a hands-ondemonstration of its use in a laboratory exercise.The experiment of interest in this work required students to operate a Morgan-Press injectionmolding machine priced around $25,000. In this experiment students produced molded circulardiscs with fiber filled and unfilled polypropylene produced by RTP materials. The RTPpolypropylene pellets prices vary on fiber filler content and is available by contacting themanufacturer. The Morgan-Press and molded discs are shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. Experimental equipment and molded parts in composites lab: A) Morgan-Pressinjection molding machine B) Fiber-free polypropylene disc C) Fiber-filled
to theauthor’s ability to engage in a faculty learning community at UMD’s Swenson College ofScience and Engineering on innovative teaching practices.Bibliography1. Vaughen, B. K. An approach to help departments meet the new ABET process safety requirements. CEE 2012, 46, 129.2. Ambrose, S. A.; Bridges, M. W.; DiPietro, M.; Lovett, M. C.; Norman, M. K. How Learning Works: 7 Research- Based Principles for Smart Teaching; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA, 2014; , pp 328.3. Felder, R.; Brent, R. Active Learning: An Introduction. ASQ Higher Education Brief 2009, 4, 2.4. Bloom, B. S. Taxonomy of educational objectives: handbook I: Cognitive Domain; McKay: New York, 1956; .5. Benderly, B. L. Teaching Toolbox: No Accident. Prism 2016, January
author is happily willingto disseminate all Concept Quiz prompts to any faculty interested in use of the method (they arenot explicitly published here to avoid students accessing quiz prompts through ASEE’s website);please email the author at –redacted during ASEE review phase–.Bibliographic Information1. B. Brooks, D. Gilbuena, J. Falconer, D. Silverstein, R. Miller, M. Koretsky. Preliminary development of the AIChE Concept Warehouse. Reviewed 2012 ASEE Annual Conference Proceedings, Paper ID AC 2012-4310 (2012).2. M. Koretsky, J. Falconer, B. Brooks, D. Gilbuena, D. Silverstein, C. Smith, M. Miletic. The AIChE Concept Warehouse: a web-based tool to promote concept-based instruction. Advances in Engineering Education 4 (1), 1-27
proponents of “design-based” coursework throughout the curriculum to provide students more opportunities toexperience more realistic problems.With regards to team dynamics, most teams reported positive interactions. In peer evaluation 1,only three of the 21 senior design teams made comments indicative of conflict (communicationproblems, uneven workload, etc.). In peer evaluation 2, however, that increased to one third (7 of21) of the teams having one or more comment suggesting a team dynamic or cohesion issue.This increase in reports of negative team-cohesion may be reflective of end-of-term stress andfrustration of working under pressure potentially captured by the timing of peer evaluation 2.Only one team, Team B, reported team dynamic issues in
engineering students. This process included firstidentifying suitable problems. A suitable problem for the DST is defined as an authentic, real-world design problem that has yet to be solved, and that would require significant effort, time,and expertise to solve; the purpose of the DST is not to assess ability to solve a design problem,but rather to measure how students get started framing a design problem.We located two appropriate problems for the DST, both from an email requesting ideas forsolving technological problems, issued by Deutscher Technologiedienst GmbH (used withpermission, and with minor adaptations for our purposes, see Appendix B & C).The DST was given during class time in the first week of class. Students were given 15 minutesto
, Proceedings of the 2012 ASEE Conference & Exposition, San Antonio, TX, 2012.4. Blum, MM., Cadwell, KD., Hasenwinkel, JM. A Mechanics of Materials Outreach Activity – Reconstructing the Human Body: Biomaterials and Biomimicry. Proceedings of the 2015 ASEE Conference & Exposition, Seattle, WA, 2015.5. Yen, J., Helms, M., Gibbons, S., Hinds, B., DeLuca, D., Ching, J., Gould, C., Wong, C., Hastrich, C., Zegarac, D., Eggermont, M. What Has Fins Like A Whale, Skin Like A Lizard, And Eyes Like A Moth? The Future Of Engineering, Proceedings of the 2009 ASEE Conference & Exposition, Austin, TX, 2009.6. Moore, TJ., Maruyama, K. Nature-Inspired Design: A PictureSTEM Project Curriculum Module (Curriculum Exchange
such as transportation, electricitygeneration, etc.) which encompasses about 10% of typical Fig. 2. Student responses to survey multiple questions regarding A) the efficiacy of using commonly known structures to gain a sense of scale, B)annual use[8] . Over 80% of the students found that basing the their awareness of environmental concerns after the projects conclusion, andreservoir foundation on areas that were familiar to them aided C) how accurate they feel their reservoir design would compare to actualthem in understanding the volume of reservoir volume that requirementswas required. This is important to note from both a design
Paper ID #15618Collaboration between Seniors and Freshmen on Senior Capstone ProjectsProf. Anthony Butterfield, University of Utah Anthony Butterfield is an Assistant Professor (Lecturing) in the Chemical Engineering Department of the University of Utah. He received his B. S. and Ph. D. from the University of Utah and a M. S. from the University of California, San Diego. His teaching responsibilities include the senior unit operations laboratory and freshman design laboratory. His research interests focus on undergraduate education, targeted drug delivery, photobioreactor design, and instrumentation.Kyle Joe Branch
coming to lab. This is precisely where the benefit of video SOPs andthe flipped laboratory model can be realized.Table I below is the laboratory schedule for the course, which is divided into four blocks,increasing in complexity. The Blocks are: 1. Sequential Experiments I and II (Fluidized Beds) 2. Gas Chromatography (GC), Pump Performance, and Flow in Pipes and Valves 3. Packed Bed, Vapor Liquid Equilibrium (VLE), and Heat Exchanger 4. Process Control I, II, and III (Twin-column Distillation Unit)Table I. CHE 322 Laboratory Schedule of Experiments Week of Group (Monday) A B C th January 26