Asee peer logo

Comparing Student Experiences And Growth In A Cooperative, Hands On, Active, Problem Based Learning Environment To An Active, Problem Based Environment.

Download Paper |


2007 Annual Conference & Exposition


Honolulu, Hawaii

Publication Date

June 24, 2007

Start Date

June 24, 2007

End Date

June 27, 2007



Conference Session

ChE: Innovations in Student Learning

Tagged Division

Chemical Engineering

Page Count


Page Numbers

12.381.1 - 12.381.9



Permanent URL

Download Count


Request a correction

Paper Authors

author page

Paul Golter Washington State University Orcid 16x16

author page

Bernard Van Wie Washginton State University

author page

Gary Brown Washington State University

Download Paper |

NOTE: The first page of text has been automatically extracted and included below in lieu of an abstract

Abstract Two questions that frequently come up when developing a teaching method that tries to combine best practices from multiple pedagogies are: Is this better than how we normally teach? And which pedagogy is giving the most benefit. In the spring semester of 2006 we had a large enough junior class to separate our required Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer course, ChE 332, into two sections. One section was taught using a novel pedagogy that combines Cooperative, Hands-on, Active, and Problem based learning (CHAPL). The other was taught initially in a manner that attempted to simply remove the hands-on component of the pedagogy. In response to student feedback, this was shifted to an inter- group collaborative environment with each group providing hands-on demonstrations for the rest of the class. As shown by a focus group study, survey, and end-of-semester written course evaluations, the students in the CHAPL section showed greater enthusiasm for the course. Sections of the students reports from projects in the class were also analyzed using a critical thinking rubric (CTR) developed by the Washington State University (WSU) Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology (CTLT). The CTR assesses four categories (problem identification, solution method, assumption quality and solution quality) on a 6 point scale. The students in the CHAPL section appear to show more growth in critical thinking than those in the other section. Introduction Instructors in the science and engineering disciplines are beginning to show enthusiasm for incorporating novel learning pedagogies into their classrooms and are seeing significant results. Some examples of this include POGIL[1], developed in chemistry, and Hi-Pele[2], developed in chemical engineering. These pedagogies are playing an important role in a Chemical Engineering Fluid Mechanics and Heat Transfer (FMHT) course being taken at Washington State University which employs simultaneous use of Cooperative, Hands-on, Active, and Problem based Learning or an approach we call CHAPL[3]. The CHAPL pedagogy is a combination of Cooperative, Hands-on, Active, and Problem based learning. Students are divided into home teams. Home teams are instructor assigned to blend students by academic achievement while taking student schedule and preference into account. Each student within a home team is responsible for a core concept of the course. Members of each home team assign the concepts as they see fit. Students from different home teams who have the same core concept form ‘jigsaw’ groups[4] which spend two class periods developing a teaching module that they will lead their respective home teams through. Each core concept also has a hands-on module that allows for experimentation and illustration. After the jigsaw groups have developed their teaching modules, the home teams rotate through the core concepts. As all of this is going on the professor and TA(s) coach the groups, spending time listening, asking guiding questions, and correcting misconceptions. After this, the home teams have a design project that incorporates all of the concepts covered. The hands on modules are small scale apparatus mounted on wheeled stands along with a whiteboard. The resulting unit is roughly six feet tall and four feet wide. Even though the modules are largely self contained and require minimal hookups, electricity only for the majority of them, their size relegates them to laboratory space. To address this we developed Desktop Learning Modules (DLMs), the Fig. 1 – DLM design. One gallon reservoirs for hot & cold water feed to interchangeable see-through fluids and heat transfer cartridges with digital display of flow rates, temperatures and pressures.

Golter, P., & Van Wie, B., & Brown, G. (2007, June), Comparing Student Experiences And Growth In A Cooperative, Hands On, Active, Problem Based Learning Environment To An Active, Problem Based Environment. Paper presented at 2007 Annual Conference & Exposition, Honolulu, Hawaii. 10.18260/1-2--3026

ASEE holds the copyright on this document. It may be read by the public free of charge. Authors may archive their work on personal websites or in institutional repositories with the following citation: © 2007 American Society for Engineering Education. Other scholars may excerpt or quote from these materials with the same citation. When excerpting or quoting from Conference Proceedings, authors should, in addition to noting the ASEE copyright, list all the original authors and their institutions and name the host city of the conference. - Last updated April 1, 2015