] and they have since been distributed to dozens of institutions across the United States as partof a large NSF IUSE grant effort. Figure 1 shows hydraulic loss and double pipe heat exchangerLCDLM kits, both small enough to fit on a standard desk and highly visual. A B Figure 1: Hydraulic loss (A) and double pipe heat exchanger (B) LCDLM kitsThe 2020 coronavirus pandemic has presented a unique challenge in our effort to disseminateand implement LCDLMs across the country; a majority of the participating universities in ourstudy transitioned to an online teaching model in spring of 2020, making in-person use of theLCDLMs unfeasible. Over the past year, our team has developed several virtual
, a proposal was submitted in2013 to the Kansas Soybean Commission called “Beyond the Book: Active Learning throughBiodiesel (#ALT-B)” to develop a freshman course which would include a laboratory componentcentered around the production of biodiesel. Students would be exposed to all of the processesand chemical engineering concepts related to biodiesel production including reactions,separations, fluid flow, heat and mass transfer, process control, thermodynamics, and materialand energy balances. The goal was to introduce students to the fundamental concepts at a highlevel while providing an opportunity to see how the concepts are integrated while exploring in ahands-on laboratory. The production of biodiesel was selected because the
capable… I just think it logically follows to like have an intent to go out and be successful as part of like the workforce being an operating members society of these special skills and the special knowledge. It’s the whole reason you're there. Or at least pursuing like that specific degree.” – Dan Dan has framed success within the bounds of having an engineering position and being future-oriented. Kate similarly sees success as being future-oriented but also brings attention to the process of becoming successful. To Kate, “success is a state function.” A state function means the path taken from A to B is independent of the route taken. Therefore, there are many paths to being successful. While Kate notes grades
students in the geosciences. Advances in Engineering Education. 8(4).Fey, S. B., Theus, M. E., & Ramirez, A. R. (2020). Course-based undergraduate research experiences in a remote setting: Two case studies documenting implementation and student perceptions. Academic Practice in Ecology and Evolution. 10(22): 12528-12541.Foertsch, J. A., Alexander, B. B., & Penberthy, D. L. (1997). Evaluation of the UW-Madison’s summer undergraduate research programs: Final report. Madison, WI.Gates, A. Q., Teller, P. J., Bernat, A., Delgado, N., & Della-Piana, C. K. (1998). Meeting the challenge of expanding participation in the undergraduate research experience. In Frontiers in Education Conference, 1998. FIE’98
the recitation would be devoted to students working on special homework problems(“section problems”) which we describe next.Each week, one of the students’ homework problems, written by E. B., was more authentic than a typicaltextbook problem. Students would be required to make their own assumptions and set their own designcriteria, and might have to look up information to solve the problem (i.e. in handbooks, published researcharticles, etc.). In general, they would have to make design decisions with limited information, just as anengineer would do in the workplace. An example problem is in Figure 1. These section problems were 50%of students’ weekly homework grades. Students would be given 15 minutes in section each week to workon these
each student will write their individual memo based on some or all of the results from that brainstorming session and the resultant HAZOP table. You may prepare your HAZOP analysis on a reactor, separator, distillation tower, tank or other unit in your process.”An additional individual assignment the instructor assigns to the students include a quiz on anassigned CSB video, with questions listed here [7]:Process safety video quiz “A. What was the original chemical hazard (flammability, reactivity, or toxicity) in this accident? What was the chemical that posed this hazard? B. What actions did the operators perform that were directly linked to the explosion? C. Which Risk-Based Process Safety (RBPS) pillar or
Paper ID #33919Exploration of a Nontraditional Assessment Method Using a ParticipatoryApproachDr. Tamara Floyd Smith, Tuskegee University Dr. Tamara Floyd Smith is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at Tuskegee University. She has been a faculty member at Tuskegee University for 18 years. She currently teaches Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer. Those courses integrate well with her scientific research portfolio. She is also actively engaged in engineering education research. American c Society for Engineering Education, 2021 Exploration of a Non
. However, itbecame clear within the first week of lab that a) it was necessary to prevent the masks from beingexposed to individuals using the PPE table and b) students needed somewhere to place theirreusable / cloth masks after removing them. To address this, the instructor began placing eachmask in a plastic bag. Students could then remove and don the mask inside and place their clothmask into the empty bag.Compliance with mask requirements was excellent. There was only one occasion during the twosemesters in which the lab operated under COVID-19 policies when a student failed to complywith mask requirements. That case was early in the first semester, and the student had simplyforgotten to wear / bring a mask to lab.Despite requiring the viewing
correctly completed 277% of assigned challenge activities but scored 70% onthe exam. A low Pearson coefficient signifies a poor linear correlation, which for studentscompleting more than required is shown to have flat trend lines. Those who overachieve onchallenge activities are more likely to receive higher exam grades which corresponds to an A orB. The y-intercepts for greater than 100% for all exams is in the B range and since the trend lines 6closely represent horizontal fits, students who overachieve, correlate to high exam scores. Thosewho overachieve on challenge activities are more likely to receive higher exam grades, whichcorresponds to an A
. Liberatore, and A. P. Malefyt, "Problem Solving When Using Student- Written YouTube Problems," in ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, 2019, doi: https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--33193. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/33193[23] S. J. Grigg, J. Van Dyken, L. Benson, and B. Morkos, "Process analysis as a feedback tool for development of engineering problem solving skills," in ASEE Annual Meeting, Atlanta, 2013, p. 6505, doi: https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22372. [Online]. Available: https://peer.asee.org/22372[24] S. J. Grigg and L. Benson, "Promoting problem solving proficiency in first year engineering process assessment," in ASEE Annual Meeting, Seattle, WA, 2015, doi: https://doi.org
Paper ID #34414Qualitative Analysis of Skills in a CHE Laboratory CourseDr. Heather C. S. Chenette, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Heather Chenette is an Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at Rose-Hulman Institute of Tech- nology. Her professional interests include enhancing student learning in the classroom and creating op- portunities for students to learn about membrane materials and bioseparation processes through research experiences.Dr. Daniel D. Anastasio, Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology Daniel Anastasio is an assistant professor at Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. He received a B.S. and
report FY 2015,” 2016.[5] United States Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB), “Impact Report FY 2016,” 2017.[6] ABET, “Criteria for Accrediting Engineering Programs,” 2018. [Online]. Available: https://www.abet.org/accreditation/accreditation-criteria/criteria-for-accrediting- engineering-programs-2019-2020/.[7] S. J. Dee, B. L. Cox, and R. A. Ogle, “Connect with Wiley,” Process Saf. Prog., vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 316–319, 2015.[8] B. K. Vaughen and T. A. Kletz, “Continuing our process safety management journey,” Process Saf. Prog., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 337–342, 2012, doi: 10.1002/prs.11515.[9] E. Mkpat, G. Reniers, and V. Cozzani, “Process safety education: A literature review,” J. Loss
Paper ID #33339Using Existing University Resources: Integration of the UniversityWriting Center into a Senior-level Laboratory Series for ImprovedLearning OutcomesProf. Stephanie G. Wettstein, Montana State University - Bozeman Stephanie Wettstein is an Associate Professor in the Chemical and Biological Engineering department at Montana State University in Bozeman, MT. She is associated with MEERC and has been the faculty advisor of the MSU SWE chapter since 2013.Dr. Jennifer R. Brown, Montana State University - Bozeman Jennifer Brown is an Associate Professor in the Chemical and Biological Engineering Department at Montana
Paper ID #34342Work in Progress: Modeling the Effect of Hematocrit on Blood CellSeparations Using a Hands-on Learning Device and Microbead Blood Simu-lantKitana Kaiphanliam, Washington State University Kitana Kaiphanliam is a doctoral candidate in the Voiland School of Chemical Engineering and Bio- engineering at Washington State University (WSU). Her research focuses include miniaturized, hands-on learning modules for engineering education and bioreactor design for T cell manufacturing. She has been working with Prof. Bernard Van Wie on the Educating Diverse Undergraduate Communities with Affordable Transport Equipment
students. She was selected as a UIC Teaching Scholar for Spring 2017, named as an American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE) ”35 under 35” winner in the education category for 2017 and named as American Society for Engineering Education (ASEE) ”20 under 40” awardee for 2018.Prof. James W. Pellegrino, The University of Illinois at Chicago James W. Pellegrino is Liberal Arts and Sciences Distinguished Professor and Founding Co-director of the Learning Sciences Research Institute at the University of Illinois at Chicago. His research and devel- opment interests focus on children’s and adult’s thinking and learning and the implications of cognitive research and theory for assessment and instructional practice. He
in thiswork by collecting additional survey responses.References[1] L. Bullard, R. Felder, and D. Raubenheimer, “Effects of active learning on student performance and retention in chemical engineering,” Annual Conference of the American Society for Engineering Education, Pittsburgh, PA. 2008.[2] S. Nogales-Delgado, S. Román Suero, and J. M. E. Martín, “COVID-19 outbreak: Insights about teaching tasks in a chemical engineering laboratory,” Educ. Sci., vol. 10, no. 9, p. 226, 2020.[3] A. K. Brady and D. Pradhan, “Learning without borders: Asynchronous and Distance Learning in the Age of COVID-19 and Beyond,” ATS Sch., vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 233–242, 2020.[4] L. Kohnke and B. L. Moorhouse, “Facilitating synchronous online
significant. The uniqueconditions of the spring, with students at our institution leaving campus and course instructionrapidly shifting to remote/online delivery, could certainly affect student responses, but it isinteresting to observe that the two cohorts appear to be impacted differently. a a (a) (b)Figure 1. Average student survey ratings of (a) chemical engineering self-efficacy and (b) coping self-efficacy forthe 2019-2020 academic year. Error bars indicate the 95
concentration distribution of chocolate in milk within the tube over the entire radius and length of the tube. (a) Plot this concentration distribution against z and r in a properly labeled surface plot. (b) What are the following chocolate concentration values, to four significant digits? - Midpoint of the tube length, and at r = 1 cm - End of the tube length (z = 20 cm), and at center of tube (c) What is the average concentration of chocolate in the milk exiting the tube?Each of the questions (a) through (c) are answered by solution of the PDE provided, andaccording to the initial and boundary conditions described. The first steps of specifying problemgeometry and dimensional
transcripts independently andidentified positive and negative teamwork interactions. The researchers then tabulated thesuccessful and unsuccessful interactions according to the following categories and subcategories: 1. Team relationships a. Members show respect for each other b. Members demonstrate commitment to team success c. Members resolve differences to benefit the entire team 2. Joint work products a. Members contribute to developing shared team goals b. Multiple members produce joint outcomes reflecting synergistic inputs from everyone c. Members enable one another to contribute effectively in joint work 3. Individual work products a. Teams allocate some work of
discussed theresults in the context of established metal corrosion mechanisms. The discussion emphasized thations present in the low salt condition would increase the rate of metal corrosion and the lack ofdissolved oxygen in the saturated salt condition would decrease the rate of metal corrosion [31].To conclude, students completed a post-test and post-survey to assess how their knowledge ofbiomaterials and attitudes towards STEM changed as a result of the experiment, respectively(Appendices A & B). Figure 1: Representative data demonstrating successful paperclip corrosion and quantitative fatigue bendingtests. (A) Example of a corroded paperclip after incubation in salt water. (B) Schematic representation of paperclip fatigue bending test
and retention. Student Success, 8(2), 123. https://doi.org/10.5204/ssj.v8i2.387Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. College Student Development and Academic Life: Psychological, Intellectual, Social and Moral Issues, July, 251–263.Berger, J. B., & Milem, J. F. (2000). Organization behavior in higher education and student outcomes. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research2 (Volume XV, pp. 268–338). Agathon Press.Bolman, L. G., & Deal, T. E. (1991). Leadership and management effectiveness: A multi-frame, multi-sector analysis. Human Resource Management, 30(4), 509–534. https://doi.org/10.7748/ns.4.5.23.s40Bonner, M., Koch, T., &
the camp session thatare intended to be shared with participants. Appendix B gives a simple description ofbackground concepts involved in the lesson, which is intended for instructors unfamiliar with theapplications.Connections to Chemical EngineeringThe authors are chemical engineering faculty and interdisciplinary students in the research labsof those faculty. While the activities for the BME major at Grandparent University are themedaround two major organs in the human body, the authors designed the activities to emphasizeseparation process principles and transport phenomena—two key areas of the chemicalengineering curriculum. The kidney activities focus on filtration involving both adsorption tosurfaces and pore and particle size-based
Management Journal, vol. 26, pp. 587-595, 1983.[12] D. W. Organ, "Organizational citizenship behavior: It's construct clean-up time," Human performance, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 85-97, 1997.[13] J. A. LePine, A. Erez, and D. E. Johnson, "The nature and dimensionality of organizational citizenship behavior: a critical review and meta-analysis," Journal of applied psychology, vol. 87, no. 1, p. 52, 2002.[14] P. M. Podsakoff, S. B. MacKenzie, R. H. Moorman, and R. Fetter, "Transformational leader behaviors and their effects on followers' trust in leader, satisfaction, and organizational citizenship behaviors," The leadership quarterly, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 107-142, 1990.[15] C. C. Lin and T
," Anatomical Sciences Education, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 516-528, 2016, doi: 10.1002/ase.1608.[3] D. C. Haak, J. HilleRisLambers, E. Pitre, and S. Freeman, "Increased Structure and Active Learning Reduce the Achievement Gap in Introductory Biology," Science, vol. 332, no. 6034, pp. 1213-1216, June 3, 2011 2011, doi: 10.1126/science.1204820.[4] S. L. Eddy and K. A. Hogan, "Getting Under the Hood: How and for Whom Does Increasing Course Structure Work?," Cbe-Life Sci Educ, vol. 13, no. 3, pp. 453-468, September 21, 2014 2014, doi: 10.1187/cbe.14-03-0050.[5] B. Hanks, L. Murphy, B. Simon, R. McCauley, and C. Zander, "CS1 students speak: advice for students by students," ACM SIGCSE Bulletin, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 19
] solution for [that homework problem] to the solution posted on [the course learning management system]. Identify each mistake you [the student] made (if any) and classify the reason for the mistake as (a) not identifying the problem as testing the validity of rate expression, (b) not determining the reactor type, (c) not correctly writing the reactor mole balance, (d) not correctly substituting the rate expression into the mole balance, (e) not integrating the mole balance (if necessary) (e) not linearizing the equation correctly, (f) not calculating the variables in the equation correctly for each data point, not fitting a straight line to the model correctly, (g) not analyzing the results of
Paper ID #33204Chemical Engineers’ Experiences of Ethics in the Health Products IndustryMs. Dayoung Kim, Purdue University at West Lafayette Dayoung Kim is a Ph.D. Candidate in Engineering Education at Purdue University. Her current research interest centers on engineering ethics and social responsibility, and she is specifically interested in cul- tural influences on engineers’ moral formation. She earned her B.S. in Chemical Engineering at Yonsei University (Seoul, South Korea) in 2017 and M.S. in Chemical Engineering at Purdue University (West Lafayette, USA) in 2021.Dr. Alison J. Kerr, University of Illinois Urbana
graduate students (3.3%). The overall participants’ age range and genderdistribution is given by frequency (Figure 2a) and percentage (Figure 2b). The percentages ofparticipants by gender and age range were comparable. (a) (b)Figure 2 Overall participant distribution by age and gender: (a) frequency and (b) percentage (N = 179).The ethnicity distribution was as follows: 3 African American (1.6%), 46 Asian (25.0%), 91Caucasian/White (49.5%), 9 Hispanic/Latino (4.9%), 31 Other (16.8%) and 4 Multiple (2.2%).In the Other category, students reported (24) Middle Eastern, (4) African, (1) East Indian, and (2)Native American. Figure 3 shows the ethnicity distribution by
of Kahoot in the learning process of science and mathematics", Education Sciences Vol. 9, No. 1, 2019, pp. 55.[5] Plump, C.M., and J. LaRosa," Using Kahoot! in the classroom to create engagement and active learning: A game-based technology solution for eLearning novices", Management Teaching Review Vol. 2, No. 2, 2017, pp. 151-158.[6] Triyono, B., and A.F.R. Syafei," Using Lino. it application in teaching English", Journal of English Language Teaching Vol. 5, No. 1, 2016, pp. 137-145.[7] Stead, D.R.," A review of the one-minute paper", Active learning in higher education Vol. 6, No. 2, 2005, pp. 118-131.[8] Chizmar, J.F., and A.L. Ostrosky," The one-minute paper: Some empirical findings", The
technologies in all stages, (b) The optimization of COVID-19 ventilators across the counties of New JerseyIndustry or government-sponsored engineering clinic projectsOne of the key highlights of the HMRCoE at Rowan University is the Engineering Clinicprogram. This is a requirement for each undergraduate student for all four years of their degreeprogram. In the junior and senior years, the student is required to join a project related toresearch offered by the Engineering Professors based on their area of research expertise as wellas federal and industry sponsorship. These projects span from designing phone and computerapplications to testing machinery for use in industry. There is a wide span of projects between allthe different engineering
Technology by the Numbers 2019, Washington, D.C.: American Society for Engineering Eduation, 2020.[2] L. P. Ford, J. Brennan, J. Cole, K. D. Dahm, M. V. Jamison, L. J. Landherr, D. L. Silverstein, B. K. Vaughen, M. A. Vigeant and S. W. Thiel, "How We Teach: Chemical Engineering in the First Year," in 127th ASEE Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada, 2020.[3] D. L. Silverstein and M. Vigeant, "Results of the 2010 Survey on Teaching Chemical Reaction Engineering," Chemical Engineering Education, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 31-40, 2012.[4] H. S. Fogler, Elements of Chemical Reaction Engineering, Pearson, 2016.[5] H. S. Fogler, Essentials of Chemical Reaction Engineering, Pearson, 2018.[6] D. L. Silverstein and M. A. Vigeant, "How We Teach