['-S_,p

_ e_c _ia_l_F
_ e_a_t_u_r_e_S_e_c_ti
_._o_n_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _~)

THE FUTURE OF ENGINEERING EDUCATION

Part 2. Teaching Methods that Work

Richard M. Felder • North Carolina State University • Raleigh, NC 27695- 7905

Donald R . Woods • McMaster University • Hamilton, Ontario, Canada LBS 4L7
James E. Stice • University of Texas • Austin, TX 78712-1062
Armando Rugarcia • Iberoamericana University • Puebla, Mexico

eficiencies in engineering education

D
ment and creativity. Finally, even if nothing
have been exhaustively enumerated ... even if nothing new is added to the existing curriculum, con-
in recent years. Engineering schools new is added fining it to four years will be almost impossible
and professors have been told by countless pan- to the existing unless more efficient and effective ways to
els and blue-ribbon commissions and, in the cover the material can be found.
curriculum,
United States, by the Accreditation Board for The reality is that better teaching methods
Engineering and Technology that we must
confining it to
four years will be exist. The literature in general education, tech-
strengthen our coverage of fundamentals; teach nical education, and educational psychology is
more about "real-world" engineering design and almost impossible
replete with methods that have been shown to
operations, including quality management; unless more facilitate learning more effectively than the tra-
cover more material in frontier areas of engi- efficient and ditional single-discipline lecturing approach.
neering; offer more and better instruction in effective ways to Unfortunately, these developments have so far
both oral and written communication skills and cover the material had relatively little impact on mainstream en-
teamwork skills; provide training in critical and can be found . ... gineering education. Although their content has
creative thinking ski lls and problem-solving The reality is changed in some ways and the students use
methods; produce graduates who are conver-
that better teaching calculators and computers instead of slide
sant with engineering ethics and the connec- rules, many engineering classes are taught
tions between technology and society; and re-
methods
in exactly the same way that engineering
duce the number of hours in the engineering exist.
classes in 1960 were taught.
curriculum so that the average student can com-
The purpose of this paper is to offer alterna-
plete it in four years _f 11
tives . The instructional methods to be described have been
This is an impressive wish list-especially when the last chosen to meet the following criteria:
item is included-that cannot possibly be fulfilled using the
• They are relevant to engineering education.
approach to educating engineers that has predominated in
the past fifty years. If, for example, courses continue to be Many innovative instructional methods have been
confined to single subjects (heat transfer in one course, developed for nontechnical courses and emphasize
thermodynamics in another, environmental engineering in free discussion and expressions of student opinions,
another, technical writing in another, etc.), it will take a six- with minimal teacher-centered presentation of
or seven-year curriculum to produce engineers who have the information. We believe that involvement of students
desired proficiency in the fundamentals and are conversant is critical for effective classroom learning; however,
with methods of modern engineering practice, culturally much of the basic content of engineering courses is
literate, and skilled in communication. Moreover, if students not a matter of opinion. Educational approaches that
are assigned only well-defined convergent problems, they emphasize process exclusively to the detriment of
will never gain the skills needed to tackle and solve chal- content will not be considered.
lenging multidisciplinary problems that call for critical judg- • They can be implemented within the context of the
© Copyright ChE Division of ASEE 2000

26 Chemical Engineering Education

( Future of Engineering Education )
ordinary engineering classroom. When this chapter has been competed, the student should be able to
define the variables in the ideal gas equation of state in terms a high
An instructional approach based entirely on, say, self- school senior could understand, calcul ate the value of any one of
paced computer-assisted instruction might be the variables fro m given values of the other three, estimate the error
extremely effective-at least for some students-but in the calculated values, and outline the derivation of the ideal gas
equation f rom the kinetic theory of gases.
it might also require a specialized network of
workstations that could cost an institution several The common stem of the four objectives in this paragraph is
million dollars to purchase and set up. Such programs "When this chapter has been completed." An alternative
will be left off the list. The techniques we describe stem might be "In order to do well on the next test." The
can be implemented in regular classrooms and phrases that define the objectives begin with the verbs de-
laboratories with no tools or devices beyond those fine, calculate, estimate, and outline. Other acceptable verbs
routinely available to all engineering instructors. include list, identify, explain (without using jargon), predict,
model, derive, compare and contrast, design, create, select,
• Most engineering professors should feel reasonably optimize, and many others.
comfortable with them after a little practice.
The behavior specified in an instructional objective must
It is conceivable, for example, that getting students to be directly observable by the instructor and should be as
role-play molecules in a reactive gas would teach specific and unambiguous as possible. For this reason, verbs
them more about the dynamic behavior of a given such as know, learn, understand, and appreciate are unac-
system than would a standard lecture. Some instruc- ceptable. These are critically important goals, but they are
tors find methods like this useful and can manage to not directly observable. For example, if an instructor states
pull them off; still, it is safe to say that most engi- that her goal is for her students to understand the first law of
neering professors would never contemplate doing thermodynamics, she might be asked how she will know
anything like that in their classes. Such methods will whether or not they do. She would then list the things she
not be included in our list of recommendations. would ask them to do to demonstrate their understanding.
The items on the list would constitute the instructional
• They are consistent with modern theories of learning
objectives associated with the specified goal. If there
and have been tried and found effective by many
could be any possible doubt about whether or not an
educators.
objective has been met, metrics should be included in the
The literature is full of articles by professors who defining statement.
have tried new methods and written about the results.
Instructional objectives may involve skills that cover a
But the validity of a method must remain suspect if
broad spectrum of complexity and difficulty . The book Tax-
the only evidence on its behalf is one person's
onomy of Educational Objectives (Cognitive Domain) de-
testimony that "I tried this and liked it and so did the
veloped by Bloom and colleaguesC101 defines a hierarchy of
students." The methods to be given are consistent
with results of theoretical and/or empirical studies in six levels:
the cognitive and educational psychology literature, 1. Knowledge-repeating memorized information
and they have each been implemented successively in 2. Comprehension-paraphrasing text; explaining
engineering classes by independent investigators. concepts in jargon-free terms
3.Application-applying course material to solve
This paper surveys some (but by no means all) instruc-
straightforward problems
tional methods that meet these criteria. Several excellent
4. Analysis-solving complex problems; developing
references describe other techniques and summarize the sup-
process models and simulations; troubleshooting
porting research. C241
equipment and system problems
5. Synthesis-designing experiments, devices, processes,
FORMULATE AND PUBLISH CLEAR and products
INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVEs1s-1o1
6. Evaluation-choosing from among alternatives and
justifying the choice; optimizing processes; making
Instructional objectives are statements of what students
judgments about the environmental impact of engineer-
should be able to do to demonstrate their mastery of course
ing decisions; resolving ethical dilemmas
material and desired skills. They contain a stem specifying
the point at which the mastery should occur, followed by one Levels 1 through 3 are commonly known as "lower-level
or more phrases describing the expected behavior, with each skill s" and Levels 4 through 6 are " higher-level skills."
phrase beginning with an action verb. For example Most undergraduate engineering courses focus on Level-3

Winter WOO 27
( Special Feature Section
skills: an analysis of one four-year engineering program Once formulated, instructional
showed that 2345 out of 2952 problems assigned (79%) objectives reveal course topics that are
were Level 3 or lower_f 11 1 On the other hand, probable de- most important and deserve the greatest
mands on engineering graduates in the corning decades and coverage, and which ones involve little else
many of the new ABET accreditation criteria (Engineering than memorization and thus merit only cursory
Criteria 2000) involve skills at Levels 4 through 6.[1 1 attention or possible elimination
Recommendation
from the curriculum.
Write instructional objectives for a course (or a section of
a course) that encompass both knowledge of content and the types the students will encounter later in the curriculum
mastery of the skills you wish the students to develop. At all or in professional practice. These instructors are pursuing
levels of the engineering curriculum-including the first what might be called the "Trust Me" approach to education
year-include some higher-level problem-solving skills (e.g., (as in "Trust me-what I'm teaching you may seem point-
multidisciplinary analysis, design, critical thinking) and the less now, but in another year, or perhaps in four years, you'll
"soft" skills (e.g., oral and written communication, team- see why you needed it.").
work, social and ethical awareness) specified in EC 2000. Recommendation
Make the objectives as detailed and specific as possible;
Begin teaching each course and each new topic within it
rather than simply saying that the student should be able to
by describing the physical and chemical phenomena to be
"design a chemical plant," list all the different things the
studied and the types of problems to be solved, using ex-
student will be expected to do (look up, estimate, calculate,
amples familiar to the students if possible. Discuss several
create, analyze, select, explain) when designing the plant.
realistic situations in which engineers and scientists are re-
Make class exercises, homework assignments, and tests con-
quired to understand the phenomena and solve the problems.
sistent with the objectives. Give the objectives to the stu-
A good way to begin is to divide the class into groups of
dents to use as study guides.
three or four and have the groups generate as many examples
Justification as they can think of in a brief period of time, adding your
Once formulated, instructional objectives reveal which own to supplement whatever they come up with. For ex-
course topics are most important and deserve the greatest ample
coverage, and which involve little else than memorization For the next two weeks, we're going to be discussing characteristics
and thus merit only cursory attention or possible elimination of a fluid flowing through a pipe. In groups of three, come up with as
from the curriculum. Objectives enable instructors to design many situations as you can that involve this subject-three people
talking, one writing down the ideas. You have one minute-go!
consistent homework assignments that provide practice in
all of the desired skills and tests that assess mastery of the Give them the allotted time (or a little more if they seem to
skills. They make ideal study guides for the students; the need it), then stop them and collect the ideas, listing them
more explicit you are about what you want the students to be without criticism. At least some of the groups are almost
able to do, the more likely they will be to succeed at doing certain to come up with home plumbing, irrigation, oil and
it.r 121 The objectives provide an excellent outline of the course coolant flows in engines, municipal water and sewer flows,
content, for instructors teaching the course for the first time flow of body fluids, and a variety of industrial examples.
as well as instructors of subsequent courses. Finally, the Supplement their list with your own. You might then con-
instructional objectives for all departmental courses collec- tinue
tively reveal gaps and redundancies in the curriculum and Ok, you 're now engineers designing a piping system to move fluid
provide an excellent curriculum overview to accreditation from a storage tank to a reactor at a specified rate. What will you
visitors, especially if homework assignments and tests closely need to know or figure out ? Same groups, two minutes-go!
follow the objectives. It may occur to some of the groups that they will need to
know the density and viscosity of the fluid, the distance from
ESTABLISH RELEVANCE OF the tank to the reactor, whether the fluid is corrosive or
COURSE MATERIAL AND TEACH INDUCTIVELY dangerous in some way, the pipe material (aluminum, cop-
per, stainless steel, plastic), and costs of piping, pumps, and
Instructors often start a course by presenting totally new power, and they will have to determine the pipe diameter,
material without putting it in any context. They make no the required valves, fittings, and flow meters, the kind of
attempt to relate the material to things students already know pump to use, the size of the pump, and the path of the
about from their own experience or from prior courses, nor system. Give hints if necessary, and add items to their list.
do they preview how it will be needed to solve problems of Spending ten minutes on such an exercise at the beginning of
28 Chemical Engineering Education
[~ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ __ ________
F_u_tu_,.,_e_o_if_E
_ n_g_i_n_e_e_n_·n_g_ E_d_u_ca_ti_o_n__,,)
a new topic can go a long way toward motivating the sru- fore going into the details can provide the concrete experi-
dents to pay attention to what takes place in the subsequent ence that starts the learning cycle.
two or three weeks.
The flow of information in the presentation of course BALANCE CONCRETE AND ABSTRACT
material should generally follow that of the scientific method: INFORMATION IN EVERY COURSE
begin with induction, proceeding by inference from specif-
ics (facts, observations, data) to generalities (rules, theories, Material in engineering courses may be categorized as
correlations, mathematical models), and then switch to de- being concrete (facts, observations, experimental data, ap-
duction , using the rules and models to generate plications) or abstract (concepts, theories, math-
additional specifics (consequences, applications, ematical formulas , and models). Most engineer-
predictions). ing courses contain material in each category,
The problem but the balance varies considerably from one
Justification with introducing course to another and from one instructor to
Our goal in teaching is to get information and abstraction another in a given course.
skills encoded in our students' long-term memo- [is that it is]
ries. Cognitive research tell s us that we learn In recent decades, the balance between the two
notfirmly categories in the engineering curriculum has been
new material contextually, fitting it into existing
grounded in
cognitive structures,L 13·151 and new information shifting toward abstraction. The old courses on
that cannot be linked to existing knowledge is
the student's industrial processes and machinery have been
not likely to be retained. Moreover, once infor- knowledge largely replaced with courses that emphasize math-
mation is stored in long-term memory, cues are and experience ematical expressions of fundamental scientific
required for us to recall and use it. Linking the ... the new principles. While this movement may have ini-
new material to familiar material provides a material is tially had the effect of correcting an imbalance, it
natural set of cues. not linked to has proceeded to an extent that has negative con-
sequences for many students. The problem with
The motivational and learning benefits of pro- existing
introducing abstraction that is not firmly
viding context, establishing relevance, and teach- cognitive grounded in the student' s knowledge and ex-
ing inductively are supported throughout the lit- structures and perience has been described in the preceding
erature on cognitive and educational psychology so is section ; the new material is not linked to exist-
and effective pedagogy. r15·161 Ramsden and unlikely ing cognitive structures and so is unlikely to
Entwistle 11 21 note the motivational effective- to be be transferred to long-term memory.
ness of "vocational relevance," and the same transferred to
authors show that establishing relevance is one Recommendations
long-term Balance concrete and abstract content in the
of the factors that induces students to adopt a
"deep" (as opposed to superficial) approach to memory. presentation of all engineering courses. Most
learning. [1 2·171 courses currently contain a reasonable level of
abstraction, so the challenge is generally to pro-
Inductive teaching (wherein the information flow gener-
vide sufficient concrete material for those who need it. Some
ally proceeds from specifics to generalities) takes several
suggestions for doing so follow:
forms in the literature, variously known as discovery learn-
ing, inquiry learning, problem-based learning, just-in-time • Do everything listed under the category of establishing
learning, and the case-study method. Problem-based learn- relevance in the preceding section.
ing (PBL), which involves students working in teams on • Intersperse concrete illustrations and applications throughout
projects built around realistic problems, has been exten- theoretical developments rather than waiting until the final
sively discussed and shown to be effective in science, engi- formulas have been derived . When possible, tie the examples
neering, and medicine. ris-231 (This approach will be treated in back to the "real-world" systems and situations introduced in
the motivating introduction to the subject.
greater detail in the next paper in this series.)
• When illustrating how formulas and algorithms are applied,
The literarure on learning styles also supports the recom- use numbers rather than algebraic variables in at least the first
mendations in this section_l24•33 J Kolb 121 -291suggests "teaching example. The greater the level of generality of the theory, the
around the cycle," starting with a concrete experience, docu- greater the need for specificity in the examples, Some
menting observations, creating an abstract model, and then students-specifically, sensing learners-understand "5" at a
experimenting and testing the model. This cycle has been level that they may never understand "x". 125 ·32·331
used to design a college-wide instructional program in engi- • Provide visual illustrations and demonstrations of course-
neering.130·3 11 Establishing the relevance of new material be- related material when possible. Most students get a great deal
Winter 2000 29
['--S_p_ e_
c_w·_l_F_e_
a _tu_,.,_e_ S_e_c_tto
_·_n_ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ ~)
more out of visual information than verbal tions to "prove" or "verify" some statement or result.
information (written and spoken words and At least one of them will show up on the next test. I
won't go over them unless asked. (Or, I'll go over
mathematical formulas).12 51 Show pictures, Provide them during my office hours, but only if you
sketches, schematics, plots and flow charts, and
computer simulations of process equipment and visual demonstrate that you've attempted them yourself.)

systems. Take the class to the local boiler house • Explain what a vapor pressure is in terms a high
and point out pumps, flowmeters , boilers, heat
illustrations school senior could understand.
exchangers, refrigeration units, and turbines. and • Why do you feel comfortable in 20°C air and freezing
Bring demonstrations into class, such as those in 20°C water? Your explanation should involve
described by Woodr 34 l for heat transfer and demonstrations several concepts introduced in this course.
Kresta 135 l for fluid mechanics. • Make up and solve a problem related to the material
of just covered. 136•371 The problem must be original, but
• Never venture too far from the realm of
you can get ideas and help from one another and from
experimentation. In abstract subjects such as course-related me. Start simply the first time you do this in class, and
thermodynamics and process control, for gradually build in more depth. For example,
example, it is easy for the students to drown in
material
- Make up but don ' t solve a problem involving
an alphabet soup of variables that bear no when possible. Raoult' s law.
apparent relationship to anything one can
- Make up and solve a problem involving Raoult' s
measure in a laboratory or plant (e.g., entropy, Most law.
free energy, and transfer functions). It is
important to remember that the ultimate goal of
students get a - Make up and solve a problem involving Raoult's
law. If your problem is straightforward (given
all theories is to correlate data from measure- great deal this, calculate that) and there are no mistakes,
ments on physical systems and to predict the you' II get a "C"; to earn full credit the problem
outcomes of future measurements. As each more out of should involve a realistic situation.
abstract variable is introduced, provide examples
of how it could be determined experimentally
visual - Make up and solve a problem that invol ves both
Raoult ' s law and what you covered during the
and how values of measured variables can be information last two weeks of your organic chemistry course.
predicted from known values of the abstract
than verbal You may not get many good problems the
variables, and give such problems as homework
assignments. Once the students have manipu- first time or two you do exercises like these, but
lated a given variable or function in a variety of
information if you provide feedback and give examples of
contexts, its meaning can be assumed to be (written and successful efforts, many students will surprise
anchored in memory, but in the absence of such you (and themselves), both with the quality
examples and exercises no such assumption can spoken words of their problems and by how thoroughly they
be made.
and learned the material in the course of the ex-
Just as overemphasizing mathematical formu- ercise. 136·371
lations of course principles works against the mathematical As noted in the previous section, a good way
sensing learner, overemphasizing facts and com- formulas) . to achieve concrete/abstract balance is to "teach
putational algorithms and shortchanging concep- around the cycle."r25 -311 When presenting a new
tual understanding works against intuitive learn- Show concept, start with a physical demonstration or
ersY31 (This concrete/abstract imbalance is also pictures, real-world example, model the results, test the
not in the sensors' best interests, but it is less model through active experimentation, and ex-
likely to make them uncomfortable.) Engineer- sketches, plore its implications. You might also find it
ing students are not generally overloaded with schematics, worthwhile to have students measure their own
spare time. If they can get away with memoriz- learning styles and talk about the implications.
ing problem solutions without understanding or plots and flo w The more they understand their own prefer-
questioning the underlying concepts and meth- charts, and ences, the more they can capitalize on the
ods, many will do it.l 17l strengths of their preferred styles and work
One way to help students gain a deeper under-
computer to build their capabilities in their less-pre-
standing of course material is to ask questions simulations of ferred styles. Felder and Soloman 's Index of
that require such an understanding, first in class Learning Stylesl381 and Keirsey's Tempera-
problems and homework and then on tests. For
process ment Sorterc 39 l are accessible on-line and easy
example, equipment to use for this purpose.
• Equation (8-34) in the textbook is presented with only
a sketchy explanation of where it comes from. Derive
and sy stems. Justification
it, starting with Eq. (8-5). Piagetf401 suggests that human capabilities
• In Monday' s handout there are a number of sugges- evolve in stages, beginning with the sensory-
30 Chemical Engineering Education
 Future of Engineering Education )

motor stage (up to age 2) and proceeding through pre-opera- vice to the intuitors. Even if they intend to go on to
tional (ages 4 through 7) and concrete operational (about 7 graduate sc hool and re search careers, they need to
to 12) stages to the formal operational stage. Concrete strengthen their sensing ski lls (observation of and atten-
operational thinkers can think logically in terms of objects, tion to detail s, careful methodology, replication of mea-
but have difficulty replacing objects by symbols. They can surements and calculations), and they will not do so if
acknowledge different viewpoints and cause-effect logic, they are not challenged to do so in their courses.
but they have trouble generalizing through verbal or propor-
tional reasoning. Formal operational thinkers can replace PROMOTE ACTIVE LEARNING
objects with symbols, generalize and work with abstract IN THE CLASSROOM
concepts, use verbal and proportional reasoning, and derive
cause-effect relationships from results of experiments. In the traditional approach to higher education, the profes-
Piaget stated that the shift from concrete operational to sor dispenses wisdom in the classroom and the students
formal operational thinking should occur by age 12; but passively absorb it. Research indicates that this mode of
more recent observations suggest that many first-year col- instruction can be effective for presenting large bodies of
lege students have not yet made it. Williams and Cavallo,1 421 factual information that can be memorized and recalled in
working with freshmen in physics courses, found that most the short term. If the objective is to facilitate long-term
of their subjects were concrete operational, incapable of retention of information, however, or to help the students
grasping abstract concepts that were not firmly embedded in develop or improve their problem-solving or thinking skills,
concrete experience. By including concrete examples in our or to stimulate their interest in a subject and motivate them
teaching and explicitly showing how they can be general- to take a deeper approach to studying it, instruction that
ized, we can help students make the shift from concrete to actively involves students has consistently been found
formal operational thinking. 1431 more effective than straight lecturing .c2·3.46.4 7 l The chal-
Learning-style differences also provide justification for lenge is to involve most or all of the students in produc-
establishing a good concrete/abstract balance in every engi- tive activities without sacrificing important course con-
neering course_l24-26 •32 •331 Sensing learners tend to be practical tent or losing control of the class.
and methodical; intuitors tend to be imaginative and quick- Recommendation
thinking. Sensors are more comfortable with concrete infor-
Several times during each lecture period, ask the students
mation (facts, data, "real-world" phenomena) than with ab-
to form into groups of 2 to 4 and give them brief exercises
stractions (theories, concepts, and models), and the converse
that last anywhere from 30 seconds to 3 minutes. The exer-
is true of intuitors. Both sensing and intuitive learners make
cises may involve answering questions of the type instruc-
excellent engineers, although they tend to gravitate to differ-
tors routinely ask the class as a whole, or they may call for
ent specialties. Sensors make excellent experimentalists and
problem solving or brainstorming. For example,
production engineers; intuitors do well in design and theo-
retical research and development, and both types may be- Outline a strategy for solving the problem just posed.
come excellent managers and administrators. Industry and • Draw a flowchart (schematic)for the process just described.
academia need individuals with both type preferences. Think of as many practical applications as you can of this ( system,
device, fo rmula).
Most engineering undergraduates are sensors, while most • Get started on the solution of the problem and see how far you can
engineering professors are intuitors. 144 .4 51 Most intuitive pro- get with it in two minutes.
fessors, and even many of the sensing professors, teach in an What is the next step in the derivation?
intuitor-oriented manner, emphasizing theories, mathemati- • Complete this calculation.
cal models, and abstract prose to students who respond best • Prove or verify this result.
to concrete examples, well-established problem-solving pro- • Suppose you carry out experimental measurements and the results
fail to agree with the theoreticalfonnula we just derived. Think of as
cedures, and material that has a clear connection to the "real many possible explanations as you can.
world" (a classic sensor's phrase). This mismatch has sev-
• What questions do you have about this material?
eral unfortunate consequences for the sensing learners. Faced
with an incessant barrage of material that seems remote and The groups should generally be given a short time to re-
abstract, they have difficulty absorbing the material, become spond-long enough to think about the question and to
bored in class, tend to do poorly on tests (frequently running begin to formulate an answer, but not necessarily to work
out of time on them) and tend to get lower grades in engi- out complete solutions.
neering courses than their intuitive counterparts, even though Vary the format of these exercises to prevent their becom-
both types do equally well as practicing engineers. ing as tedious and ineffective as straight lecturing. Assign
Making courses overwhelmingly abstract is also a disser- some to pairs, some to groups of three or four, and some to
Winter 2000 31
( Special Feature Section
individuals. Sometimes ask students to work on a problem have learned certain material before class; 1181 and still an-
individually, and then compare their answers with a partner other is "team learning," a more formal cooperative learning
("think-pair-share"). Sometimes give a rapid succession of structure where student teams work on structured learning
such exercises, and sometimes lecture for 10-15 minutes projects in every class session.'5 51 All of these techniques
between exercises. require more time and training to implement than the brief
To maximize the likelihood that most or all of the students turn-to-your-neighbor exercises described previously, but
will be actively involved and that they will remain on task, the potential return in depth of learning is greater.
call on several individuals or groups to give their re- Justification
sponses when the allotted time has elapsed. If you only
call for volunteers to share responses , the students will Literature supporting the notion that active, student-cen-
know that the answer will eventually be forthcoming and tered learning is superior to passive, teacher-centered in-
will have no incentive to participate in the activity-and struction is encyclopedic_l 13·14•46-481 People acquire knowledge
many will not; but if they know that any one of them and skills through practice and reflection, not by listening to
could be called on, fear of embarrassment will induce others telling them how to do something. Straight lecturing
most of them to do the work so they will be ready with may succeed at promoting short-term factual recall, but ac-
something if they are chosen. tive approaches have consistently been shown to be superior
for promoting long-term retention of information, compre-
Active learning methods make classes much more enjoy- hension, problem-solving skills, motivation to learn, and
able for both students and instructors. Even highly gifted subsequent interest in the subject. Active learning is one of
lecturers have trouble sustaining attention and interest the seven, evidence-based recommendations for improving
throughout a 50-minute class. After 10-20 minutes in most learning summarized by Chickering and Gamson,15 61 and the
classes, the students' attention starts to drift, and by the end active learning exercises described above also provide prompt
of the class boredom is rampant. Even if the instructor asks feedback, another of the recommendations.
questions in an effort to spark some interest, nothing much
happens except silence and avoidance of eye contact. Tests
of information retention support this picture of what hap-
pens in terms of recall : immediately after a full lecture,
students were able to recall about 70% of the content
( ~_ _u_s_E_c_o_o_P_E_R_A_T_1v_E_L_E_A_R_N_1N_G_ _
Cooperative learning (CL) is an instructional approach in
~J
presented in the first ten minutes but only 20% of the which students work in teams on a learning task structured to
content of the last ten minutes .r21 have the following features: 1481
When active learning exercises are interspersed through- • Positive independence. There must be a clearly defined group goal
(complete the problem set, write the lab report, design the process)
out a lecture, the picture changes. Once a class accustomed that requires involvement of every team member to achieve. If
to group work gets started on a problem, the classroom anyone fails to do his or her part, everyone is penalized in some
atmosphere is transformed: discussions, arguments, and oc- manner.
casional laughter can be heard, all sounds of learning taking • Individual accountability. Each student in the team is held respon-
place. Even students who may not be doing much talking are sible for doing his or her share of the work and for understanding
everyone else's contribution.
engaged in thinking about the question at hand instead of
• Face-to-face promotive interaction. Although some of the group
just mechanically transcribing notes. Just five minutes of work may be parceled out and done individually, some must be done
such activities in a 50-minute class can be enough to keep interactively, with team members providing one another with
the students attentive for the remaining 45 minutes of lectur- questions, feedback, and instruction.
ing. Many references offer specific suggestions for incor- • Appropriate use of interpersonal and teamwork skills. Students
should be helped to develop leadership, communication, conflict-
porating active learning exercises in the classroom. 146•501
resolution, and time-management skills.
Felder 151 •521 and Woods 1531 discuss the implementation of • Regular self-assessment ofteamfunctioning. Teams should
active learning in large classes, and Felder 15 11 discusses periodically be required to examine what they are doing well together
how to incorporate active learning without sacrificing and what needs improvement.
content coverage. Cooperative learning exercises may be performed in or out
Several authors have developed more formal active learn- of class. Common tasks for CL groups in engineering are
ing activities. One is "TAPPS" (thinking-aloud pair problem completing laboratory reports, design projects, and home-
solving), an activity where pairs of students take turns work- work assignments in lecture courses. Only one problem set
ing their way through a problem solution; 1541 another is the or report is handed in by a group, and one group grade is
"Osterman feedback lecture," where two 20-minute mini- assigned to the project-but adjustments for individual team
lectures are separated by a ten-minute activity, the latter citizenship (or lack thereof) can and should be made. Pre-
usually being a short problem that requires the students to examination group study sessions can also be set up to
32 Chemical Engineering Education
( Future of Engineering Education )
meet out of class, with bonus points being awarded to can be used as measures of ability, or a diagnostic test
members of groups for which the team average test grade given early in the course can be used for the purpose of
exceeds a specified value. forming teams.

Recommendation
• Form teams that are heterogeneous in ability level. The
members of a team of only weak students are obviously at
The following suggestions are based on material in Johnson, a disadvantage (although sometimes they might do sur-
Johnson, and Smith,1481 Felder and Brent,l5 75 81 and Millis and prisingly well), and the members of a uniformly strong
Cottell. 1591 team may choose to divide up the home-
• Explain to students what you are do- work and to communicate only cursorily
ing and why. As with in-class active In a mixed-ability group, the with one another. Neither group receives
learning methods, cooperative home- weaker students gain from the full benefits of cooperative learning.
work may not be welcomed enthusi- In a mixed-ability group, the weaker stu-
seeing how better students
astically by all students. Some regard dents gain from seeing how better stu-
study and approach problems, dents study and approach problems, and
it as a game the instructor is playing at
and the stronger students the stronger students usually gain deeper
their expense or an experiment with
them as the guinea pigs, and some usually gain deeper understanding of the subject through their
may complain that the instructor is understanding of the subject attempts to explain the material, a phe-
not doing his or her job (which they through their attempts to nomenon familiar to every professor.
see as lecturing to them on everything explain the material, a • Assign team roles that rotate with
they will need to know for the tests). phenomenon familiar to each assignment. Three indispensable
Felder and Brentl 601 discuss the origin every professor. roles are the manager (organizes the as-
and forms of student resistance to ac- signment into subtasks, allocates respon-
tive and cooperative learning and sug- sibilities, and keeps the group on task),
gest strategies for defusing and even- the recorder (writes the final report or problem solution
tually overcoming the resistance. On the first day, twenty set, or for large projects, assembles the report), and the
minutes spent giving some of the reasons for using the checker (proofreads and corrects the final report before it
approach (e.g., it prepares students to function in the is submitted). Other roles that may be performed sepa-
environment in which engineers work) and explaining the rately or combined with one of the preceding roles in-
proven educational benefits to students (e.g., higher grades clude group process monitor (makes sure that every team
and lower dropout rates) can go a long way toward over- member contributes and that all contributions are acknowl-
coming the resistance. Another option is to run a mini- edged by the others, verifies that every team member
workshop on managing changeY 8· 191 understands each part of the completed assignment) and
• Assign some or all homework to teams of 3-4 students. In the skeptic (plays the role of devil's advocate, suggests
teams of two, one person tends to dominate and there is alternative possibilities, keeps the group from leaping to
usually no good mechani sm for resolving disputes, and in premature conclusions). Only the names of the students
teams of five or more someone is usually left out of the who actually participated should appear on the solution,
process. Collect one assignment per group. with their team roles for that assignment identified. In a
• Form the groups yourself. Considerable research shows lecture course, the roles should rotate with each assign-
ment so that a student cannot repeat as (say) manager
that instructor-formed teams on average function better
than self-selected teams. When students self-select groups, until every other team member has held that position.
the top students often fi nd one another and form groups, • Promote positive interdependence. Assign roles. Provide
leaving the weak students to shift for themselves, which is only one set of materials and require only one team prod-
unfair. Also, good frie nds find each other, leading to uct. Provide specialized training to individual team mem-
situations where their teammates are never fully inte- bers on different aspects of the project that they must then
grated into the team. Particularly in the fres hman and bring back to the group effort (this technique is known as
sophomore years, when most attrition from the curricu- "jigsaw" in the cooperative learning literature). Give bo-
lum occurs, under-represented minorities (incl uding nuses on tests to groups when the team average exceeds
women) should not be isolated in teams. The ideal team is 80 (or some other specified value). Randomly select one
heterogeneous in ability (which we will say more about member of each group to present a problem solution or
shortly), with team members who have common interests report on a specific aspect of the project and give every-
and common blocks of time when they can meet outside one in the group the grade earned by that individual. If
class. SAT or ACT scores or grades in prerequisite courses you use the last strategy (which also promotes individual
Winter2000 33
( Special Feature Section
accountability), tell the students well in advance that you grade if they meet a specified standard (for example, a
plan on doing so, but do not provide much advance weighted average grade of 88 or better for an A), they
notice of which students will present on which parts of have every incentive to help their teammates.
the assignment. • Start small and build. If you have never used cooperative
• Get teams to assess how well they are functioning. Peri- learning and you are not working with a colleague who is
odically ask the students to spend five to ten minutes at experienced in this approach, you might consider begin-
the end of their work session assessing their performance, ning on a relatively small scale, with several assignments
identifying their strengths, and setting goals for improve- done by groups and the rest done individually. Once you
ment. [1 9·62·631 A summary of the assessment might be in- gain confidence, increase the level of your involvement to
cluded with the group problem solution or in individual a point that feels comfortable to you. When problems
journals on the group process. arise, remember to consult references on cooperative learn-
• Consider doing some testing of pairs or groups. One ing for ideas about how to deal with them.
mechanism is to administer and score an individual test
Justification
and then to allow CL teams to retake the test (perhaps as a
take-home exam) to earn additional points. The advan- Most engineering is done cooperatively, not individually,
tage of this procedure is that most students will achieve a and technical skills are often less important than interper-
deeper understanding of how to solve all the test prob- sonal skills in getting the job done. In survey after survey,
lems; the disadvantage is that it requires more grading. representatives of industry place communication and team-
Dekker and Stice[641 recommend giving tests to pairs of work at the top of their lists of desirable skills for new
students as an alternative to individual tests and offer engineering graduates. If teamwork is such a critical part of
ideas for structuring such tests . what engineers do, surely engineering schools should pro-
• Do not re-form groups too often. A team should remain vide some guidance in how to do it.
Cooperative learning may be the most thoroughly re-
together for at least a month in order to evolve through the
"form, storm, norm, and perform" evolution of team de- searched instructional method in all of education, and a vast
velopment. If students know that they will only have to and still rapidly growing body of research supports the ef-
remain in a team for two or three weeks, they will have fectiveness of the approach .L48·57 ·59•65 -681 Studies have shown
little incentive to confront and overcome the interpersonal that compared to students taught traditionally (that is, prima-
problems that commonly arise in team development. If, rily with lectures and individual homework), cooperatively
however, they know they are going to be together for a taught students tend to have better and longer information
longer period of time, they are forced to deal with the retention, higher grades, more highly developed critical-
problems by establishing norms , developing strategies for thinking and problem-solving skill s, more positive attitudes
coping creatively with conflict, and taking advantage of toward the subject and greater motivation to learn it, better
and valuing individual talents and learning styles. interpersonal and communication skills, higher self-es-
• Provide an escape mechanism for teams having severe teem , lower levels of anxiety about academics, and, if
groups are truly heterogeneous , improved race and gen-
difficulties. Roughly halfway through the semester, an-
nounce that you will dissolve all of the teams and form der relations . Another benefit is that when homework is
new ones, except that a team may stay together if each done cooperatively, there are three to four times fewer
member sends a note to the instructor expressing a desire assignments to grade.
to do so. Typically, all but the most highly dysfunctional Felder, et al., r58 •681 report on a longitudinal study compar-
teams elect to remain together, and the problem students ing the conventional instructor-centered approach with an
in the groups that dissolve often change their behavior in alternative approach that combined all of the methods rec-
their new groups. Consider instituting mechanisms for ommended in this paper. Students experiencing the alter-
teams to fire uncooperative students and for individuals to native approach outperformed students experiencing the
quit uncooperative teams when all other avenues (includ- conventional approach in their academic performance,
ing instructor intervention) have been exhausted and prior development of higher-level thinking skills, retention in
warnings have been given .'5 81 chemical engineering, and attitudes toward their educa-
• Do not assign course grades on a curve. If students rec- tional experience.
ognize that by helping someone else they could be hurting A variety of factors account for the observed benefits of
themselves (as is the case when grades are curved), they cooperative learning. Weaker students working individually
may be inclined to avoid cooperation, making it less are likely to give up when they get stuck; working coopera-
likely that the benefits of cooperative learning will be tively with stronger students to assist them, they keep going
realized. On the other hand, if they are guaranteed a given to completion. Many strong students tend to do the minimal
34 Chemical Engineering Education
 Future of Engineering Education )
work required to complete the assignment, which may not "tricky" problem on the spot, they see themselves (right-
require deep understanding of concepts; when faced with the fully) as having been cheated by the instructor.
task of explaining and clarifying material to weaker stu- Thinking and problem-solving skills-and speed in prob-
dents, they often find gaps in their own understanding and lem solving, for that matter-are only developed through
fill them in. Students working alone may tend to delay practice and feedback: testing students on ski lls they have
completing assignments or skip them altogether; when they not had an opportunity to practice is unfair. There is neither
know others are counting on them, they are often driven to empirical evidence nor logic to support the argument that
do the work on time. long and tricky tests assess students' potential to be suc-
cessful engineers or help students become better problem
( ___G_1v_e_ c _
HA_L_L_E_N_G_1N_G
_ e_u_T_F_A_1R_T_e_s_T_s__ J solvers. This does not mean that we should construct
easy tests, which do not motivate students to learn at a
Although we might wish it were otherwise, for many of deep level. It is rather to set the bar high , but to teach in a
our students tests are the primary motivation to study. The manner such that all students who have the ability to
students may attend every class and complete all the as- meet the challenge can do so.
signments, but it is their preparation for the tests that
Recommendationsl2•3•691
determines the breadth and depth of their learning. The
burden is on the instructor to make the tests challenging • Give the students instructional objectives for each test in
enough to push each student to learn to the greatest ex- the form of a study guide. (" In order to do well on this
tent of which he or she is capable. test, you should be able to ... ") Make the li st comprehen-
sive and challenging. Include objectives that involve all
But, just as tests can motivate students to learn at a deep
of the basic types of calculations the students should be
level, they can also lead to student demoralization and hos-
able to perform, concepts they should be able to explain
tility (both of which correlate with poor performance) if they
without using jargon, formulas they should be able to
are perceived by the students as being unfair. The two most
derive, derivations they should be able to explain step-by-
common types of tests in this category are tests that are too
step, familiar phenomena that they should be able to
long and tests that contain surpri ses-problems with twists
interpret in terms of course concepts, and anything else
unlike anything the students have seen before and problems
you might call on them to do on the test.f51
that call for skills that were never taught in class or required
on homework assignments. • When writing the test, consult the instructional objectives
and make sure that 10-15% of the test covers the more
Some students-sensing learners on the Myers-Briggs Type
Indicator and the Felder-Silverman Learning Styles Mode1r24 - challenging material in the study guide (which will allow
26·32·331-work more systematically and slowly than the intui- discrimination between the A-level and B-level students).
tive learners who are their counterparts. On tests, the sensors
If the students have the study guide at least a week before
the test-and preferably longer than that-and the ob-
read and reread problem statements, often taking a relatively
jectives provide the basis of the test construction , there
long time to formulate their problem-so lving strategies and
will be no surprises. The test will be just as challeng-
checki ng their calculations carefully. Thi s methodical ap-
ing, or more so, than it would otherwise have been,
proach will make many of them excellent engineers and
except that now the challenge is to the students' con-
experimental scientists, but it frequently leads to their run-
ceptual understanding rather than to their speed or
ning out of time on long tests. Nothing infuriates students
puzzle-solving ability .
more than studying hard and being well prepared for a test,
and then getting a low grade because they lacked sufficient • Always work a test out yourself from scratch when you
time to demonstrate their understanding . A student who have finished writing it, timing how long it takes to do it.
gets a "D" on a one-hour test that he or she could have This burdensome exercise is the only way to discover the
gotten an "A" on if two hours had been allowed, deserves overspecified and underspecified problems, the erroneous
the " A"; students who do not understand the material at or ambiguous problem statements, the numerical calcula-
an "A" level will not earn an "A" on the test, regardless tions that take large amounts of time but show very little
of how much time they are given. about conceptual understanding, and the appropriateness
Students also resent surprises on tests. The functions of or inappropriateness of the level of difficulty of the entire
tests are to motivate and help students to learn what the test. The alternative is for these problems to show up
instructor wants them to learn and to enable the instructor to when the test is being given, which leads to disasters of
assess the extent to which they have succeeded in doing so. the type all instructors and students have experienced and
When students understand the material for which they have do not wish to experience again .
been prepared but do poorly because they cannot figure out a • Minimize speed as a factor in petformance on tests. For
Winter2000 35
( Special Feature Section
quantitative problem-solving tests, you should be able to and the students who get low grades will be much more
work out the test in less than one-third of the time the inclined to take responsibility for their poor performance
students will have to do it, and if the test is particularly than to blame the test or the instructor.
difficult or involves many numerical calculations, a one- r
fourth rule might be more appropriate. If it takes you CONVEY A SENSE OF CONCERN ABOUT THE
longer than that, either find a longer time slot in which STUDENTS' LEARNING
to administer the test or consider eliminating ques-
tions, presenting some formulas instead of requiring The social environment in a class-the nature and quality
derivations , and asking for solution outlines rather of interactions between the students and the instructor and
than complete calculations. among the students----can have a profound effect on the
• Do not test skills that students have not had a chance to quality of learning that takes place in the classY6 ·70· 75 l In his
practice. Don ' t make all homework problems straightfor- monumental study, What Matters in College, l70J Alexander
ward calculations and then put deep analysis questions on Astin found that the quality of interactions between students
the test. Don ' t require numerical solutions on all home- and instructors in and out of class was the factor that corre-
work problems and then ask students for qualitative solu- lated most highly with almost every positive learning and
tion outlines on the test. Don 't give students problems attitude outcome he considered. If students believe that an
with extraneous data on the test unless the students have instructor is concerned about them and has a strong desire
worked on similar problems in the homework. If picking for them to learn the course material, the effects on their
important material from long readings is a skill you want motivation to learn and their attitudes toward the course, the
your students to develop, give them training and practice subject, and the instructor can be profound. The suggestions
in it--don't just tell them that they are responsible for that follow are all known to instill such a belief. We suggest
everything in their 500-page text and make them guess that you consider all of them and try to adopt the ones with
what you plan to ask them to do. If you think ability to which you feel comfortable.
solve quantitative problems quickly is an important skill
(it is generally not that important in engineering practice), Recommendations
then give the students training and practice in speed- • Learn the students' names. Taking the trouble to learn
solving in class and on the homework before you make it names and use them in and out of class conveys a sense
a primary criterion for doing well on the tests . of respect for the students as individuals. Their motiva-
• Even if you curve grades, if the average is in the 50-60 tion to do well in your course is likely to increase consid-
erably once they realize that you know who they are. Use
range or below, consider the possibility that it was a poor
test or that you did a poor job of preparing the students place cards or seating charts, take and label photographs
for it. If you decide that either is the case, consider adding of the class, or ask students to bring in photocopies of
a fixed number of points to each student's grade to their student identification cards or drivers licenses and
bring the top grade or the average grade to a value of use them to help you learn the names quickly.
your choosing. Alternatively, if most students missed • Make yourself available. Announce office hours and keep
the same problem, announce a quiz for the following them; if you have to miss them, announce it in advance
week that will be a variation of that problem and add and schedule replacement hours if possible. Encourage
the results to their test grades . students to contact you during your office hours or by e-
mail, perhaps insisting that they do so at least once during
Justification
the first two weeks of the course. Come to class a few
Education should not be viewed as a mystery religion. minutes early to answer any questions the students may
There is no pedagogical value in making students guess have or just to chat.
what they are supposed to know and understand or in testing
them on skills in which they have received no training. • If you use nontraditional methods such as cooperative
When students know explicitly what is expected of them learning, explain how what you are doing has been shown
(whether it be straightforward or high-level or ill-defined to lead to improved learning and/or improved prepara-
problem solving, critical or creative or multidisciplinary think- tion for their careers. References given in this paper
ing, or anything else) and they are given practice and feed- (e.g., Felder and BrentC601 ) provide supportive material for
back in the specified skills, the odds that they will be able to such explanations.
meet the expectations go up. Even though the tests may be • Celebrate the students ' achievements. When a class does
harder, the average student performance will be better than it well on a test or you get a number of creative solutions to
would have been if the tests were exercises in speed and homework problems, offer commendation. When your
guessing ability, student morale and motivation will increase, students win awards or write articles in the school paper,
36 Chemical Engineering Education
 Future of E ngineering Education ]
congratulate them publicly. communicate), rapport (empathy, concern for students), struc-
• Collect periodic feedback and respond appropriately to ture (class organization, course presentation), and load
it. Collect midterm evaluations, using either simple, open- (workload) _l7 91 No matter what your teaching style may be-
ended questions (What has helped you learn in the course? flashy or congenial or scholarly-if students believe you
What has detracted from your learning? What changes care about them, most will be motivated to learn what you
would improve the course for you?) or a more formal are teaching. If you convey a sense of not caring, then no
instrument, such as a Course Perceptions Questionnaire? 51 matter how brilliantly or entertainingly you lecture, far fewer
Periodically collect "minute papers": at the end of a will be so motivated.
class, have individual students or pairs take a minute or
two to write (anonymously) the one or two main ideas SUMMARY
presented in the lecture and the muddiest point or con- We have discussed a wide variety of teaching techniques
cept. Use the responses to monitor how the class went that have been repeatedly shown to be effective in engineer-
and to plan the next class . In large classes, use ing education. The techniques are variations on the follow-
ombudspersons-class representatives who report to you ing main themes:
periodically about how well the teaching and learning is I . Formulate and publish clear instructional objectives.
going. Regardless of the feedback mechanism chosen,
summarize the most common suggestions, share them 2. Establish relevance of course material and teach
inductively.
with the class, accept those you can, and explain why you
cannot accept the others. 3. Balance concrete and abstract information in every
• Let students participate in learning and performance course.
assessment. Give choices on assignments (e.g. , problem 4. Promote active learning in the classroom.
sets or projects) and tests (e.g. , solve any three of the 5. Use cooperative learning.
following four problems). Have students critique one
another's drafts of assignments or lab reports before the 6. Give challenging, but fair, tests .
final versions are turned in to you. Let them create poten- 7. Convey a sense of concern about students' learning.
tial examination questions, and use one of them on the We do not claim that our suggestions constitute a compre-
actual exam. Have them assess their own performance hensive list of proven effective teaching methods. Such a list
and the performance of their colleagues in team-based would be encyclopedic and would be comprehensive only
projects.[6 11 Let them contract for the relative weighting until the appearance of the next issue of any journal on
of the term work and the final examination. 119·76·771 education. We also do not claim that adopting all of the
• Maintain a sense of respect for the students, individually suggestions will guarantee that all students in a class will
and collectively. Avoid belittling or sarcastic remarks perform at a high level or even that they will all pass. The
about their responses to questions, performance on tests, performance of an individual student in a class depends on a
behavior in class, or anything else. If you are disap- staggering variety of factors, many of which are out of the
pointed with any or all of them, express your disappoint- instructor' s control; moreover, an instructor who sets out
ment calmly and respectfully. Avoid comments that in- to implement all of the suggestions in thi s paper is likely
volve the slightest trace of disparagement or stereotyping to be overwhelmed in the attempt and to end by imple-
directed at students of a particular race, gender, or sexual menting none of them.
orientation, or with students who are disabled in any way. Our hope is that readers will consider all of the sugges-
If you fail to follow this recommendation, doing every- tions in the paper in light of their teaching styles and person-
thing else recommended in this paper may not be enough alities and attempt to adopt a few of them in the next course
to salvage the class. they teach, and then perhaps a few more in the course after
Justification that. While we cannot predict the extent to which the tech-
The term "caring" or its synonym "concern" show up in niques will succeed in achieving the instructors' objectives,
virtually every published study of what students consider to we can say with great confidence that their use will improve
be effective teaching. In a review of nearly 60 studies of the quality of learning that occurs in those classes.
students' descriptions of effective teachers, FeldmanP81 found
eight core characteristics in most lists: concern for students, IF YOU GET ONE IDEA FROM THIS PAPER
knowledge of subject, stimulation of interest, availability, Writing formal instructional objectives and using active
encouragement of discussion, ability to explain clearly, en- and cooperative instructional methods offers a good pros-
thusiasm, and preparation. Factor analysis of rating scales pect of equipping your students with the knowledge and
show four generic factors across disciplines: skill (ability to skills you wish them to develop.
Winter2000 37
( Special Feature Section )
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Bookstore, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada, and available on-
line at <http://chemeng.mcmaster.ca/pbl/pbl.htm>
We are grateful to Robert Hudgins (University of Water- 19. Woods, D.R., Problem-Based Learning: How to Gain the
loo), Jorge Ibanez (Universidad Iberoamericana-Mexico Most from PBL, Woods Publishing, Waterdown (1994). Dis-
City), John O'Connell (University of Virginia), Tom Regan tributed by McMaster University Bookstore, Hamilton,
Ontario, Canada
(University of Maryland), Antonio Rocha (lnstituto
20. Barrows, H.S. , and R. Tamblyn, Problem-Based Learning,
Tecnologico-Celaya), Heather Sheardown (McMaster Springer, New York, NY (1980)
University), and Phil Wood (McMaster University) for 21. Engel, C.E., "Not Just a Method But a Way of Learning,"
helpful reviews of this paper. Chapter 2 in The Challenge of Problem-Based Learning,
D.J. Boud and G. Feletti, eds., Kogan Page, London, UK
(1991)
REFERENCES
22. Schmidt, H.G., "Problem-Based Learning: Rationale and
1.
Rugarcia, A., R.M. Felder, J.E. Stice, and D.R. Woods, Description," Medical Ed. , 17, 11 (1983) and "Foundations
"The Future of Engineering Education: I. A Vision for a of Problem-Based Learning: Explanatory Notes," Medical
New Century," Chem. Eng. Ed., 34(1), 16 (2000) Ed., 27, 422 (1993)
2. McKeachie, W.J., Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research, and 23. Coles, C., "Is Problem-Based Learning the Only Way?" Chap-
Theory for College and University Teachers, 10th ed., ter 30 in The Challenge of Problem-Based Learning, D.J .
Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA (1999) Boud and G. Feletti, eds. , Kogan Page, London, UK (1991)
3. Wankat, P. , and F.S. Oreovicz, Teaching Engineering, 24. Felder, R.M. , and L.K. Silverman, "Learning and Teaching
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY (1993). Available on-line at Styles in Engineering Education," Eng. Ed., 78(7), 674 (1988)
<http://www.asee.org/pubs/teaching.htm> 25. Felder, R.M., "Reaching the Second Tier: Learning and
4. Stice, J.E ., ed. , Developing Critical Thinking and Prob- Teaching Styles in College Science Education," J. College
lem-Solving Abilities, New Directions in Learning and S ci. Teach., 23(5), 286 (1993). Available on-line at <http://
Teaching, No. 30, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA (1987) www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/fi'felder/public/Papers/
5. Stice, J.E., "A First Step Toward Improved Teaching," Secondtier.html>
Eng. Ed., 66(5), 394 (1976) 26. Felder, R.M., "Matters of Style," ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18 (1996).
6. Felder, R.M., and R. Brent, "Objectively Speaking," Chem. Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/
Eng. Ed. , 31(3), 178 (1997). Available on-line at <http:// users/fi'felder/public/Papers/LS-Prism.htm>
www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Col- 27. Kolb, D.A., Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source
umns/Objectives.htm1> of Leaming and Development, Prentice Hall, Englewood
7. Gronlund, N.E., How to Write and Use Instructional Ob- Cliffs, NJ (1984)
jectives, 5th ed., Macmillan, New York, NY (1994) 28. Stice, J.E ., "Using Kolb's Learning Cycle to Improve Stu-
8. Mager, R.F., Preparing Educational Objectives, Fearon dent Learning," Eng. Ed. , 77, 291 (1987)
Publishers, San Francisco, CA (1962) 29. McCarthy, B. , The 4MAT System : Teaching to Learning
9. Popham, W.J. , and E.L. Baker, Establishing Instructional Sty les with Right-L eft Mode Techniques, EXCEL Inc.,
Goals, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ (1970) Barrington, IL (1986)
10. Bloom, B.S., and D.R. Krathwohl, Taxonomy of Educa- 30. Harb, J .N. , R.E. Terry, P .K. Hurt, and K.J. Williamson,
tional Objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain, Addison- Teaching Through the Cycle: Application of Learning Style
Wesley, New York, NY (1984) Theory to Engineering Education at Brigham Young Uni-
11. Woods, D.R., "How Might I Teach Problem Solving?" in versity, BYU Press, Provo, UT (1995)
Developing Critical Thinking and Problem-Solving Abili- 31. Harb, J.N., S.O. Durrant, and R.E. Terry, "Use of the Kolb
ties, J.E. Stice, ed., New Directions for Teaching and Learn- Learning Cycle and the 4MAT System in Engineering Edu-
ing, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA (1987) cation," J. Eng. Ed., 82, 70 (1993)
12. Ramsden, P. , and N.J . Entwistle, "Effects of Academic 32. Lawrence, G. , People Types and Tiger Stripes, 3rd ed., Cen-
Departments on Students' Approaches to Studying," Brit- ter for Applications of Psychological Type, Gainesville, FL
(1993)
ish J. of Ed. Psychology, 51, 368 (1981)
33. Felder, R.M., "Meet Your Students. I. Stan and Nathan,"
13. Haile, J .M., "Toward Technical Understanding: Part 1.
Chem. Eng. Ed., 23(2), 68 (1989). Available on-line at <http:/
Brain Structure and Function," Chem. Eng. Ed., 31(3),
/www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/fi'felder/public/Columns/
152 (1997); "Part 2. Elementary Levels," Chem. Eng. Ed.,
Stannathan.html>
31(4), 214 (1997); "Part 3, Advanced Levels," Chem. Eng.
34. Wood, P .E. , "Bring the Real World into the Classroom,"
Ed., 32(1), 30 (1998)
Canadian Chem. N ews, March (1999)
14. Bruning, R.H. , G.J. Schraw, and R.R. Ronning, Cognitive 35. Kresta, S. , "Hands-On Demonstrations: An Alternative to
Psychology and Instruction, 3rd ed., Merrill (1999) Full-Scale Lab Experiments," J . Eng. Ed., 87(1), 7 (1998)
15. Glaser, R., "Education and Thinking: The Role of Knowl- 36. Felder, R.M. , "On Creating Creative Engineers," Eng. Ed.,
edge," American Psychologist, 55, 2 (1984) 77(4), 222 (1987)
16. Woods, D.R., "Three Trends in Teaching and Learning," 37. Felder, R.M. , "The Generic Quiz : A Device to Stimulate
Chem. Eng. Ed., 32(4), 296 (1998) Creativity and Higher-Level Thinking Skills," Chem. Eng.
17. Felder, R.M., Meet Your Students. III. Michelle, Rob, and Ed., 19(4), 176 (1985)
Art," Chem. Eng. Ed. , 24(3), 130 (1990). Available on-line 38. Felder, R.M. , and B.A. Soloman, Index of Learning Styles.
at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/fi'felder/pub- Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/
lic/Columns/Objectives.htm1> users/fi'felder/public/ILSpage.html>
18. Woods, D.R., Problem-Based Learning: Helping Your Stu- 39. Keirsey, D., Keirsey Temperament Sorter. Available on-line
dents Gain the Most from PBL, Woods Publishing, at <http://keirsey.com>
Waterdown (1997). Distributed by McMaster University 40. Piaget, J ., and B. Inhelder, The Psychology of the Child,

38 Chemical Engineering Education

 Future of Engineering Education J
Basic Books, New York, NY (1975) Student-Centered Instruction," College Teaching, 44(2), 43
41. Piaget, J ., "Intellectual Evolution from Adolescence to Adult- (1996). Available on-line at <http ://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/
hood," Human Develop. , 15, 1 (1972) lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Resist.html>
42. Williams, K.A., and A.M.L. Cavallo, "Reasoning Ability, 61. Kaufman, D.B. , R.M. Felder, and H. Fuller, "Peer Ratings
Meaningful Learning and Students' Understanding of Phys- in Cooperative Learning Teams," 1999 ASEE An. Conf
ics Concepts," J. College Sci. Teach., 24(5), 311 (1995) Proc., ASEE (1999 ). Available on-line at <http: //
43. Stonewater, J .K., and B.B. Stonewater, "Teaching Problem www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/
Solving: Implications From Cognitive Development Re- peer_ratings.html>
search," AAHE Bulletin, 7, February (1984) 62. Heller, P ., R. Keith, and S. Anderson, "Teaching Problem
44. Godleski, E.S., "Learning Style Compatibility of Engineer- Solving Through Cooperative Grouping, Part 1: Group Ver-
ing Students and Faculty," FIE '84 Proceedings, IEEE/ASEE, sus Individual Problem Solving," Amer. J. of Physics, 60(7),
362 (1984) 627 (1992)
45. Rosati, P., R.K. Dean, and S.M. Rodman, "A Study of the 63. Heller, P. , and M. Hollabaugh, "Teaching Problem Solving
Relationship Between Students' Learning Styles and In- Through Cooperative Grouping: Designing Problems and
structors' Lecturing Styles," IEEE Trans. in Ed., 31(3), 208 Structuring Groups," Amer. J. of Physics, 60(7), 637 (1992)
(1988) 64. Dekker, D. , and J .E . Stice, "Pairs Testing," FIE '98 Proc., 14
46. Bonwell, C.C. , and J.A. Eison, Active Learning: Creating (1988)
Excitement in the Classroom, ASHE-ERIC Higher Educa- 65. Springer, L., M.E. Stanne, and S. Donovan, ''Effects ofSmall-
tion Report No. 1, George Washington University, Washing- Group Learning on Undergraduates in Science, Mathemat-
ton, DC (1991) ics, Engineering, and Technology: A Meta-Analysis," R ev. of
47. Sutherland, T.E. , and C.C. Bonwell, Using Active Learning Ed. Res., 69( 1), 21 (1999). Available on-line at <http://
in College Classes: A Range of Options for Faculty, Jossey- www.wcer.wisc.edu/nise/cll>
Bass, San Francisco, CA (1996) 66. Goodsell, A.M., M. Maher, and V. Tinto (eds. ), Collaborative
48. Johnson, D.W., R.T. Johnson, and K.A. Smith,Active Learn- Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education. National Cen-
ing: Cooperation in the College Classroom, 2nd ed., Interac- ter of Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment,
tion Book Co., Edina, MN (1999) Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA (1992)
49. Felder, R.M., "How About a Quick One?" Chem. Eng. Ed., 67 . Kadel, S., and J.A. Keehner (eds.), Collaborative Learning:
26(1), 18 (1992). Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/
A Sourcebook for Higher Education, Vol. 2, National Center
unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Columns/Quickone.html>
on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment,
50. Felder, R.M. , "It Goes Without Saying," Chem. Eng. Ed., Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA (1994)
25 (3 ), 132 ( 1991). Available on-line at <http: //
68. Felder, R.M. , G.N. Felder, and E.J. Dietz, "A Longitudinal
www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Columns/
Study of Engineering Student Performance and Retention.
Withoutsaying.html>
V. Comparisons with Traditionally Taught Students," J .
51. Felder, R.M. , "FAQs II," Chem. Eng. Ed., 33(4), 276 (1999)
Eng. Ed., 87(4), 469 (1998). Available on-line at <http://
52. Felder, R.M., "Beating the Numbers Game: Effective Teach-
www2 .ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/
ing in Large Classes," 1997 ASEE Ann. Conf Proc. , ASEE,
long5.html>
June (1997). Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/
unity/lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/Largeclasses.htm> 69. Felder, R.M. , "Tips on Quantitative Tests," Emphasis on
Teaching and Learning, N.C. State University, 7, Novem-
53 . Woods, D.R., "Handling the Large Class: Ways to Deal With
ber (1997). Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/
a Potentially Big Problem," J . College S ci. Teach. , 20(5), 297
(1991) lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/testingtips.html>
54. Whimbey, A.E., and J.J. Lochhead, Problem Solving and 70. Astin, A.W., What Matters in College: Four Critical Years
Comprehension: A Short Course in Analytical Reasoning, Revisited, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA (1993)
Franklin Institute Press, Philadelphia, PA (1982) 71. Brink, R.W. , Educational Innovations in Canada and the
55. Michaelson, L.K. , R.H. Black, and L.D . Fink, "What Every United States, Dept of Electrical Engineering, University of
Faculty Developer Needs to Know about Learning Groups," Twente, Enschede, The Netherlands (1989)
in L. Richlin (ed. ), To Improve the Academy: Resources for 72. Ramsden, P., Learning to Teach, Routledge, London, UK
Faculty, Instructional, and Organizational Development, (1992)
New Forums Press, Stillwater, OK (1996) 73. Ramsden, P. , "Student Learning and Perceptions of the
56. Chickering, A.W. , and Z.F. Gamson, "Seven Principles for Academic Environment," Higher Ed., 8 , 411 (1979)
Good Practice in Undergraduate Education," AAHE Bulle- 74. Entwistle, N.J., and P. Ramsden, Understanding Student
tin, p.3 , March (1987) Learning, Croom and Helm, London, UK (1983)
57. Felder, R.M., and R. Brent, Cooperative Learning in Techni- 75 . Ramsden, P. , The Lancaster Approaches to Studying and
cal Courses: Procedures, Pitfalls and Payoffs, ERIC Docu- Course Perceptions Questionnaire: Lecturer's Handbook,
ment Reproduction Service, ED 377038 (1994). Available Oxford Polytechnic, Headington, Oxford, UK (1983)
on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/users/f/felder/ 76. Woods, D.R., R.R. Marshall, and A.N. Hrymak, "Self-As-
public/Papers/Coopreport.html> sessment in the Context of the McMaster Problem-Solving
58. Felder, R.M., "A Longitudinal Study of Engineering Stu- Program," Evaluation and Assessment in Higher Ed., 12(2),
dent Performance and Retention. IV. Instructional Methods 107 (1988)
and Student Responses to Them," J. Eng. Ed., 84(4 ), 361 77 . Brown, G. , and M. Pendleberry, Assessing Active Learning,
(1995). Available on-line at <http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/ Parts 1 and 2, CVCP Universities; Staff Development and
lockers/users/f/felder/public/Papers/long4.html> Training Unit, University House, Sheffield, UK (1992)
59. Millis, B.J ., and P .G. Cottell , Jr. , Cooperative Learning for 78. Feldman, K.A., "The Superior College Teacher from the
Higher Education Faculty, American Council on Education Students' View," Research in Higher Ed., 5, 43 (1976)
and the Oryx Press, Phoenix, AZ (1998) 79. Cross, K.P. , "On College Teaching," J . Eng. Ed., 82( 1), 9
60. Felder, R.M. , and R. Brent, "Navigating the Bumpy Road to (1993) 0

Winter2000 39