Rossiter and Biggs (2008), A problem-based learning approach

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

A problem-based learning approach

to 1styear UG Chemical

Engineering

Dr Catherine Biggs and Dr Diane Rossiter

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Contents

•Progression of improvements in CPE1002

•Mid-term

feedback from the students on

IBL

•Strategies adopted in tutorials and use of

learning space for large group IBL

•Discussion invited

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Progression of improvements in

CPE1002

•Course aims

•Form

at changes

•Revised form

at

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Course Aims

The course aims to provide an introduction

to theprinciples of chemical engineering

principles of chemical engineering

through discussion of the chemical industry

and the development and application of

material balances over a range of equipment

and processes. Core subject in Year 1.

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

75% exam, 25%

cwk

80% exam, 20%

cwk

Assessment

9 (16%)

7 (25%)

Results:

exam fails

55

28

Students

CAB+1

CAB+1

Resources

Small group;

3 hrs,

3 x term

Large group;

3 hrs,

2 x term

Tutorials

2 hours

2 hours

Lectures

2004/05

2003/04

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Why Change CPE1002?

•Bored with delivery

•Students not seeing the connection

•Opportunity for change –A/Prof Paul Lant (PAL)

(University of Queensland)

By the end

of th

e cou

rse…

Deve

lope

d and

practiced cor

e pro

cess

eng

ineering

skills an

d feel co

nfident

that you

are well on yo

ur way

to beco

ming a ch

emical

eng

ineer!

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

What we tried to teach them

•Technical skills

•Material balances, units, system boundaries etc

•Dealing with uncertainty

•Personal Skills

•Working and communicating in a group

•Independent and self directed learning

•Transferable Skills

•Technical reporting

•Presentations

•Communication

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

•Problem-based Tutorials (2 hours per week)

•Group Assignments with real data, authentic,

not always one neat solution

•Lectures/Keynotes (1 hour per week)

•Overview and introduction

•Directed learning

•Homework Sheets and W

ritten Quiz

•Independent study and re-enforcement

major

sh

ift of

fo

cus

How we tried to teach them

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

•Things we added to the course

•Site visit to Local G

eorgia Pacific Paper Mill

•Linked site visit to assignment

•Guest lecture on sustainability

•More problems more often

•Group work

•Things we left out

•Nothing technical

•Less one-to-one tutorials outside of class

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

50% exam,

50% cwk

75% exam,

25% cwk

80% exam,

20% cwk

Assessment

15 (23%)

9 (16%)

7 (25%)

Results:

exam fails

66

55

28

Students

CAB+PAL+1

CAB+1

CAB+1

Resources

IBL;

2 hrs, w

eekly

Small group;

3 hrs,

3 x term

Large group;

3 hrs,

2 x term

Tutorials

1 hour

2 hours

2 hours

Lectures

2005/06

2004/05

2003/04

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

50%

exam,

50% cwk

50% exam,

50% cwk

50% exam,

50% cwk

Assessment

TBA

1 (2%)

15 (23%)

Results:

exam fails

70

67

66

Students

DR+3

CAB+DR+2

CAB+PAL+1

Resources

IBL ;

2 hrs,

weekly

IBL;

2 hrs,

weekly

IBL;

2 hrs,

weekly

Tutorials

1 hour

1 hour

1 hour

Lectures

2007/08

2006/07

2005/06

Introduced

MOLE quizzes

through funded

CiLASSproject

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Contents

•Progression of improvements in CPE1002

•Mid-term

feedback from the students on

IBL

•Strategies adopted in Tutorials and use of

learning space for large group IBL

•Discussion invited

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Mid-term feedback from the

students1

•Many find concepts hard to

grasp initially since a lot of

new material (other topics

more familiar -maths,

science).

•Most feel challenged -not

given all the answ

ers, self

study required, team

working.

•Some hate group work!

•Many like that it’s directly

relevant to Engineering and

problem solving.

•Some like varied activities in

tutorials –team building (egg

drop), case studies.

•Some like group work!

1. Short CPE Year 1 Survey, 26 Oct. 2007, Week 4, 61 responses out of 69.

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Why are you finding this course

enjoyable?

“…challenging and requires working at which I enjoy. I put more effort into

this part than any other (course). After completing a difficult question it’s

well worth the effort.”

“I like solving problems, looking at my work and admire it after success, I

like being given tips and using them to come up with new ideas and all

these course (CPE1002) give me that opportunity”

“It all seems new, I feel like I’m studying the course I applied for and I

especially enjoy team activities.”

“Lots of different activities in the workshop”

“New, interesting methodology”

“I believe it could be due to the group work.”

“Cos it’s fun to do”

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Contents

•Progression of improvements in CPE1002

•Mid-term

feedback from the students on

IBL

•Strategies adopted in tutorials and use of

learning space for large group IBL

•Discussion invited

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Strategies adopted in tutorials and

use of learning space for large

group IBL

•Typical form

at and new strategies based

on observations

•Room layout and issues

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Typical format of a tutorial

1.Feedback on homework –sm

all class, using

flipcharts located in different corners

2.

IBL Activity –working in groups, typically

prepare OHP with their proposed solution

3.

Feedback on IBL Activity –whole class

4.

Time to work on Homework/Assignment

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Strategies adopted in tutorials2

•Student Selection-3 homework feedback stations

provided with different tutor

•Student Engagement-Use of short term

tasks to keep

students engaged betw

een activities 2 & 3 (e.g. each

group prepares question/observation on Post-It relating

to the main activity for feedback)

•Student Reflection-Use of anonym

ous feedback (via

Post-It) on “What I learned today”, “What I’m

still not

clear about”to inform

planning for next tutorial/lecture.

2. Observations –5.10.07 (CAB) & 12.10.007 (Dr Bob Petrulis, CiLASS)

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Learning Space3–before

3. Portobello Centre PC-B59, photo taken by Dr J. Howse –set up time

10 minsbefore and after by 4 people.

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Learning Space –after arranging

17 group work areas for 70 students, screen at front with OHP & data

projector.

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Learning Space –with class

Teaching team –4 academic staff (2 lecturers and 2 post-docs)

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Room Layout Issues for IBL

•Setting up the room takes 4 people 10mins before and after

•Too much clutter

•Constant changes to teaching delivery in one session e.g. small class,

whole class, group work, individual w

ork

•Current arrangement not useful for sm

all class teaching with flip charts

Solutions/challenges

•Arrangement of tables to reinforce group communication and allow

sight of main “blackboard”

•Do we need a breakout room for sm

all class delivery? Room

allocation/charging? Are we doing too much in one session?

•Need a dedicated “flexible”space for large class sizes (> 50+)

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Contents

•Progression of improvements in CPE1002

•Mid-term

feedback from the students on

IBL

•Strategies adopted in Tutorials and use of

learning space for large group IBL

•Discussion invited

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering

Discussions Invited

(1)Practical implications of large group IBL

activities.

(2)Effective mechanisms for getting

students to engage and collaborate in IBL

activities