1. Problem-Based Learning Laboratories On Chemicals from Biorenewables: Student Reflections B. Narasimhan, C.E. Glatz, S.K. Mallapragada, P.J. Reilly, and J.V. Shanks Department of Chemical Engineering K. Saunders and M. Huba Educational Leadership and Policy Studies

2. Synopsis of Activity  We have developed four 1-credit open-ended, multidisciplinary laboratory courses involving “Chemicals from Biorenewables”  These problem-based learning laboratories have been integrated with existing and new bioengineering-related ChE classes  Target audience:  Undergraduate (seniors) and graduate students in Chemical Engineering  Undergraduate and graduate students in Biochemistry and Biophysics, Biology, Biorenewable Resource Technology, and Food Science

3. Description of Laboratory Courses  Bioinformatics - (Spring 03,04: Reilly) - Development of bioinformatics and virtual reality techniques to investigate and predict enzyme structure and function  Metabolic Engineering - (Spring 02,04: Shanks, Gonzalez) - Combination of experiments with mathematical analysis of the metabolism of ethanol fermentation from yeast  Bioseparations - (Fall 02,04: Glatz) - Development of a process for recovering a recombinant protein expressed in corn germ  Tissue Engineering - (Fall 02,03: Mallapragada, Narasimhan) - Design of bioreactor to cultivate bioartificial skin in vitro on degradable polymer scaffolds

4. Motivation: Educational  ABET criteria  Life-long learning  Multidisciplinary, team-based approach  Problem-based learning (PBL)  Open-ended problems  Learning-based approach  Students direct learning of the topic  Problems provide motivation for learning  Metacognition – self-awareness of learning

5. Acknowledgments  Don Woods – extensive writings  NSF  Combined Research and Curriculum Development Grant - EEC 0087696  Our Students  Maureen Griffin – HS Teacher  Our Graduate Student Tutors

6. Assessment of Student Reaction and Awareness  On-line journaling  Six sets of reflection questions – one to five questions per set.  Focus groups  Education graduate student discussing set of nine questions at end of course.  Purposes  Metacognition  Feedback

7. Journal Questions and Responses : First third of course…  Describe your past experiences with team projects. Some had projects that went well. Most had experienced projects where teams were of limited effectiveness.  How well is your team able to identify issues, set goals and identify problems. At the early stage there was confidence in this aspect but more guidance was sought for how to implement a plan.

8. Journal Questions and Responses : Middle third of course…  How has working on a team influenced your learning. Nobody on the team could have come up with the requirements alone, but we gathered and filled in things based on our individual experience.  Describe how your experiences have influenced your thinking about how you best learn. It makes me question things much more – this was not the original way I learned when it was all handed to me.

9. Journal Questions and Responses : Last third of course…  Describe the ways the course has affected your written and oral communication. We found an error during an early progress report that taught us to anticipate critical questions for future presentations.  How prepared to you feel to address new problems. At first I wondered where to start with such a big project... I learned to look to the literature to get a start and break the task down in small tasks that were more do-able.

10. Focus Group Responses  Overall reaction to the course. The course has taught me where to look for information, how to critique the work of others, how important it is to thoroughly explain my ideas to those with different backgrounds, and that it is good to have a team with varied backgrounds. This course problem is what I talked about in my job interviews.

11. Focus Group Responses  How to improve the course.  Add more structure to ensure that groups are progressing.  Define the grading more clearly – are we being graded on our design, our teamwork, our problem-solving skills?  The journaling takes time – it should be clear that something is being done with our answers.

12. Tissue Engineering

13. Protein Recovery from Transgenic Corn Transgenic Corn Germ Extraction Cation Exchange Chromatography Size Exclusion Purified Brazzein

14. Instructor Challenges  Matching the work to the credits.  Finding time to respond to journaling.  Designing suitable assessments for learning effectiveness of this approach.  Failure of faculty member to participate.  Training of TA tutors.  How to make it sustainable after NSF funding expires.

15. Curriculum Structure  Four new 1-credit laboratories - each associated with an existing or new ChE undergraduate/ graduate level biotechnology related theory course  Each laboratory course has one open-ended design project topic and list of desired outcomes  Students work in teams - each team, when possible, has a student with a biology/biochemistry or other non-ChE background  Opportunity for problem-based, student-directed, multidisciplinary team-based learning  Bioethics component

16. Integration of New Laboratories into ChE Curriculum at ISU Metabolic Engineering Microbial Engineering Lab Product Development Polymeric Biomaterials Tissue Engineering Lab Downstream Processing Bio- Separations Bio- Separations Lab Upstream Processing Biochemical Engineering Bioinformatics Lab

17. General Lab Course Outline  Weeks 1-2 : Common component for all the lab classes - Teach students statistics, bioethics, how to work in teams, literature searches, laboratory notebooks. Faculty member plays role of instructor with learning exercises in context of technical content of the course.  Weeks 3-5 : Literature review, coming up with plan for solving the problem, team roles, some laboratory training. Faculty member plays role of coach.  Weeks 6-14 : Implementation of plan, experimental design. Faculty member plays role of coach  Weeks 15-16 : Wrapping up, written and oral presentations

18. Motivation: Scientific  ChE is evolving from a petrochemical-based to a biorenewables-based discipline. Examples: ProductSpecies usedCompany IndigoMicrobialGenencor poly(lactic acid)MicrobialCargill/Dow BiopolMicrobial/plantsMonsanto 1,3 propanediolMicrobialDuPont  Current ChE curriculum does not reflect this trend  Introduce new courses to cover this new technology