Chemical engineering education

http://cee.che.ufl.edu/ ( Journal Site )
MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Chemical engineering education
Alternate Title:
CEE
Abbreviated Title:
Chem. eng. educ.
Physical Description:
v. : ill. ; 22-28 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
American Society for Engineering Education -- Chemical Engineering Division
Publisher:
Chemical Engineering Division, American Society for Engineering Education
Place of Publication:
Storrs, Conn
Publication Date:
Frequency:
quarterly[1962-]
annual[ former 1960-1961]
quarterly
regular

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Chemical engineering -- Study and teaching -- Periodicals   ( lcsh )
Genre:
periodical   ( marcgt )
serial   ( sobekcm )

Notes

Citation/Reference:
Chemical abstracts
Additional Physical Form:
Also issued online.
Dates or Sequential Designation:
1960-June 1964 ; v. 1, no. 1 (Oct. 1965)-
Numbering Peculiarities:
Publication suspended briefly: issue designated v. 1, no. 4 (June 1966) published Nov. 1967.
General Note:
Title from cover.
General Note:
Place of publication varies: Rochester, N.Y., 1965-1967; Gainesville, Fla., 1968-

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
oclc - 01151209
lccn - 70013732
issn - 0009-2479
Classification:
lcc - TP165 .C18
ddc - 660/.2/071
System ID:
AA00000383:00071

Full Text














a a S * S g E S






eCC
ach#4owledAes a.id uankh....


3M COMPANY


...CEIA EG412RGDtiTF
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION
wiat a doieati# oa aunds.










EDITORIAL AND BUSINESS ADDRESS
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
Editor: Ray Fahien (904) 392-0857
Associate Editor: Mack Tyner
Editorial & Business Assistant:
Carole C. Yocum (904) 392-0861
Publications Board and Regional
Advertising Representatives:
Chairman:
Lee C. Eagleton
Pennsylvania State University

Past Chairman:
Klaus D. Timmerhaus
University of Colorado
SOUTH:
Homer F. Johnson
University of Tennessee
Ralph W. Pike
Louisiana State University
James Fair
University of Texas
Gary Poehlezn
Georgia Tech
CENTRAL:
Darsh T. Wasan
Illinois Institute of Technology
J. J. Martin
University of Michigan
Lowell B. Koppel
Purdue University
WEST:
William H. Corcoran
California Institute of Technology
William B. Krantz
University of Colorado
C. Judson King
University of California Berkeley
NORTHEAST:
Angelo J. Perna
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Stuart W. Churchill
University of Pennsylvania
Raymond Baddour
M.I.T.
A. W. Westerberg
Carnegie-Mellon University
NORTHWEST:
Charles Sleicher
University of Washington
CANADA:
Leslie W. Shemilt
McMaster University
LIBRARY REPRESENTATIVE
Thomas W. Weber
State University of New York


Chemical Engineering Education


VOLUME XV


NUMBER 3


SUMMER 1981


106 Departments of Chemical Engineering
UC Santa Barbara, Dale E. Seborg

112 The Educator
Bob Sparks, Jill Murray

Undergraduate Research
120 Undergraduate Research in ChE ... Thoughts and
Comments From an ASEE Symposium, Nicholas A.
Peppas
121 Undergraduate Research: Myth or Reality?
Albert Sacco, Jr.
122 Undergraduate Research: A Necessary Education
Option and its Costs and Benefits, Arthur L. Fricke
126 ChE Undergraduate Research Projects in Biomedical
Engineering, Pieter Stroeve
130 Senior Thesis Research at Princeton,
Robert K. Prud'homme

133 Research with Senior Level Students: Advantages,
Disadvantages, Recommendations, Dimitrios Tassios
135 Student Preparation for Graduate School Through
Undergraduate Research, Nicholas A. Peppas
137 Undergraduate Research in Chemical Engineering,
William B. Krantz
140 Undergraduate Research as a Prerequisite for
Graduation, Emmanuel G. Koukios

146 Administration
Coping with Bulging ChE Enrollments (Are You or
Aren't You), Robert B. Beckmann

118 ASEE Division Activites

116 Letters to the Editor

144-145 Book Reviews

III Positions Available


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION is published quarterly by Chemical
Engineering Division, American Society for Engineering Education. The publication
is edited at the Chemical Engineering Department, University of Florida. Second-class
postage is paid at Gainesville, Florida, and at DeLeon Springs, Florida. Correspondence
regarding editorial matter, circulation and changes of address should be addressed
to the Editor at Gainesville, Florida 32611. Advertising rates and information are
available from the advertising representatives. Plates and other advertising material
may be sent directly to the printer: E. O. Painter Printing Co., P. O. Box 877,
DeLeon Springs, Florida 32028. Subscription rate U.S., Canada, and Mexico is $15 per
year, $10 per year mailed to members of AIChE and of the ChE Division of ASEE.
Bulk subscription rates to ChE faculty on request. Write for prices on individual
back copies. Copyright 1981 Chemical Engineering Division of American Society
for Engineering Education. The statements and opinions expressed in this periodical
are those of the writers and not necessarily those of the ChE Division of the ASEE
which body assumes no responsibility for them. Defective copies replaced if notified
within 120 days.
The International Organization for Standardization has assigned the code US ISSN
0009-2479 for the identification of this periodical.


SUMMER 1981




































[nQj departmentt ~


CIE AT UC SANTA BARBARA


DALE E. SEBORG
University of California
Santa Barbara, CA 93106

C CHEMICAL ENGINEERING BEGAN at the University
of California, Santa Barbara (UCSB) in
January, 1966 with two faculty members and six
undergraduate students. During the next 15 years,
the program grew to its present size of 9 faculty
(including a vacant position), 195 undergraduates,
and 33 graduate students. Campus visitors are
surprised to learn that the Department of Chemi-
cal and Nuclear Engineering is located in the Arts
Building which it shares with the Art Depart-
ment. (A logical arrangement since chemical engi-
neering is widely considered to be an art as well
as a science). The UCSB campus is located on the
Pacific shoreline, 100 miles northwest of Los
Angeles and 330 miles south of San Francisco.


The beautiful location and moderate Santa
Barbara climate are two reasons why UCSB was
chosen to host the next ASEE Summer Workshop
for Chemical Engineering Faculty in August,
1982.
The UCSB campus is one of the nine campuses
in the University of California system. The
school's evolution into the UC system began in
1909 with the founding of the Santa Barbara
State Normal School. In 1935 the school was
designated as the Santa Barbara State College
which, in turn, was incorporated into the UC
system in 1944 and renamed, UCSB. After an
engineering program was approved in 1961,
Albert G. Conrad, then chairman of the Electrical
Engineering Department at Yale, was appointed
as the first Dean of Engineering. The College of
Engineering now consists of four academic de-
Copyright ChE Division, ASEE, 1981


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









apartments which offer degrees in computer science
and in four engineering disciplines: chemical,
nuclear, electrical and mechanical. Over 1400
undergraduate students and 330 graduate students
are currently enrolled in engineering at UCSB.
Since the total campus enrollment is over 15,000,
approximately 12% of the UCSB students are
enrolled in engineering.
The department is fortunate that the UCSB
campus has strong supporting programs in
cognate areas such as chemistry, physics and
biology. In addition to having excellent academic
departments in these disciplines, UCSB houses a
number of distinguished research institutes which
include the Quantum Institute, the Marine Sciences
Institute, and the new Theoretical Physics Insti-
tute which was started in 1979 with a 5 million
dollar grant from the National Science Founda-
tion.

DEPARTMENT HISTORY

T HE FIRST CHEMICAL engineering faculty
member to be hired at UCSB, Robert G.
Rinker, arrived in July, 1965. Bob recalls that
the department's first home was a 4000 square
foot room in the basement of the Arts Building.
Since this room had been used as a storage area
for surplus equipment and furniture, Bob's first
task was to create a working space for labora-
tories by disposing of the accumulated debris.
The department's "founding father" and first
chairman, John E. Myers, came to UCSB in Janu-
ary, 1966 from Purdue where he had been a faculty
member for 16 years. A native of Alberta, Jack re-
ceived his B.S. degree from the University of Al-
berta and his Ph.D. degree from the University of
Michigan where he was a doctoral student with
Donald Katz. He has supervised 30 student theses
on a variety of topics in heat and mass transfer,
notably nucleate boiling heat transfer. Jack and
a former colleague, C. O. Bennett, are co-authors of
a very successful undergraduate textbook, Mo-
mentum, Heat, and Mass Transfer. This book
is now in a third edition and has sold over 50,000
copies; it has also been translated into Spanish,
Polish and Portuguese. Jack enjoys telling the
story about the book salesman who visited him
shortly after he arrived at UCSB and tried to


persuade Jack to adopt his own textbook!
During his 15 years at UCSB, Jack Myers has
devoted his efforts to building the department and
providing campus leadership during critical
periods. Since 1976 he has served as the Dean of
the College of Engineering during a period of
rapid growth in both research programs and
student enrollments. Despite his heavy administra-
tive load, Jack continues to teach his popular fluid


"The ChE program needs how much money?"-
Dean Myers swings into action.
mechanics course and to supervise an occasional
graduate student. He also serves as a hard-hitting
first baseman on the faculty softball team at de-
partmental picnics.
-A third faculty member, Orville C. Sandall,
joined the department in 1966 after receiving his
Ph.D. at UC Berkeley. Orville is part of the "Al-
berta Connection" since, like Jack Myers, he is a
native of Alberta who received his B.S. degree
from the University of Alberta. Duncan A. Melli-
champ arrived in January, 1977 after receiving
his Ph.D. from Purdue and working with DuPont
for two years. Owen T. Hanna joined UCSB in
fall, 1967 from the Boeing Company. Owen re-
ceived his Ph.D. from Purdue and is the current
department chairman.
The third member of the "Alberta Connec-
tion," Dale E. Seborg, received his Ph.D. from
Princeton and joined the department in 1977, after
nine years as a faculty member at the University
of Alberta. Dale has served as the department


During his 15 years at UCSB, Jack Myers has devoted his efforts
to building the department and providing campus leadership during critical periods.


SUMMER 1981









chairman during the past three years. H. Chia
Chang arrived in 1980 after completing his Ph.D.
at Princeton. A new faculty member, Peter Christ-
man will join the department in 1982 after finish-
ing his Ph.D. at the University of Texas.
In 1969 the department's first nuclear engineer,
Henri Fenech, arrived from MIT where he had
been on the faculty. The nuclear engineering pro-
gram currently consists of 6 faculty, 50 under-
graduates and 12 graduate students.

FACULTY PROFILES
A brief summary of the research interests
and professional activities of the chemical engi-
neering faculty are included below.
Chia Chang received his B.S. degree from
Caltech in 1976 and his Ph.D. degree from Prince-
ton in 1979. In his thesis research, Chia developed
elegant new results based on Catastrophe Theory
to predict the occurence of multiple steady states
in reaction systems. He has research interests in


Since chemical engineering is an art as well as a
science, the department is located in the Arts Building.

instabilities and oscillatory phenomena in chemi-
cal reactor dynamics; effective transport in hetero-
geneous media;. and applied mathematics.
Owen Hanna is the current Department Chair-
man, a post he also held from 1971-73. Owen's
main research interests include transport analysis,
chemical reaction analysis and computational
methods for the solution of chemical engineering
problems. He has studied non-isothermal chemical
reaction behavior for tubular reactors and catalyst
pellets. In the way of computational methods,


Women currently comprise 23% of
the chemical engineering enrollment and have
played a leadership role in the technical societies.


Owen has developed a new method for efficiently
integrating systems of differential equations
which includes monitoring global accuracy. Owen
is also working on the development of new asymp-
totic techniques which may be applicable to a
variety of chemical engineering problems.
Owen and Orville Sandall have collaborated
on a number of problems involving heat transfer
and mass transfer. They have developed a success-
ful asymptotic formalism (for large Prandtl or
Schmidt numbers) which has been applied to a
number of problems in turbulent transport.
Duncan Mellichamp's research interests in the
areas of process dynamics and control, and digital
computer control overlap those of several other
faculty. He presently is collaborating with Bob
Rinker on the control of an autothermal packed-
bed reactor, particularly at an unstable steady
state. Duncan has recently developed several new
methods to help design multivariable control
systems for large-scale, i.e. high-order processes,
such as distributed reactors. He has worked with
several Ph.D. students and faculty from the
Electrical and Computer Engineering Department
on problems of interest in the design and optimal
operation of real-time computing systems. Finally,
Duncan and Dale Seborg are collaborating on
several advanced control studies which will be
evaluated using a computer-controlled multi-
component distillation column.
Duncan has been very active with the CACHE
organization having served as Editor of the Real-
Time Monograph Series and in a number of ad-
ministrative positions including President (1977-
78). He presently is working as Editor of a text-
book on real-time computing which will be
published soon.
Bob Rinker, who obtained his Ph.D. from Cal-
tech, has relatively broad research interests in the
general areas of kinetics, catalysis and reactor be-
havior. Notably, Bob and his graduate students
have conducted experimental studies of transport
and chemical reaction in supported liquid-phase
catalysts, dynamic and multiple steady-state be-
havior of distributed-parameter chemical reactors,
and concentration forcing of nonlinear chemical
processes in fixed-bed reactors. He is also col-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









laborating with Professor Peter Ford of the
Chemistry Department to study the kinetics and
mechanistic behavior of homogeneous catalysis by
transition metal carbonyl complexes. Bob and a
physicist, Dr. Robert Hill, are investigating the
atmospheric fixation of nitrogen by electrical dis-
charges at low and high temperatures. Collabora-
W '


Bob Rinker and graduate student Bill Savage are
studying transport and reaction in supported liquid
phase catalysis.
tive studies with Duncan Mellichamp are
mentioned under the latter's name.
Bob took his turn as Department Chairman
(1973-78) and has had the main responsibility
over the years of teaching both the undergraduate
and graduate lecture courses and laboratory ex-
periments in chemical reaction engineering as well
as the dual level course in polymer engineering.
Orville Sandall joined the department in 1966
after receiving a Ph.D. from Berkeley. He teaches
and does research in the areas of mass transfer
and separation processes. Current research proj-
ects include experimental and theoretical studies
of gas absorption with chemical reaction in
turbulent liquids and multicomponent distillation
in continuous contact equipment. This research is
generally motivated by the desirability of placing
mass transfer design procedures on a more funda-
mental basis. Orville also collaborates with Owen
Hanna on theoretical studies of turbulent heat
and mass transfer. During the past five years,
Orville has served as the Graduate Advisor for
the chemical engineering program. He is currently
on a leave of absence at the National Science
Foundation to serve as the program director for
the new Separation Processes Program.


Dale Seborg joined UCSB in 1977 and has
served as the department chairman from 1978 to
1981. Previously, he was a faculty member at the
University of Alberta for nine years where he
and Grant Fisher co-authored a book, Multi-
variable Computer Control-A Case Study.
His process control research ranges from theo-
retical developments of new control techniques to
experimental evaluations using computer-con-
trolled pilot plants. Dale and Duncan Mellichamp
direct an active process control program which
includes about a dozen graduate students and
financial support from five industrial sponsors.
Dale received the 1980 Technical Achievement
Award from the AIChE's Southern California
Section and was a co-recipient of the Best Paper
Award for the 1973 Joint Automatic Control
Conference. Within AIChE, Dale has chaired the
Systems and Process Control Group and currently
serves as the society delegate on the American
Automatic Control Council. As an antidote for his
process control activities, he teaches the intro-
ductory chemical engineering course to sopho-
mores.

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING RESEARCH

T HE NUCLEAR ENGINEERING faculty have de-
veloped strong research programs with special
emphasis on three areas: nuclear materials,
thermal hydraulic processes, and biomedical engi-
neering. Bob Odette and Gene Lucas have de-
veloped a comprehensive materials laboratory
which includes a Scanning Transmission Electron


Orville Sandall and graduate student Alice Tang
are conducting research on gas absorption in liquid jets.


SUMMER 1981









Microscope (300,000 x magnification) and is
supported by over $1,000,000 in research grants.
Together with Sam Gurol, they are involved in
developing a better understanding of the funda-
mental physical processes which govern the micro-
structure and mechanical properties of nuclear
structural materials.
Two nuclear engineering faculty, Sanjoy
Banerjee and Henri Fenech, are directing research
on the complex thermal hydraulic processes that
occur in nuclear systems. In particular, mechan-
isms which play a key role in reactor safety are
being investigated including rewetting of hot
surfaces, reflux condensation, and pressure and
wave concentrations in multiphase systems.
Sanjoy provides a very beneficial link between the
chemical and nuclear wings of our department
since he has an extensive background in nuclear
engineering as well as B.S. and Ph.D. degrees in
chemical engineering. He joined the department
in 1980, arriving from McMaster University
where he held the Westinghouse Chair in Engi-
neering Physics.
The early detection and localization of lung
tumors which are too small to detect using con-
ventional X-ray techniques is the goal of a research
program directed by Ed Profio. Ed and his
students have clinically tested a promising new
technique based on fluorescence bronchoscopy. An-
other research project involves the development of
fast neutron radiography for the detection of
breast cancer.

UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM
N RECENT YEARS THE number of chemical engi-
neering majors at UCSB has steadily increased
to the current level of 195, a record high. About
45 students are expected to graduate in June
1981, a significant increase over the normal 25-35
graduates per year. Typically, one-half of our
undergraduates have transferred to UCSB from
junior colleges, state colleges or other UC
campuses. The vast majority (,-90%) of our
undergraduates are California residents. Since the
state of California is a net importer of chemical
engineers, our graduates are readily able to find
employment i nCalifornia. However, an enter-
prising minority (,-15 %) of each graduating
class accept jobs outside of California, presumably
to verify persistent rumors that life does exist east
of the Sierra Nevada Mountains.
Women currently comprise 23% of the chemical


Duncan Mellichamp and Dale Seborg in the Real-
Time Computing Laboratory.

engineering enrollment and have played a leader-
ship role in the technical societies. For example,
during the 1980-81 academic year, female chemical
engineers have served as the president of the So-
ciety of Women ,Engineers student chapter and
were elected to three of the top four offices in the
AIChE student chapter. (Inevitably, the AIChE
vice-president was referred to as the token male.)
The B.S. degree in chemical engineering is a
four-year program which nominally requires only
180 quarter units, the standard graduation re-
quirement for all UCSB degree programs. How-
ever, the typical chemical engineering student
graduates with more units, particularly if he or
she is a transfer student. The UCSB chemical
engineering curriculum places considerable
emphasis on laboratory experience, especially in
the senior year when students take two quarters
of Chemical Engineering Laboratory and a two-
quarter course in process dynamics and control
which includes a laboratory.
In the Chemical Engineering Laboratory
courses, students have a four-hour lab period each
week for 20 weeks. The courses include a balance
of bench-scale experiments which provide accurate
experimental data and unit operations experi-
ments which provide familiarity with large-scale
equipment. A unique feature of this laboratory is
a wind tunnel which has a large test section (18" x
18") and can generate velocities up to 200 feet per
second. This versatile apparatus is used for a wide
variety of transport phenomena experiments.
A unique feature of the UCSB curriculum is
the unusual emphasis on two areas, process dy-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION


- r --now









namics and control, and real-time computing.
Undergraduates are required to take two quarters
of process dynamics and control as part of the
core curriculum. Many students also choose the
popular Real-Time Computing sequence for their
technical electives. Duncan Mellichamp has
gained widespread acclaim for his pioneering
efforts in developing excellent instructional labora-
tories in both areas, real-time computing and
process dynamics and control.
GRADUATE PROGRAM
GRADUATE ENROLLMENTS IN chemical engineer-
ing at UCSB have steadily grown to their
present level of 24 M.S. students and 9 Ph.D.
students. Virtually all of our M.S. students pursue
the thesis option since the non-thesis option is
rarely approved. It has also been department
policy to strongly encourage our own undergradu-
ates to broaden their background by pursuing
graduate studies elsewhere rather than staying at
UCSB. Consequently, all of our current 33 gradu-
ate students received their B.S. degrees from
other universities. Furthermore, of the 18 Ph.D.
students and approximately 60 M.S. students who
have graduated from the department since 1966,
none of the Ph.D. students and only a few M.S.
students received their B.S. degrees from UCSB.
CAMPUS GOVERNANCE
T HE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA has a strong
tradition of shared governance between the
Academic Senate and campus administrators. In
particular, Academic Senate committees play a
critical advisory role in academic planning and
personnel decisions. Although the Department of
Chemical and Nuclear Engineering is a relatively
small department at UCSB, our faculty have
played a disproportionately large role in the Aca-
demic Senate. In recent years, five of our faculty
-Jack Myers, Duncan Mellichamp, Bob Odette,
Owen Hanna and Bob Rinker-have chaired key
Academic Senate committees. By providing this
leadership, they have not only performed a valu-
able service to the campus, but they have also
extended the department's influence with the
campus administration. Our faculty's active par-
ticipation in campus governance has undoubtedly
played a major role in developing strong adminis-
trative support for our programs over the
years. Ol
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The assistance of Mel Garber of the UCSB Public In-
formation Office is gratefully acknowledged.


POSITIONS AVAILABLE
Use CEE's reasonable rates to advertise. Minimum rate
% page $50; each additional column inch $20.

MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
Chemical Engineering-tenure system faculty position.
Opening for full-time faculty member, beginning immedi-
ately. Doctorate in chemical engineering required. Strong
commitment to teaching and the ability to develop an
outstanding research program is expected. Teaching and/
or industrial experience desirable but not essential. Michi-
gan State University is an affirmative action-equal op-
portunity employer and welcomes applications from women
and members of minority groups. Send applications and
names of references to Chairman, Department of Chemical
Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
MI 48824.

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
Chairperson, Department of Chemical Engineering. Ph.D.
in Chemical Engineering or related field; strong interest in
education and academic research essential. Expanding de-
partment faculty of 16 with new positions available under
Quality Improvement Program funded by State Legisla-
ture to establish Centers of Excellence in selected areas.
Salary range: $40,000-55,000 per 12 months. Please send
application with resume and reference to Prof. Robert D.
Walker, Jr., Chair. Search Committee, ChE Department,
Univ. of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611. Deadline for ap-
plications extended to Sept. 15, 1981.
An equal opportunity/affirmative action employer.


Now Available from
Research Publications, Inc.

RAPID PATENT SERVICE

In addition to our complete
patent publications on microfilm
we now offer

Paper Copies of All U.S. and
Foreign Patents
High quality reproduction
provided quickly and efficiently
Telephone and Electronic
Ordering Available
For complete information on this important
new service, please contact:


K


Patent Services Department
Research Publications, Inc.
12 Lunar Drive
Woodbridge, CT 06525
(203) 397-2600
Patent Services Department
Research Publications, Inc.
2221 Jefferson Davis Highway
Arlington, VA 22202
(703) 920-5050


SUMMER 1981










LS educator



&4^ SpashS*

JILL MURRAY
Washington University
St. Louis, MO 63130

T HIS IS A MAN WHO gets excited over nine dots
on a piece of paper and different ways to
connect them. He offers the puzzle, a common brain
twister, to fourth-grade students and academic
colleagues alike-anyone willing to engage in a
little unorthodox problem-solving.
This is a man, three times chosen Professor of
the Year by Washington University engineering
students, who was recently the recipient of a
national award for excellence in college teaching.
The same man, still, has written more than fifty
scientific papers in areas ranging from artificial
kidney technology to contraceptives.
The man is Robert E. Sparks, professor of
chemical engineering, chairman of the biomedical
engineering program, and director of the Biologi-
cal Transport Laboratory at Washington Universi-
ty. If forced to wear a single label, though, he
prefers "inventor."
The nine-dot problem is one he sometimes
assigns to his classes to make a point about
creativity. It consists of three rows of three dots
which must be connected by four straight lines.
The answer usually given involves extending those
lines outside the tic-tac-toe-style grid, a move not
immediately considered by most.
But for Sparks, "going outside the grid" has
become an approach toward everything he sees
and does. He takes special delight in twisting and
turning the nine-dot and other problems until they
yield not one, but whole handfuls of solutions.


This is a man, three times chosen
Professor of the Year by Washington University
engineering students, who was recently
the recipient of a national award for
excellence in college teaching.


*Reprinted with permission of Washington University,
Magazine, Vol. 51, No. 2, 1981.


"It's the hidden assumptions that always bite.
The first question I ask is, How else? For instance,
what if the dots are really on the surface of a
sphere? Or, imagine instead that they are really
magnets, or perhaps different sizes. What then?"
Asking questions that are not normally asked
is a gift, he concedes, whether the subject is a
simple puzzle or a highly technical innovation. But
it is also a skill that can be developed. Can it be
taught? He swears it can, if only in the beginning
by osmosis.
This positive, flexible attitude, this unmistak-
able enthusiasm of a mind leading other minds.
Sparks brings to his classes, whether conducting
a special workshop for gifted grade school children
or teaching a college class in fluid mechanics.
"What I want more than anything else is to get
students thinking," he declares. "Long after
they've forgotten the homework, the formulas, the
professor, I want them to remember the excite-
ment of having their own ideas."

Copyright ChE Division, ASEE, 1981


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










Other projects are the investigation of a new form of birth control using targeted
drug release, a synthetic material resistant to clotting for use in artificial blood vessels, and a
chambered device through which pancreatic cells from an animal might be transplanted to diabetic patients.
II-l I M


"Number-crunching," student lingo for the
mechanical process of plugging figures into
formulas and grinding out answers, is the alterna-
tive that too often passes for education. Many
have grown to expect this-professors say that
students even complain when examinations ask
them to use concepts imaginatively in situations
they have not seen before. Concluded one after
such a test experience, "I thought that was going
too far." Unfortunately, Sparks believes, some
professors don't go far enough.
"We get so tied up in teaching great gobs of
technical material that we sometimes act as if it
were not possible to think until all the facts and
figures have been mastered," he observes. "We
sometimes forget that lecturing is not necessarily
teaching, and listening is not necessarily learning.
More important, learning is not necessarily think-
ing."
He expounded these ideas in June 1980 at the
annual meeting of the Chemical Manufacturers
Association. The meeting included the 1980
Catalyst Awards ceremony, which honored out-
standing teachers of chemistry and chemical engi-
neering at the high school, college and university
levels. Sparks was one of six to receive the as-
sociation's award-a $1,500 prize, a medal, and
a citation. In the address, he described the
problems associated with the traditional college
lecture course and, naturally, proposed a solution.
"Students can't think during a lecture. They
are so busy taking notes that they don't have
time," he contends. "And yet, in most technical
classes much factual information and many ana-
lytical techniques are conveyed."
After tumbling this dilemma around in his
mind, looking for a way to approach it from an-
other direction, Sparks decided to apply a new
formula to his content-loaded junior-level course,
Heat, Mass and Momentum Transfer. He decided
to hold two lectures a week and give the third
meeting over to discussion groups that would meet
separately with him on Friday. This "sacrifice"
of one formal session proved to be one of the most
successful practices around.
"It's the best thing since peanut butter," an-
nounced one student to his adviser. Others have
remarked, "It's one of the few classes I feel I really


get my money's worth out of," or simply, "Friday
sessions are the best part of this course."
"The focus of these small sessions is always on
the meaning behind the facts and calculations. We
continually ask Why? or What can we do with this
information?" says Sparks. "My guiding axiom is,
'Lead, don't tell.' They are," he adds, "the most
awake and alive classes I have ever taught."
The spirit of the Friday sessions is taken
farther in Inventive Reasoning, an optional fresh-
man course designed by Sparks and offered every
other year. The two-hour course, which evolved
from a series of informal, voluntary, noncredit
seminars, aims specifically at developing the


Sparks conducts the Friday sessions.


student's ability to generate his own ideas. It has
now expanded to industrial lectures and work-
shops on inventive thinking for researchers.
Many types of problems are presented from
many points of view. Some stem from what Sparks
calls reasoning from a phenomenon. How many
uses can be found for a paper clip, he asks, or for
microwave radiation, or liquid crystals? A second
category is reasoning from an observation. Here,
the class concentrates on the meaning of a pro-
cess, from the act of stirring cold chocolate syrup
into milk, to the nature of tarnish patterns on
silver, or the characteristics of small sap droplets
on a windshield. A third set of problems which he
terms sensitivity to triggers are exercises to in-
crease the awareness of input which might lead to
new trains of thought.


SUMMER 1981









Explains Sparks, "I contend that anyone ex-
posed for very long to such an atmosphere soon
becomes tenacious about inventing and will do
something with any problem you give him, even if
he has to change the nature of the problem. The
change is okay, because the idea is more important
than the problem which generated it. Problems are
everywhere and anyone can ask questions. How-
ever, a good new idea is not easy to come by. It
should be held onto, looked at, modified, and, if it
is not immediately useful, it should be saved for
future reference."
Norbert S. Mason, Sparks' collaborator and
a senior research associate, attests, "He lives by
that. It isn't just something he talks about in
class. He's equally proud of his own ideas as of
those of others."
Mason earned his Ph.D. in chemical engineer-
ing under Sparks at Case Western Reserve Uni-
versity in Cleveland, Ohio. When Sparks accepted


Sparks and senior research associate, Norbert
Mason, appear to have discovered something.
an appointment at Washington University in 1972,
Mason followed. Preferring the academic atmos-
phere to his former years in the chemical and
rubber industry, Mason has worked with Sparks
ever since.
"Sparks is an inventor, yes, but he is also a
leader in getting diverse groups of people to work
together," says Mason. "In our research, we have
consulted veterinarians, gynecologists, dental-
supply manufacturers, even felt-tip pen manufac-
turers. He's always well-organized, and that helps
a lot."
Born in Marshall, Missouri, Sparks attended
school in Independence and entered Kansas City
'University (now UMKC) as a prelaw student.
After only six weeks, though, he grew so homesick


"We sometimes forget that lecturing
is not necessarily teaching, and listening is not
necessarily learning. More important, learning
is not necessarily thinking."


for his favorite high school subject that he plunged
into a chemistry course well after its beginning.
He stayed with that decision, and in 1960, gradu-
ated with a doctorate in chemical engineering
from Johns Hopkins University.
"I chose chemistry and engineering for the
same reason I hope you would choose any profes-
sion-because it excites you. That nonlogical com-
ponent, how it feels in the gut, is more important
than the outlook in the job market or how much
money you're going to make," he says.
Engineering, particularly in its biomedical ap-
plications, continues to be an exciting field for
him. Elected president of the American Society for
Artificial Organs last year, he is currently work-
ing on one industrial contract and three research
projects funded by the National Institutes of
Health. He also is negotiating research contracts
with English and French biomedical companies
and writing a joint research proposal with an
Italian kidney specialist. In addition to Mason, his
collaborators include Washington University
surgeons Richard Clark and David Scharp,
nephrologist Eduardo Slatopolsky, gynecologist
David Keller, internist Robert Perrillo, virologist
Sondra Schlesinger, and St. Louis University
hematologist J. Heinrich Joist.
One project involves a process using mem-
branes with skewed pore size distribution as a
screen to filter blood into its components. If per-
fected, the process might someday be able to
separate the hepatitus virus from bloodclotting
fractions.
Other projects are the investigation of a new
form of birth control using targeted drug release,
a synthetic material resistant to clotting for use in
artificial blood vessels, and a chambered device
through which pancreatic cells from an animal
might be transplanted to diabetic patients.
Closest to becoming a commercial product is a
substitute for a chalky slurry that many patients
with kidney disease must drink daily to remove
phosphate impurities from the blood. Sparks and
Mason formulated a new antacid gel potent enough
to be taken in much smaller quantities. Animal
and preliminary human testing has been com-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









pleted, and they are now awaiting production in
large enough quantities for wider testing prior
to approval from the Food and Drug Administra-
tion. The unlikely source for this idea was litera-
ture from the Atomic Energy Commission, which
used thin layers of similar gels to remove radio-
active impurities from contaminated water.
"For me, thinking inventively is an exciting
experience and a lot of fun," Sparks says. "By
excitement, I mean that peculiar absorbing
interest that makes one forget the clock or his
stomach or how tired his eyes are. Excitement and
motivation are the most precious gifts of all those
I would like to give my students."
Not that Sparks disdains the basics. He has
no special affinity for the short-lived educational
trend in which many traditional school subjects
were declared irrelevant. "Facts, procedures, and
skills-oh, these are gold! They shouldn't be
boring," he emphasizes. "But you only see it that
way once you realize that the facts are the raw
material for thinking."
These are strong sentiments, and one offshoot
is a book he is in the midst of writing for the
adolescent audience, tentatively titled Think Loose!
It is based on the ideas he developed in his Inven-
tive Reasoning course. A liberal salting of
cartoons is one of its special features. "Cartoonists
are extraordinarily inventive," notes Sparks. "If
their comics only portrayed the obvious and
straightforward, you wouldn't laugh."
In addition to a good-sized cartoon collection,
Sparks also claims as his hobbies squash, jogging,
and backpacking in the Rockies. His favorite non-
academic pastime, though, is music. He sang in
church as a child and in high school and college
he performed in operrettas, barbership quartets,
choruses, and as a soloist. He once sang first tenor
in the New Jersey Novice Champion Barbershop
Quartet, and while teaching at Case Western Re-
serve University, he sang with the Cleveland
Orchestra Chorus and Chamber Chorus under
Robert Shaw and George Szell. For the last two
years he has been a member of the St. Louis
Symphony Orchestra Chorus, and with both these
choruses has performed four times at Carnegie
Hall.


Sparks "in session" with students.


Two of his sons are serious music students.
Mark is studying the flute at the Oberlin Con-
servatory in Ohio, and David, a senior at Kirk-
wood High School, plays the clarinet. A third son,
Chris, is majoring in philosophy at Webster
College in St. Louis. His wife, Adna, a doctoral
student in educational counseling at St. Louis Uni-
versity, is, as well, a source of inspiration for new
teaching methods.
From time to time, Sparks enjoys a change of
pace from university-level curriculum, and he dips
into primary and secondary school teaching, hold-
ing sessions on creativity by presenting such
favorites as the nine-dot problem or devising new
endings to fairy tales. "I like to get in and stir
things up a little," he admits. "Once they catch
on, the kids are great. They fill up the whole
chalkboard with ideas."
Sparks wishes he could get to his pupils even
earlier. "Developing a child's attitude toward
education and society in those beginning years is
as important as teaching information," he affirms.
It is no surprise then, that an idea Sparks is
proudest of is not a new biomedical invention, but
a new way to group children for instruction. His
proposal, called cycled ability grouping, replaces
the common high-average-low tracking system by
overlapping students so that each group has an
ability range spanning approximately 50 percent
of the total. A student with medium ability, there-
fore, might be at the bottom of a fast-moving class
one year, in a middle group the following year,


SUMMER 1981


In addition to a good-sized cartoon collection, Sparks also claims as his hobbies
squash, jogging, and backpacking in the Rockies. His favorite non-academic pastime, though, is
music ... For the last two years he has been a member of the St. Louis Symphony Orchestra Chorus,
and ... has performed four times at Carnegie Hall.









and at the top of a slower-moving class the next.
Several schools in the Cleveland Heights school
system have been using this grouping system for
several years.
The system seems complicated at first glance,
but Sparks insists that its benefits overwhelm
any initial confusion. He condemns the normal
track system as a disaster, noting, "If a child
stays in the same group for more than a year, he
begins to feel irrevocably locked into the system,
and sees no hope for a change. This can have a
stifling effect on his aspirations." He believes
teachers, too, would find the change stimulating,
particularly those who instruct the bottom-level
classes.
Perhaps the key to Sparks' overall success as
an inventor and teacher is that he cultivates
flexible and creative thought without abandoning
the framework of reality. He readily acknowledges
the "test-taking attitude" all students must have
to survive, but he makes clear to his classes that
the ability to distinguish right and wrong quiz
answers will not suffice forever. "Once you get out
of school," he warns, "people will expect you to
think."
"For me, education is the growing of minds,
including attitudes. I have begun to think of teach-
ing now as leading people to see and helping them
learn how to lead themselves to see. An internal
response which has been growing with some sur-
prise and disbelief is the feeling, 'I am a teacher.'
It is an exhilarating feeling." E


j letters

COMMENTS ON FAHIDY PAPER
Sir:
Concerning Professor Fahidy's article in the
Spring 1981 issue. He has his biases, ably ex-
pressed, and I have mine, well over toward the
numerical end of the applied-math spectrum. Both
of us, however, should be careful of over-kill.
I doubt seriously his statement that a Legen-
dre expansion
"would be typically introduced by discussing in a class
lecture the steady-state temperature distribution in a
homogeneous hemisphere whose surface is maintained
at a constant temperature and whose base (equatorial
plane) is insulated."
The solution to such a problem is, of course,
T (r,0) = To or, in dimensionless form, u = 1. Lest


anyone imagine that the author had in mind an
axisymmetric pattern of constant surface tem-
perature, the boundary condition u(R,0) = 1 is
explicitly stated. Perhaps Professor Fahidy is
merely using this problem as a novel way of
demonstrating that certain infinite sums of
weighted Legendre polynomials must add up to
unity or that, if you get lucky, certain infinite
series will degenerate to one term. His purported
"solution" describes some very different problem
with a mysterious zero at the center. Curiously,
the problem is well posed in verbal form, with
Dirichlet or Neumann conditions at every point on
the surface of the hemisphere, but the mathe-
matical equivalent has too few boundary condi-
tions.
If he's not more careful, Professor Fahidy will
give special functions a bad name.
DAVID B. MARSLAND
N.C. State at Raleigh


FAHIDY RESPONDS
Dear Editor:
The following is my response to Professor
Marsland's comments:
Professor Marsland would be happier, I pre-
sume, if the hemisphere problem were treated
using the more general boundary condition
u(R,0) = f(0). When the simple f(0) = 1 con-
dition is posed, his intuitive solution is correct;
however, algebraic manipulations are simpler in
this case without much manipulative encumbrance.
This specific problem is a standard exercise, (see
e.g. Kersten: Engineering Differential Systems,
McGraw-Hill 1969, No. 5, 33, p. 106). The fact that
certain infinite series possess unity as their sum is
a rather useful piece of information and, contrary
to Professor Marsland's statement, degeneration
to a single term is a matter of structure, not luck.
Zeros, by no means mysterious, in potential theory
do not hinder a fairly wide application of the
theory and Professor Marsland would find several
books (e.g. Dettman: Mathematical Methods in
Physics and Engineering. McGraw Hill 1962,
1969) a delightful counterproof to his belief. As
for my ability to "give special functions a bad
name," there is little fear: much more brilliant
mathematicians than I ever can hope to be have
already established their good name.
T. Z. FAHIDY
University of Waterloo


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION








INNOVATION...


Sometimes it's not all it's

cracked upto be.


However, at Union Carbide innovation continues to improve peoples' lives.
Union Carbide pioneered the petrochemicals industry. Today the Corporation's many hun-
dreds of chemicals are used in everything from automobile bumpers to shampoos. A leader in
the field of industrial gases, our cryogenic technology led to the development of the Oxygen
Walker System, which allows mobility for patients with respiratory diseases. Union Carbiders
are working on the frontiers of energy research-from fission to geothermal-at the world
renowned Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee. Our revolutionary Unipol process
produces polyethylene, the world's most widely used plastic, at one half the cost and one
quarter the energy of standard converting processes.
From sausage casings to miniature power cells, the Union Carbide tradition of innovation
extends beyond research and development activities to our engineering groups, manufactur-
ing operations, and sales forces.
Continued innovation will largely spring from the talents of the engineers and scientists who
join us in the 1980's.

We invite you to encourage qualified students
to see our representatives on campus-


: UNI
CA R I D:


an equal opportunity employer


or write to:
Coordinator, Professional Placement
Union Carbide Corporation
270 Park Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10017












U L 30 CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

DIVISION ACTIVITIES
r

NINETEENTH ANNUAL LECTURESHIP AWARD TO
ARTHUR W. WESTERBERG
The 1981 ASEE Chemical Engineering Di-
vision Lecturer was Arthur W. Westerberg of
Carnegie-Mellon University. The purpose of this
award lecture is to recognize and encourage out-
standing achievement in an important field of
fundamental chemical engineering theory or
practice. The 3M Company provides the financial
support for this annual lecture award.
Bestowed annually upon a distinguished engi-
neering educator who delivers the Annual Lec-
ture of the Chemical Engineering Division, the
award consists of $1,000 and an engraved certifi-
cate. These were presented to this year's Lecturer
at the Annual Chemical Engineering Division
banquet, held at the University of Southern Cali-
fornia, Los Angeles, CA, on June 23, 1981. Pro-
fessor Westerberg's lecture was entitled "Design
Research-Both Theory and Strategy."


A native of Minnesota, Art Westerberg received his
B.Sc. (with Highest Distinction) from the University of
Minnesota in 1960 and his M.Sc. from Princeton in 1961.
both in chemical engineering. He received his Ph.D. in
1964 from Imperial College, London, where he worked for
Roger Sargent in the new area called computer-aided
process design.
Returning to Minnesota, an attempt at entrepreneur-
ship lasted for nine months when he was president of a
consulting company started by his father. He then joined
Control Data Corporation for two years as a senior analyst
in their process control division in LaJolla, California. In
1967 an interest in teaching and research drew him to
academia when he joined the Chemical Engineering De-
partment at the University of Florida.
In 1974-75, Rodolphe Motard and he spent a joint
sabbatical at the Computer Aided Design Centre in Cab-
bridge, England, at which time they, together with Peter
Hutchinson and Peter Winter, coauthored Process Flow-
sheeting, a unique book devoted to elucidating the under-
lying structures and their advantages for available and
proposed flowsheeting programs.
In 1976 Professor Westerberg joined Carnegie-Mellon
University in Pittsburgh. He served as director of the
Design Research Center from 1978 to 1980, when he became
head of the Chemical Engineering Department, a position
he currently holds.
In research, Professor Westerberg's publications empha-


size optimization and synthesis in computer-aided design.
Recent work includes developing a multileveled decomposi-
tion strategy to permit an optimization algorithm to be
useful for engineering design calculations, the develop-
ment of a new flowsheeting system, and a new approach
for estimating minimum utility requirements.
In education, he was on the CACHE Committee from
its inception in 1970 until last year, and he was program
chairman of the Chemical Engineering Division for the
ASEE Annual Conference in 1979. He gave the first
invited Chemical Engineering "Tutorial Lecture" in 1978
at the ASEE meeting in Vancouver and has authored
several articles for CEE.

LECTURE TOUR
Funds are available to have Dr. Westerberg deliver his
Award lecture at three locations in the U.S. The locations
are to be selected from schools requesting the presentation
of the lecture. Requests for this outstanding lecture will
be received until September 1, 1981. The request should in-
clude suggested times, the audience to which the lecture
will be presented, and whether or not the school could
participate in some of the costs associated with a lecture
tour. Funds are available from 3M, but they are limited.
Please send your request with the required information to
Dr. James E Stice, ChE Dept., University of Texas,
Austin, TX 78712.

NOMINATIONS FOR 1982 AWARD SOLICITED
The award is made on an annual basis with nominations
being received through Feb. 1, 1982. The full details for the
award preparation are contained in the Awards Brochure
published by ASEE. Your nominations for the 1982 lecture-
ship are invited. They should be sent to Dr. Billy L. Crynes,
ChE Dept., Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, OK
74078.

NEW DIVISION OFFICERS ELECTED
The newly elected ChE Division officers are:
W. B. Baasel, Chairman; James Couper, Past
Chairman; Angelo Perna, Chairman Elect; Phillip
Wankat, Secretary-Treasurer; Dee H. Barker and
Dale Seborg, Members at Large; and Robert Stam-
baugh, Industrial Member at Large.

ChE's RECEIVE HONORS
A number of ChE professors were honored
with awards at the ASEE meeting. The Curtis
W. McGraw Award was presented to Alexis T.
Bell (University of California, Berkeley) ; the Dow
Outstanding Young Faculty Award was presented
to Alberto Co (University of Maine), Richard
Noble (University of Wyoming), and Timothy
Anderson (University of Florida) ; James E. Stice
(University of Texas) and George Klinzing (Uni-
versity of Pittsburgh) won Western Electric
Fund Awards; and George Burnet (Iowa State
University) won the CIEC Best Paper Award.


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION







Chevron


I 1


Chevron Oil Field


Research Company


PhD Chemical Engineers .
For Research And Development
In Enhanced Oil Recovery


Chevron's laboratory in La Habra, California is
engaged in research directed toward increased
recovery of oil and gas from known subsurface
reservoirs. Chemical engineering technology is
extremely important in the very complicated
business of recovering petroleum from known
reservoirs-reservoirs of oil and gas already
discovered and In quantities large enough to
make a real difference in the United States'
domestic energy supply. That is, if we can find
more effective processes for breaking it free
from the rocks and bringing it to the surface.
The research, the development and the field
trials of new Ideas for recovering oil carry
high risks and high costs. But the stakes are
high, tool When you realize that typically,
twice as much oil is left behind as Is
produced by conventional methods, it is
easy to understand how large these
stakes really are and the energy resources
that will be available if we can find the
unlocking processes.
Our chemical engineers are also
working on the problems of in situ
recovery of heavy oils and oil from tar
sands and shale.


If you want to learn more about
research in the more complex
applications of chemical engineering,
send your resume to:

J.C. Benjamin
Chevron Oil Field Research Company
P.O. Box 446
La Habra, CA. 90631


- -E


A


"-Ms


/2~


---
--


hhPI '


ri~


,/9-x <










UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH IN ChE

... Thoughts and Comments from an ASEE Symposium


SYMPOSIUM EDITOR
NICHOLAS A. PEPPAS
Purdue University
West Lafayette, Indiana


The eight papers which follow are extended
versions of the talks and comments presented at
the Annual Meeting of the American Society for
Engineering Education at the University of
Massachusetts on June 24, 1980.
This Symposium was sponsored by the Chemi-
cal Engineering Division of ASEE. It was
triggered by the realization that structured under-
graduate research programs in chemical engineer-
ing are viewed by many educators as a desirable
addition to the curriculum. Researchers and edu-
cators who have been involved in the development
of related programs were invited to present their
views and experience on various aspects of under-
graduate research.
The first two speakers discussed the "philo-
sophy" of undergraduate research in general. In
their talks they pointed out the benefits of related
programs as well as some of the major problems
such as costs, faculty time, large enrollments, high
student/faculty ratio, initial training, space, etc.
Professor Albert Sacco presented his conclusions
from experience gained at Worcester Polytechnic
Institute, a University known for its project-
oriented educational program. Some very interest-
ing discussions with the audience followed as a
result of his definition of "research" in an educa-
tional institution. The speaker concluded that
based on a strict definition of the word "research"
only a small portion of research projects for
undergraduates can be considered satisfactory re-
search.
Professor Fricke's enlightening presentation
analyzed the logistics of undergraduate education.
Some very interesting calculations showed that
funds and faculty time devoted are minimal (at
least if based on a 40-hour per week schedule). In
reality these problems are "solved" by the use of
industrial funds and regular research grants and
by the dedicated service, beyond the regular 40-

Copyright ChE Division, ASEE, 1981


(This ASEE Symposium)... was triggered
by the realization that structured undergraduate
research programs in ChE are viewed by many educators
as a desirable addition to the curriculum.

hours per week schedule, of the faculty. However,
the problem of space for undergraduate research
is not solvable. Subsequent discussion revealed
that in most departments undergraduate research
does not carry appropriate "faculty release time"
and that, with minor exceptions, undergraduate
research is carried out by faculty members who
have a lighter research load in terms of graduate
students, namely by professors in the early stage
of their career.
The two subsequent speakers analyzed under-
graduate research programs in specific research
areas. Experience with research in polymers and
biomedical engineering was presented by Pro-
fessors Robert Laurence (his paper is not included
in this issue) and Pieter Stroeve. Professor
Stroeve subsequently carried out a relevant
survey; its interesting results are presented here.
Several schools require a Senior Thesis for
graduation with a B.S. degree. Professor
Prud'homme gave a very interesting presentation
on the Princeton Senior Thesis program, noting
that it takes a full year of research, appropriate
educational structure and faculty commitment,
and appropriate preparation during the last
semester of the junior year. It is to be noted that
this system is applied to a typical senior class of
35-50 students.
The last two contributions came as a natural
sequence of the subject of the previous presenta-
tion, since they stressed important problems in
Schools with large undergraduate enrollments.
Professor Tassios' talk addressed the problem of
undergraduate research in commuting schools of
large metropolitan areas. Additional problems
with time for research were noted, since many
students commuted 30-50 miles. The last presenta-
tion discussed the alarming decrease in the
number of American graduate students in chemi-
cal engineering. It stressed that it is the responsi-
bility of the educators to create an appropriate


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









environment in undergraduate education through
research, whereby students would get to know and
appreciate the importance of research in chemical
engineering.
The presentations and the vivid discussions by
a very interested audience on some of the issues
on undergraduate research led to some general
conclusions. Several researchers who participated
in the discussion were asked to submit their


written comments. Professor Krantz accepted and
describes a different undergraduate research
system offered at Colorado. Professor Koukios
summarizes some of his impressions from educa-
tional systems with required undergraduate re-
search and draws parallelisms between the
American and European educational systems.
The main conclusions of this Symposium are
summarized at the end of the eight contributions.


WORCESTER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE

UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH:
MYTH OR REALITY?

ALBERT SACCO, JR.
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester, MA 01609


T UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH: Myth or Reality";
certainly an intriguing title and one that by
its very nature has to be somewhat opinionated.
One's opinions are shaped by their experiences.
Thus, I would like to start by presenting a brief
history of my experiences with undergraduate
research.
I did my undergraduate work at Northeastern
University in Boston, Massachusetts. At that time,
Northeastern had an option available to those
students with a specified Quality Point Average
(I believe, 3.0 or greater out of 4.0). This option
allowed these students to do a special project in
lieu of design. Having heard of the rigors of the
design course, I acted naturally, taking the path
of least resistance by asking to do a special project.
These special projects were generally small re-
search efforts associated with the interest of the
various faculty members and were one academic
year in length.
After graduating from Northeastern, I went
on to graduate school at Massachusetts Institute
of Technology. While pursuing my doctoral degree
there, I had the opportunity to become involved
with several undergraduate research projects


... the results of my informal survey
suggest that based on the stated criteria,
undergraduate research is more myth than reality.
However, admittedly the criteria were
restrictive and the sample small.


Albert Sacco, Jr. came to Worcester Polytechnic Institute in
September 1977. He holds the rank of Assistant Professor in the De-
partment of Chemical Engineering. His undergraduate work was at
Northeastern University (B.S.) and his graduate studies (Ph.D.) at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, all in chemical engineering.
Dr. Sacco's research interests are in catalysis deactivation, solid-gas
reactions, and phase equilibrium.

(B.S. theses). These projects were done by
seniors at MIT, under the guidance of doctoral
students, working on well developed, well financed
research projects.
Finally, after obtaining my degree at MIT, I
began teaching in the Department of Chemical
Engineering at Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
At WPI all students must complete two 21 week
(usually, in practice, 28 week) projects. Both
projects are generally of a research nature. One
relates a technical topic to its social environment
(IQP, Interactive Qualifying Project) ; the other
is in essence a B.S. thesis (MQP, Major Qualifying
Project).
Although my years as a teacher are few (3.5
years) I believe that my experience reflects a
longer association with undergraduate research.
In addition, the programs that I have been involved
with reflect different attitudes on undergraduate
research: Northeastern allowing only those


SUMMER 1981








students with a strong interest and proven skill
to undertake undergraduate research; MIT, work-
ing from a more select group, associates these
projects very closely to on-going graduate research
projects; and WPI where all students, individually
or in groups, take part in a research experience.
As one can see, undergraduate research means
different things to different people. In order to try
and address whether undergraduate research is
indeed a reality or a myth, I feel that we should
have a working definition of research. Borrowing,
in part, from Webster's New International
Dictionary, Second Unabridged Edition, research
is defined in the following manner:
"RESEARCH-Studious inquiry or examination: specific
and usually, critical and exhaustive investigation or
experimentation having for its aim the discovery of
new facts and their correct interpretation; the revision
of accepted conclusion, theories, or laws, in the light
of newly developed facts, or the practical application
of such new or revised conclusion, etc. . .
The words I consider to be key words are italicized.
Any project that adheres to this definition is
certainly publishable. I further restrict our
definition to include the statement that if the
undergraduate project is of a research nature it
has been, or shortly will be, published in a refereed
publication. With these definitions and restrictions
in mind, the following questions were asked in-
formally of 20 faculty members at WPI and ap-
proximately five faculty at five other universities.
How many undergraduate research projects done by
a single undergraduate result in a publication in a
refereed journal?
How many undergraduate research projects done by
a group of undergraduates result in a publication in
a refereed journal?
If the project is done as a part of an on-going re-
search effort, how often does this project result in a
publication? Part of a publication?


If an undergraduate project is continued from year
to year, how often does this lead to publication?
How valuable is undergraduate research?
The answers I received can be summarized as
follows: Typically, whether done individually or
in groups, undergraduate research projects result
in fewer than 15% being published in refereed
journals. If the project is associated with an exist-
ing research program, the number published in-
creases to approximately 30-40%. However, this
increase does not reflect an increase in publications
for individual projects. It does reflect the fact that
parts of the undergraduate project will be included
in publications associated with this research. The
number of publications was perceived to increase
for projects that were continued or on-going.
However, this increase was thought to be minimal.
Finally, all faculty felt the undergraduate involve-
ment in research was an excellent learning ex-
perience.
Obviously, the sample of faculty informally
polled is too small for definitive conclusions to be
drawn. I do believe, however, that the answers
received reflect general trends. The answers re-
flect my own experience, which is that under-
graduate research projects are seriously con-
strained by time and, unless attached to an on-
going graduate research project, money. The
need for well defined manageable undergraduate
projects is, in my opinion, reflected in the in-
creased publication rate for projects being part of
a larger, well defined effort. The results of my in-
formal survey suggest that based on the stated
criteria, undergraduate research is more myth
than reality. Admittedly, the criteria were restric-
tive and the sample small; but, perhaps the real
value in undergraduate research lies not in the
research itself, but in the knowledge and ex-
perience gained in the search for understanding. E


UNIVERSITY OF MAINE


UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH:
A Necessary Education Option
And Its Costs And Benefits

ARTHUR L. FRICKE
University of Maine
Orono, ME 04469

CHEMICAL ENGINEERING IS A practice rather
than a science. Even though the principles of
science are applied to solve engineering problems,


it is seldom that the final solution can be predicted
from first principles with sufficient confidence to
eliminate all need for demonstration. More often,
the problem requires at least demonstration and
frequently experimental study of elements of the
process or experimental determination of needed
physical data. Ideally, chemical engineering
students should not only be required to take ex-
perimental as well as theoretical courses, but
should also be given the opportunity to exercise
judgment in deciding when experimental work


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










is required and the opportunity to demonstrate
that their solution works.
Undergraduate research is one means that can
be used for practice in judgment and demonstra-
tion, and it can be considered a necessary option
for this reason. Undergraduate research offers
other benefits to the student. By its very nature,
undergraduate research involves independent
study and exposes the student to self education.
It also assists the student in making career de-
cisions and often provides opportunities to learn
how to interface effectively with other engineers
and scientists.
Undergraduate research also provides benefits
to the faculty and to the institution. Research by
undergraduates can be original and significant; it
strengthens faculty-student interaction and is a
good way for the faculty to evaluate their teaching
effectiveness. Undergraduate research can benefit
the institution by improving the primary product
(the graduates) upon which an institution's repu-
tation is based.
If there are all of these benefits, why isn't
undergraduate research encouraged more? The
answer lies in costs. Research requires time, ma-
terials, capital, and space. All of these are severely
limited resources in today's university. The
amounts that can be allocated to a single student
research project (typically 3 student credit hours
or SCH) from the university budget at the Uni-
versity of Maine are shown in Table 1. Only 6.2
hours of faculty contact, $14.28 of materials,
$35.00 in capital, and 60 square feet of space can


Arthur L. Fricke has been chairman of ChE at the University of
Maine since 1976. He received his ChE degree from the University of
Cincinnati in 1957 and his M.S. and Ph.D. from the University of
Wisconsin in 1959 and 1967. He has had considerable industrial ex-
perience and has been teaching since 1967. His current research
interests are in polymer processing and pulping recovery systems.


Undergraduate research ... is often not
available because of the limited resources available
and because of the view of faculty that directing
undergraduate research is personally unrewarding.

TABLE 1
Limited Resources in Undergraduate Research


FACULTY TIME:
Avg. Load = 300 SCH/FTE/SEM. at
3 cr. hr./Res. Proj./Stu.:
Time = (3/300) x 15.5 x 40 = 6.2 hrs!


MATERIALS:
Supply Budg.
SCH.

CAPITAL:
Capital Budg.
Lab SCH.

SPACE:
Lab Space
Lab SCH./Sem.


SCH.
x
Res. Proj.


SCH.
x Res. Proj.


SCH.
x es. Pro
Res. Proj.


$20,000
4,200
x 3 = $14.28

$10,000
900
x 3 = $35.00

9,000
450
x 3 = 60 sq. ft.


be allocated to a project. Obviously, with these
meager resources the project is doomed before it
begins.
Success of an undergraduate research program
depends upon proper management and enlarge-
ment of resources. Sources of supervisory time,
financial support, and space that can be used are
given in Table 2. The only real insoluble problem
is space. Before any undergraduate research
project is suggested to a student, the faculty
member should have tapped these or other sources
for resources required.
There are general requirements that must be
met if an undergraduate research project is to be
successful. The faculty must set a well defined
objective with a good plan for necessary super-
vision; the faculty must be prepared to find the
necessary materials and equipment; the student
commitment to the work must be strong; and
proper reporting of results and conclusions must
be a part of the project. The last should be a
clearly understood requirement from the be-
ginning.
Some pertinent data on three examples of
undergraduate research are given in Tables 3, 4,
and 5. The Fiber Porosity project summarized in
Table 3 is the traditional one-student project. The


SUMMER 1981









TABLE 2
SOURCES OF SUPERVISORY TIME
1. Faculty
2. Graduate Students
3. Technicians
4. Industry
SOURCES OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT
1. Government
Undergraduate Research Participation
Research Grant Funds
Dept. of Education
2. Institution
Dept. Unrestricted Funds
Competitive Grants
3. Industry and Foundations
Competitive Grants
Restricted Gifts
"Service Development"
SOURCES OF SPACE


student was asked to modify the mercury porosi-
meter method for determining the porosity of
fibers. The data were needed for a graduate re-
search project, so supervision was provided princi-
pally by the graduate student. Since the equipment
was available, only marginal costs and additional
space were required. The small cost was paid from
research grant funds. This project led to a success-
ful modification of the method and results were
obtained that were included in the research publi-
cation. Finally, these results were used as partial
support for another research proposal.
Table 4 summarizes a group design and de-
velopment project. Funds were obtained from the
college and as a directed gift from industry to
construct a new general purpose distillation
column that could be controlled in real-time with
our DEC 11/60 computer and used in our unit
operations laboratory. The project cost (mostly for
metal, prime movers, and control systems) was
$34,000. The students and faculty designed all
TABLE 3
Fiber Porosity


1 Student @ 3 er. hrs.
Faculty Time
Grad. Stud. Time
Tech. Time
COST
RESULTS:


= 155 St. Hrs.
5 Hrs.
= 30 Hrs.
4 Hrs.
= $50


1. Modification of Method
2. Published Results
3. Support for Research Proposal


components of the system, prepared shop draw-
ings, and supervised fabrication and construction.
A 4-inch diameter x 30 plate column with reboiler,
condenser, and storage was constructed of stain-
less steel and electronic analog control loops were
installed. The students devised a complete plan for
connecting all controls to the DEC 11/60 for super-
visory operation or for DDC.
Table 5 summarizes a group research project
on "Spruce Pulping" by the Kraft process. This
work was part of a funded research project on
the effects of spruce budworm kills on pulping of
various species. The faculty time was high, but
was principally paid for by the external sponsor.
The project cost of $2400 ($600/student) was also
charged to the external sponsor. With assistance

TABLE 4
Distillation Column


4 Students @ 3 cr. hrs. each
Faculty Time
Technician Time


= 620 st. hrs.
= 46.5 hrs.
= 250 hrs.


Capital = $27,000
Materials 7,000
Total Cost = $34,000
RESULTS:
1. St. Steel 4" Dia. x 30 Plate Column with re-
boiler, condenser, storage constructed
2. Electronic analog controls for feed (FIC, TI),
bottoms (LC, FI, TI), Tops (LC, FI, TI), Re-
flux, (FIC), Steam (FIC, PIC), Cooling Water
(TIC), and Temperature measurement (TI).
3. Plan for hook-up to Dec 11/34 for DDC control
4. New U.O. lab unit

and supervision the students designed their experi-
ments, conducted the pulping experiments, made
paper and conducted appropriate physical tests,
and used statistical methods to analyze their re-
sults. Their work resulted in a reviewed publica-
tion. The industrial sponsor was very satisfied with
their performance and this has led to a new and
larger research grant.
We have reviewed the performance of well
managed undergraduate research research proj-
ects. The summary of this experience, based
upon work with 30 students, is presented in
Table 6. It has been my experience that the
largest feasible group is four students. Effective
supervision can be provided by graduate students
or technicians, if the project is well defined by
the faculty. In general, the project must be zero
cost or must be justified on another basis. Often,


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION







"BEFORE I GRADUATED,


I HAD


SEVERAL


GOOD...


JOBFFERS


O -ERS--.:


Edith Whatley,
Industrial Hygienist,
Texas Division,
Dow Chemical U.S.A.
(M.S. Chemistry,
University of Virginia)


"Choosing the right offer was a big
decision. But the more I heard about
Dow, the easier it became.
"I was impressed by how big Dow
is. But more impressed when the
interviewer told me Dow decentrali-
zation keeps you from feeling lost
in a corporate maze. He told me that
I'd be on a first-name basis with
almost everyone in my department.
"I'd also be able to contribute right
away. Because Dow thinks you learn
best by doing, and not in some formal
training program. So you get hands-


on experience from your first day
on the job.
"Plus, they encourage movement
between divisions, departments, and
even functions. So I'd get a wide
range of experience-and a chance
to find the job that's right for me.
"But I guess the main reason I
chose Dow over any other job was
that I heard of Dow's strong commit-
ment to attracting the best people.
And to giving these people the
chance to develop and grow.
"I am developing. I am growing.


I'm pleased that I chose Dow."
If you know of qualified graduates
in engineering or the sciences, or
with an interest in marketing, finance
or computer science, we hope you
will encourage them to write us:
Recruiting and College Relations,
P.O. Box 1713-CE, Midland, Michigan
48640. Dow is an equal opportunity
employer- male/female.
DOW CHEMICAL U.S.A.
*Trademark of The Dow Chemical Company *41a
1981. The Dow Chemical Company '


HERE'S








we purposely submit research proposals in which
part of the work is designed for undergraduate
research and necessary funds for the undergradu-
ate work are requested as an integral part of the
proposal. Space is always a question, but it has
always been available.
The tangible results of the work of these 30
students is impressive. In 80% of the cases, the
objective was accomplished and the project was
thus rated a "success." Approximately 50% of the
students involved entered graduate school. Ap-
proximately 50% of the research results were
publishable as an independent paper or as part of
another research paper; 30% led to development
of equipment for the department; and about 30%
served to improve relations with industry due to
the competence of the work. About 15% (4 to 5)
led to research proposals that were granted.
Finally, these projects led to substantial improve-
ment in student/faculty relations. These results
lead us to consider our program of undergraduate
research to be a successful and worthwhile part
of undergraduate education at the University of
Maine.

TABLE 5
Spruce Pulping
4 Students @ 6 cr. hrs. each = 1240 st. hrs.
Faculty Time = 90 hrs.
Technician Time 185 hrs.
COSTS
Capital = $ 600
Materials = 1,800
Total Cost = $2,400
RESULTS:
1. Reviewed Publication
2. Digester Performance Reviewed
3. Industrial Relation Established
4. Research Grant Obtained


TABLE 6
Experience Summary (30 Students)
PROJECT COST AND STAFFING
Students: 1 to 4 = 155 to 1240 hrs.
Faculty: 5 to 100 hrs.
Grad. Student: 0 to 50 hrs.
Technician: 0 to 300 hrs.
Materials: 0 to 7000
Capital: 0 to 27,000
Space: "?"
RESULTS
80% of Projects Successful
50% Students-Grad. School
50% Publishable Results
30% Dept. Development
30% Industrial Relations Improvement
15% Research Grants
IMPROVED STUDENT/FACULTY RELATIONS


Undergraduate research should be an option
available to at least the more gifted students in
all chemical engineering programs, but is often
not available because of the limited resources
available and because of the view of faculty that
directing undergraduate research is personally
unrewarding. This need not be. Resources can be
expanded from outside sources by the depart-
ment administration and the faculty to permit
this option to be offered to a significant number
of students. By properly managing their time and
other supervisory time, faculty can direct under-
graduate research so that it results in publica-
tions, improved experimental methods, and re-
search proposals, all of which lead to personal re-
wards to the faculty. What is required is a con-
sensus that undergraduate research is a desirable
option and the willingness of faculty to participate
in designing projects, collecting resources, and
providing supervision. E


STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK AT BUFFALO


ChE UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH
PROJECTS IN BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING

PIETER STROEVE
State University of New York at Buffalo
Amherst, NY 14260

THE UNDERGRADUATE PROGRAM IN chemical engi-
neering at the State University of New York
at Buffalo is highly structured. At present, the

126


chemical engineering program is organized on the
basis of four courses per semester with each course
carrying four units of credit. Contact time is at
least one hour per week per unit of credit. In the
program most of the technical courses are specified
through the junior year. Although the program is
undergoing changes, technical electives are still
chosen by the students in the senior year.
The Department of Chemical Engineering
conducts an active undergraduate research pro-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION











With enrollments in the senior class
now at about 120 ... such an intellectual
environment is a "must to humanize
chemical engineering education.


gram for the senior student. Research projects are
available both in the Fall and Spring semesters
and the projects count as a technical elective in
chemical engineering. Roughly one half of the
seniors participate in the undergraduate research
program. With drastically increasing enrollments
over the past five years, an undergraduate research
project is a desirable option to bring about a good
intellectual environment where professors and
students can work together in small groups. With
enrollments in the senior class now at about 120
(compared to 35 students five years ago) such an
intellectual environment is a "must" to humanize
chemical engineering education.
Biomedical engineering is one of the specialized
areas of chemical engineering in which seniors can
choose a research project. Usually one or two
faculty members in the department offer bio-
medical engineering projects, and four to six
undergraduates complete projects each year. Many
students have an interest in medicine and the ap-
plication of chemical engineering principles to bio-
logical problems is fascinating to them. For a


Pieter Stroeve is Associate Professor of ChE and Research Assistant
Professor in Biophysical Sciences at the State University of New York
at Buffalo. He received his BSChE from Berkeley in 1967 and his MS
and PhD from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1969
and 1973. He is the Director of the Graduate Program and teaches
courses in engineering analysis, thermodynamics, heat and mass
transfer, unit operations, colloid science and surface chemistry,
biomedical engineering, and biophysics. His current research interests
include mass transfer, the stability of emulsion droplets, electro-
chemistry, colloid science, and biomedical engineering.


definition of biomedical engineering, the reader is
referred to the recent article by Peppas and
Mallinson [1].
A valid question can be raised about the success
of an undergraduate research program in bio-
medical engineering conducted in a chemical engi-
neering department. The seniors participating in
the program have practically no background in the
biological sciences, and yet they are requested to
make a contribution in the field in the time-span
of one semester. In order to succeed, the topics are
narrowly defined with clearly identifiable objec-
tives. The chemical engineering component of the
project is the most important, while the biological
component is of secondary importance. Projects

TABLE 1
Aspects of the Undergraduate Research Project

Choosing a Topic
Lectures
Literature Survey
Discussion Sessions
Laboratory Training
Experiments
Computer Programming
Research Seminars
Oral Presentations
Written Report



can also be conducted in collaboration with a
graduate student who is working on his or her
thesis. A few projects are conducted in collabora-
tion with a faculty member of the School of Medi-
cine. The consequences of the above are that the
projects are closely supervised with realistic ob-
jectives that can often be completed in a 16-week
period. Individual lectures at the beginning of the
semester are useful to orient the student in the
proper direction. For experimental projects, the
necessary equipment must be available and opera-
tional. Training sessions in safety and the opera-
tion of the equipment are necessary to familiarize
the student with the laboratory. Table 1 shows the
mechanics and different facets of research that the
student is exposed to as he or she proceeds through
the project. A short but succinct written report
with a compilation of data and a final oral presen-
tation culminates the research project.
The goals of an undergraduate research pro-
gram have to be two-fold; first and foremost is
education, and second is the generation of useful
data and results. The educational aspect is for the


SUMMER 1981









student to learn how to initiate, perform and com-
plete the necessary tasks. The student learns to
conduct a literature survey, to organize his
thoughts, to utilize the facilities of the university,
to make experimental measurements, to present
oral talks, and to write a report. It has been this
instructor's experience that the undergraduates
are also successful in the second goal, i.e. the
majority of projects have yielded useful data and
theoretical results. Half of the projects have led
to publications.
In order to gauge the experience of other re-
searchers with undergraduates in biomedical engi-
neering projects, a questionnaire was sent to forty
chemical engineering professors in this country
and in Canada. The responses of twenty-three pro-
fessors (from twenty-two universities) active in
biomedical research were collected. Only three
faculty members did not have any undergraduates
involved in biomedical projects in the past four
years. Table 2 shows the number of undergradu-
ates and the number of projects for the remaining
twenty professors. It can be seen that the number
of undergraduates conducting research with these
faculty members has been reasonably steady over
the past three years. The faculty members were
enthusiastic about offering biomedical engineer-
ing projects to undergraduates. Some of the re-
sponses are shown in Table 3.
A surprising result of the survey is that 58 %
of the projects in Table 2 led to either presenta-
tions at national meetings or publications in
refereed journals. This is a respectable number
and indicates that many undergraduates can per-
form quality research work. Another interesting
result of the survey is that 31 percent of the

TABLE 2
Number of Undergraduates Working with Twenty
Faculty Members in Biomedical Engineering Projects*

ACADEMIC YEAR
1976-77 1977-78 1978-79 1979-80

Number of Chemical
Engineering
Undergraduates
Participating 37 46 50 51
Number of
Biomedical
Engineering Projects 32 33 38 39

*From the responses of 23 ChE faculty members inter-
ested in biomedical engineering.


TABLE 3
Responses from ChE Faculty to the Question:
ARE UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH TOPICS IN BIO-
MEDICAL ENGINEERING USEFUL IN A CHEMICAL
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT?
"They provide the student with the same opportunity to
apply his engineering skills to topics in other chemical
engineering areas. In addition, students can identify more
closely with biomedical problems."
Lauri Garred, Lakehead University
"Some students are interested in the biomedical engineer-
ing field and this gives them a chance to find out whether
or not they want to continue in it."
Herb Weinstein, City University of New York
"It's an exciting and fun way to learn chemical engineer-
ing. It is a completely different and challenging area from
the conventional applications of chemical engineering that
the students are exposed to in other courses. The proviso,
of course, is that the students have engineering problems
to solve and not problems that would be more relevant in
a biomedical faculty."
Mike Sefton, University of Toronto
"They are a logical and interesting medium to apply chemi-
cal engineering principles and a good vehicle for learning
how to do research."
Richard Seagrave, Iowa State University
"It gives the student another option to examine. Many
chemical engineering students are very interested in
in chemistry and biology. They find the application of re-
action kinetics and transport phenomena to physiological
systems fascinating."
Larry McIntire, Rice University
"If ongoing graduate research already exists in the de-
partment-yes. Otherwise, I believe that the undergradu-
ate doesn't have access to vital facilities and moral support
which are necessary for success in most cases. It wouldn't
be desirable to create make-work medical projects in a
vacuum, and doing so would also be a waste of the
faculty's time."
Mike Williams, University of California, Berkeley
"Yes, if the faculty members involved are willing to work
with the students. It gives students a broader background
in engineering applications."
Robert Popovich, University of Texas

students went on to chemical engineering gradu-
ate school, 22 percent went to medical school and
47 percent went into industry or other careers.
These numbers indicate that biomedical engineer-
ing projects are chosen, in part, by chemical engi-
neering undergraduates who are interested in
going to medical school. This is a fairly new phe-
nomenon and it would be interesting to find out
how these students will perform in their medical
studies in comparison to those students with a.
more traditional pre-med background. The per-
centage of undergraduates who went to chemical


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









TRANSPORTATION'S

FUTURE,


AN ENGINEERING

CHALLENGE.


One of the biggest engineering challenges facing the world today is
the future of transportation. And at Michelin, we're doing our best to
contribute some answers.
We've been anticipating the transportation needs of an ever-
changing world since 1889, when Michelin invented the detach-
able bicycle tire, and then again in 1948 when we introduced the
radial tire.
Now, as the world's leader in radial tire technology, Michelin has
openings for chemists and chemical engineers. Dedicated to main-
taining its leadership role through innovation, Michelin is expanding
its United States manufacturing and research capabilities to meet the
fast growing demand for gas-saving radial tires.
To take advantage of these opportunities with Michelin, a
background in organic chemistry, polymers and textile fibers is very
desirable. Michelin relies heavily on research and development to
keep the Michelin radial tire the best in the world. Facilities are new
and fully equipped. Living conditions are ideal. Find out how you can
be a part of this professional challenge by sending your resume, with
salary history, to Michelin Tire Corporation, Manufacturing Division,
Department SPM-JH-91, Box 2846, Greenville, SC 29602, or to
Michelin Americas Research & Development Corporation, Dept. SP,
Box 1987, Greenville, SC 29602.



MICHELIN
An equal opportunity employer M/F


SUMMER 1981









engineering graduate school is considerably higher
than the national average. Surprisingly, only about
25 percent of the students who went to graduate
school chose a graduate research topic in bio-
medical engineering. The results obtained by the
survey are very similar to the experiences en-
countered by this instructor over the past three
years [2].
There is general agreement among the pro-
fessors that the job market for BS chemical engi-
neers in biomedical engineering is non-existent.
For the PhD level the opinions are varied, ranging
from poor to excellent. There is general agreement
that the job market is small. Most professors feel
that the demand for PhD chemical engineers in
biomedical engineering exceeds the supply. In
Canada, however, there is practically no demand
at all, although predictions for the future are
good.
In summary, it appears that biomedical re-


search projects are useful in a chemical engineer-
ing department in order to provide interesting
and stimulating research topics to undergraduates.
Many of the undergraduates continue their studies
at an advanced level, but not necessarily in the
area of biomedical engineering. The productivity
of the students appears to be excellent as judged
from the number of publications. It should be
pointed out to those undergraduates with a strong
medical interest, that the job market on the BS
level is poor. O


REFERENCES
1. Peppas, N. A. and R. Mallinson, "Teaching of Bio-
medical Engineering in Chemical Engineering De-
partments," 73rd Annual AIChE Meeting, Chicago,
November, 1980.
2. Stroeve, P., "Chemical Engineering Undergraduates
in Biomedical Engineering Research," Proc. 1980
Annual Conf. Am. Soc. Engr. Ed., 2, 287-289 (1980).


PRINCETON UNIVERSITY


SENIOR THESIS RESEARCH
AT PRINCETON

ROBERT K. PRUD'HOMME
Princeton University
Princeton, NJ 08544

AN ACTIVITY WHICH IS as much a part of spring
at Princeton as the blooming of the tulip trees
at the Woodrow Wilson School fountain is the
scheduling of our forty-to-fifty seniors to present
the results of their senior thesis research to their
thesis advisor and one other faculty member
designated as the second reader. The Herculean
task of finding free time slots amidst busy and
conflicting schedules falls to Professor Dick Toner,
the departmental coordinator for senior thesis
work. At about the same time the juniors are mak-
ing the rounds of the faculty discussing topics
for next year. The students select topics after Dick
Toner has arbitrated conflicts and sought, to some
degree, to equitably match student interest and
faculty availability.
The senior thesis at Princeton is not an option
for a few good students, but is rather an integral
part of the educational process for all our students.
Between 1950 and 1956, senior independent re-
search projects were offered as an alternative to a
laboratory class associated with the senior-year


chemical engineering design course. With class
sizes then being in the teens, the senior thesis
process was rather informal. In 1957 the senior
thesis was made mandatory, and the design labora-
tory was discontinued. Our present policy requires
that all seniors do thesis work; however, each year
we grant exemptions to two or three students who
plan to attend medical school or business school


Robert K. Prud'homme did his undergraduate work at Stanford
University in Chemical Engineering, followed by graduate work at
Harvard University in Environmental Engineering before he "saw the
light," returned to Chemical Engineering, and obtained a Ph.D. at the
University of Wisconsin-Madison. He joined the faculty of the Chemi-
cal Engineering Department at Princeton University in 1978. In what
little spare time is available he avidly reads the fairy tales of C. S.
Lewis, J. R. Tolkein, and George Mac Donald. He plays a passable
game of squash, and drives a rather battered 1968 Volvo.


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









after graduation in order to allow them to take
additional specialized coursework outside chemi-
cal engineering.
Having described briefly the mechanics and
history of senior thesis research in our depart-
ment, in the next sections I will first describe the
strengths of this type of experience for the
student, and then point out what seem to be the
requirements for a successful senior thesis pro-
gram.

SENIOR THESIS AS INSTRUCTION
The first and most important goal of senior
thesis research is to provide a unique learning
experience for the student by providing a context
wherein students learn creative problem solving
in the following ways:
Problem Definition. In my opinion, this is the
strongest argument for a year-long independent
research project. The common lament with labora-
tory courses or problem sets is that they must be
well defined and tightly constrained to enable
students to complete them before the next assign-
ment. Those of us who have made up homework
problems know that the step from an initial idea
to a well formulated problem on a sheet of paper
is most often more difficult than solving the
problem once it is posed. The activity of problem
formulation is lacking from most curricula be-
cause it is difficult to teach; this is just what
independent research teaches. The student begins
with an idea or concept and has to design a
strategy, either experimental, analytical, or
numerical, to test that idea. This process teaches
problem formulation.
Introduction to Reference Material. Because
the projects are research projects rather than
textbook problems, students are forced to read
basic sources such as journals and technical re-
ports for information. Often this is a student's
first exposure to these sources and the resulting
appreciation for the value of current research in
scholarly journals and reports is of great benefit
whether they later go to industry or graduate
school.
Student/Faculty Relationships. This is an in-
tangible but real benefit. Through a one-on-one
relationship with their thesis advisor students get
to know a faculty member in depth. In weekly
meetings the student sees how a faculty member
"mumbles out loud to himself" about the problem


The senior thesis at Princeton is
not an option for a few good students, but is
rather an integral part of the educational
process of all our students.

at hand. Relationships built in this way are re-
flected in the high morale of students in the de-
partment. It also lets the faculty member get to
know a student well enough to make informed
recommendations to future employers or gradu-
ate schools.
Sense of Accomplishment. My students have
all had a strong sense of accomplishment after
the thesis work was finished (although the process
often led through Pilgrim's "slough of despond").
They have mastered a problem area in depth,
synthesized training from several undergraduate
courses, and have engaged in creative problem
solving.

SENIOR THESIS AS RESEARCH
In addition to the pedagogical aspects, the
senior thesis research also fits into the research
objectives of our department. The thesis provides
several benefits to the faculty:
Investigation of New Areas. All of us have
had wild ideas from time to time that generally
spring upon us late at night like Kekul6's dream.
Sometimes these are great ideas, sometimes they
are just terrible. But we would like to try them
out. They are too preliminary to warrant sub-
mitting a proposal to a funding agency, and the
chance of success may be too uncertain to commit
a graduate student. At Princeton however, if a
senior agrees that your wild idea has merit,
then you can both try it out. This has been an
effective method for exploring new research areas
and obtaining preliminary results upon which to
base proposals to a funding agency.
Assistance on Funded Projects. Often, on
funded projects where a graduate student is doing
doctoral work, an undergraduate can provide
valuable assistance by doing research on a sub-
problem. For example, one of my graduate
students is studying gas bubble nucleation in
polymer solutions. In support of this research a
senior has been determining the surface tension
of polymer solutions at elevated temperatures
which we needed in the theoretical analysis of
the nucleation phenomena. The obvious should


SUMMER 1981










be mentioned-this help with funded projects
comes without salary and overhead costs.
Industrial Interaction. In recent years several
thesis projects in the department have been spon-
sored by industry: Du Pont, Hercules, Smith-Kline,
and the Textile Research Institute, to name a few.
This mode of interaction benefits industry in their
communication with students and the department,
and the students are uniformly enthusiastic about
working on problems of "industrial significance."

PARAMETERS FOR A SUCCESSFUL PROGRAM
After discussions with colleagues at other in-
stitutions it became clear that the pattern of
thesis research at Princeton may not be trans-
ferrable to other departments. There are certain
ingredients that seem necessary for a successful
program:

Faculty Workload. It is obvious that advising
senior thesis research takes time and energy.
In our department each faculty member advises
between two and four seniors. If our class sizes
grew such that the senior/faculty ratio was larger
than it is, we would be hard pressed to continue
the program as it is now constituted. Also, ad-
vising seniors is implicitly considered as a part
of our teaching load so the number of courses we
teach each year is kept reasonably low.

Ongoing Research Activity in the Depart-
ment. Our department has an active graduate
research program and this provides three neces-
sary ingredients; ideas, support, and faculty in-
volvement. Students are not interested in work-
ing on old ideas or repeating someone elses ex-
periments. With an active research program there
are always sufficient new ideas available to
challenge the students. Also, our funded research
provides the base of equipment and materials
needed to pursue most projects. Lastly, faculty
interest in a student's project is of paramount
importance to a successful experience for the
student and faculty member. If the student's pro-
ject is in the mainstream of a faculty member's
research interests the faculty member is more
likely to supply adequate direction to the student
and is more likely to keep abreast of the student's
progress.
A University-Wide Thesis Requirement. Most
chemical engineering curricula are regarded as
being among the toughest in the university, as is


ours, and an additional requirement of a rigorous
senior thesis project might be perceived as an in-
tolerable burden. At Princeton almost all depart-
ments require senior thesis and therefore our
senior thesis requirement is not perceived as
being at all unusual. This might not be the case
at another university.

Student Quality. We are benefactors of Prince-
ton's high admissions standards in that our
students are bright and, by-in-large, motivated.
Just the thought of dragging an unmotivated, un-
willing, and ill-prepared student through a year
of senior thesis research sends chills up my spine.

CONCLUSION
Our experience with senior thesis research has
been positive both from the students' perspective
and from the faculty's. It will remain an integral
and distinctive part of being a chemical engineer
from Princeton. In preparation for this article we
sent a survey to our graduates. It is appropriate
to close with excerpts from comments of the four
hundred respondents on their retrospective looks
at senior thesis research at Princeton.

1979: The switch from the regimen imposed by a
class schedule to the freedom allowed by independent
work was an invaluable experience for me. Despite the
fact that I switched fields upon graduation . I think
the discipline I adopted in doing my senior thesis has,
is, and always will serve to give me a head start.
1978: The best "course" I took at Princeton. The
experience of having written a lengthy paper provides
valuable experience in an often neglected skill.
1977: My senior thesis added enormously to my
undergraduate education. One of the most valuable
lessons . was that I had to define my own goals
within the constraints of time and resources. I have
found this to be extremely important in industrial re-
search.
1975: The senior thesis at Princeton is an invalu-
able tool for teaching one how to approach a problem,
how to define it, and what is the measuring stick that
will let you know when you have answered the
questions you set out to solve. It is the closest thing
to how we do work in industry that I experienced at
Princeton.
1974: I did my senior thesis under Professor ....
and it was through his stimulating guidance that I
accomplished what I regard as my most rewarding
and enjoyable academic experience at Princeton.
1968: It damn near killed me, but it was the first
really large project I had ever undertaken and finished
by myself, and the experience was absolutely invaluable.
1964: My undergraduate thesis experience provided
an excellent foundation for my graduate thesis work
fifteen years later. O


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

RESEARCH WITH SENIOR LEVEL STUDENTS:
Advantages-Disadvantages-
Recommendations

DIMITRIOS TASSIOS
New Jersey Institute of Technology
Newark, NJ 07102


N EW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NJIT)
is in a period of transition: from a college
dedicated to undergraduate education to a techno-
logical university where research is becoming
more and more a major objective of the faculty.
Therefore, it does not yet have the reputation that
attracts a substantial number of graduate students
from other institutions. In addition, its location
(Newark) is not particularly enticing. The De-
partment of Chemical Engineering and Chemistry,
where the author teaches, currently has 13 full
time faculty members in chemical engineering and
20 in chemistry with a full time graduate student
enrollment of about 30 and a part-time enroll-
ment of about 100. In both groups the vast ma-
jority are M.S. students. Full time students are
expected to write an M.S. theses (6 credits). This
was also a requirement for part-time students
until 1975, but now they are only required to write
an M.S. Project (3 credits).
Seniors with a GPA of 3.0 or above (maxi-
mum 4.0) can register for ChE 491 and 492,
each worth 3 credits, to satisfy two of the required


The heavy undergraduate course load ...
limits substantially the amount of time that
can be spent in the classroom for discussion of
current research ... As a result students do not
develop an understanding-even appreciation-
of how this research advances the
frontiers of the profession.


technical electives. The title of the course is "Inde-
pendent Research and Study." Considering the
limited availability of graduate students for re-
search, seniors represent a significant resource for
the research efforts of the faculty (especially its
junior members).
Advantages and disadvantages of the research
effort with seniors will be described in this paper,
based mainly on the experiences this author has


Dimitrios Tassios is a Professor of Chemical Engineering at New
Jersey Institute of Technology, where he has been since 1966. He
holds a Diploma in ChE from the National Technical University,
Athens, Greece and an M.S. and Ph.D. in Ch.E. from the University
of Texas in Austin. He was a Fullbright Fellow and is a member of
nXE and TBir. He is a member of AIChE, ACS, and ASEE, and has
served as Chairman of the North Jersey AIChE Section. He is faculty
adviser of the AIChE Student Chapter which has won the "Outstand-
ing Chapter Award" by National AIChE for ten consecutive years. He
has published several papers in his field of research, Phase Equi-
librium.

had with about 15 students. A five year program
leading to the B.S. and M.S. degrees, which can
eliminate some of the disadvantages and con-
tribute to the growth of the graduate program, will
also be presented.

ADVANTAGES
Starting with the students, the advantages of
being involved in these two courses are several
and I would like to identify two that I consider
to be the main ones; introduction to the exciting
world of research, and personal contact with the
faculty.
The heavy undergraduate course load (along
with the continuously expanding content) sub-
stantially limits the amount of time that can be
spent in the classroom discussing current research
efforts in each field. As a result the students do
not develop an understanding or an appreciation
of how research advances the frontiers of the
profession. And here lies the major (perhaps)
advantage of these two research courses. They
introduce the student to the exciting world of re-
search. As one of my students observed: "Doing
research gives you the feeling of being involved
in the frontiers of chemical engineering, not in


SUMMER 1981









what was developed a hundred years ago."
In addition, as class sizes increase (as a result
of the sharp expansion of chemical engineering
enrollments and the reluctance of state legislators
to provide additional financial support for the
hiring of new faculty members) these two courses
represent the only opportunity for students to in-
teract with faculty members on a person-to-
person basis.
For the faculty, the advantages are also
several. The seniors can provide invaluable help in
the initiation of projects; they can participate in
on-going projects; or they may work on individual
problems that with proper planning and super-
vision (and somewhat extraordinary effort on be-
half of the student) can lead to publications
(three in the case of this author). We should not
forget that in many cases seniors represent the
only research assistance available to junior faculty
members, especially in the first and second year
of their career. Finally the aforementioned ad-
vantages for the students also apply to the faculty
member. He shares their excitement about re-
search and through his personal contact with the
student is better tuned to the student body as a
whole.

DISADVANTAGES
The seniors involved in research are expected
to spend the equivalent of one three-credit course
per semester time, about 8 to 10 hours per week.
In addition, the heavy demand imposed on them
by the other courses-especially Plant Design
and Unit Operations Laboratory-and their em-
ployment seeking efforts tend to direct their con-
centration away from research. This lack of time
and concentration, combined with a very small
budget and sometimes promoted by poor super-
vision, can lead to incomplete or even poor results.
And here lies the source of some major disadvant-
ages in carrying out research with seniors: for
the students, there is a sense of disappointment
because they do not see the fruits of their efforts
or, still worse, a demoralizing effect when the
results are unsuccessful; for the faculty members,
in addition to sharing the feelings of the students,
a low return on the time they invested since the
students leave when they are ready to perform the
most productive work.

THE FIVE-YEAR B.S./M.S. PROGRAM
To ameliorate some of these problems and also


strengthen our full time graduate program, at
least at the M.S. level, with the infusion of some
of our better graduates, a five-year program lead-
ing to the B.S. and M.S. degrees was introduced
at the recommendation of this author. The pro-
gram can be described, briefly, as follows:
ELIGIBILITY: All students with a GPA of 3.0 or better.
DURATION: Five academic years plus the summer
between the fourth and fifth years.
FINANCIAL SUPPORT: Students receive financial
support, in terms of a fellowship, for the fifth year
plus the summer between the fourth and fifth years.
M.S. THESIS: The M.S. thesis is a continuation of the
research done in ChE 491 and 492. The students,
hence, register for M.S. thesis in the summer follow-
ing graduation. Regular graduate students can not
register for M.S. thesis until they have completed
12 graduate credits.
It is evident that ChE 491 and 492 serve a
dual purpose in the five year program: They allow
the student to meet the requirements of the two
technical electives if, of course, they are success-
fully completed; and they prepare them for the
M.S. theses work. However, in spite of this pre-
paration we have found in our limited experience
with this program (it only started in 1978) that
the summer following the fifth year is often needed
for the successful completion of the M.S. pro-
gram. Finally, the program suffers (but to a
lesser degree) from the same problem that afflicts
graduate enrollments: the small salary differential
between the B.S. and M.S. degrees (typically about
$1500 per year) leads the student into quitting
the five year program and accepting an industrial
position. This problem is, unfortunately, often
exacerbated by many industrial recruiters who
attempt to persuade the students that a M.S. de-
gree is of no value to their professional career.

CONCLUSIONS
It appears that research with seniors can be
rewarding for both faculty and students, especially
if the project is carefully chosen and continuous
supervision is exercised. In addition it often repre-
sents the only source of research assistance avail-
able to junior faculty members. However, it may
also lead to problems in terms of low return on
the faculty member's effort, and disappointment
and low moral for the students.
The proposed five year program, leading to the
B.S. and M.S. degrees, can eliminate some of these
problems while strengthening the department's
graduate program. O


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









PURDUE UNIVERSITY


STUDENT PREPARATION FOR GRADUATE
SCHOOL THROUGH UNDERGRADUATE
RESEARCH

NICHOLAS A. PEPPAS
Purdue University
West Lafayette, IN 47907

T HE PURPOSE OF THIS contribution is to sum-
marize a three-year experience with under-
graduate research in polymers at Purdue Uni-
versity and to discuss indications that under-
graduate research participation is more likely to
assist students in considering graduate studies in
chemical engineering or other fields.
The recent increase in undergraduate chemical
engineering enrollments [1] is viewed with scepti-
cism by many educators who feel that chemical
engineering departments are physically unpre-
pared to handle the large number of new students.
Schools which traditionally have had large under-
graduate programs have introduced drastic
measures to cope with these "numbers," as de-
scribed in a sequence of papers edited by Houze
[2]. However, I am afraid that the factor "under-
graduate student" has been neglected. Despite the
significant expansion of faculties and staff, the
addition of recitation classes, and other measures,
there is considerable concern that professor/
undergraduate student interactions have weakened
or become non-existent.
Under these circumstances undergraduate re-
search may become an excellent way to improve
professor/student interactions, to induce an in-
tellectual framework for exchange of scientific
and sociopolitical ideas and to retard the academic
disorientation of undergraduate students. It is dis-
turbing to note that although universities are ex-
pected to provide an academic atmosphere for edu-
cation, (the word academy stemming from the
philosophic school and the suburb of Athens where
Plato and other philosophers used to gather to
discuss and think), there are indications that many
departments are merely concerned with graduat-
ing the "number of students" that will satisfy
industrial demand for chemical engineers.
Frankly, how many of us are able to identify by
person all the graduating seniors of our depart-
ments?
In a recent report [3], Barker pointed out an


Nicholas Peppas undertook the responsibility of organizing this
ASEE Symposium and editing the contributions presented in this
issue. When not busy with polymer and biomedical research and
teaching at Purdue, where he has been since 1976 after a 1973
Sc.D. from M.I.T. and a challenging experience in the Greek Army,
he is occupied with operatic, linguistic and historical studies. Some of
his published historical articles include essays on Aeschylus, Philo-
crates and Theocritos, a "History of the Albanians in Attica, 1200-
1700," and a "History of Eleusis, 500 B.C.-1920."


additional problem in chemical engineering educa-
tion; i.e. the alarming shortage of chemical engi-
neering faculty. His survey shows that in the
Spring of 1980 there were 83 chemical engineering
schools reporting 172 vacant faculty positions.
This number is up by 80% from 94 positions in
130 schools in 1977 [4]. The number of foreign
graduate students has leveled off to about 47%.
Since there were 309 Ph.D. degrees in chemical
engineering in 1979 and since many of the foreign
graduate students return to their countries [3],
there may be as few as 200 Ph.D. chemical engi-
neers available to fill 172 faculty positions and
approximately 200 industrial positions.
These alarming statistics point out that the
existing number of doctorate candidates is low and
that this phenomenon is affecting not only the
faculty renewal cycle but also chemical industries.
Several industrial leaders have publically ac-
knowledged the need for more advanced degrees
in chemical engineering.
It is not the purpose of this contribution to
analyze all the reasons that led to this shortage.
The author does feel, however, that undergradu-
ate students are in general misinformed about the
functions and job market of Ph.D. graduates, the
financial benefits, and the future careers they
might pursue if they obtained a Ph.D. degree. The


SUMMER 1981


I










Undergraduate research may become
an excellent way... to induce an intellectual
framework for exchange of scientific and sociopolitical
ideas and to regard the academic disorientation
of undergraduate students.

problem (and its possible solution) lies in the
realization that undergraduate students are
usually well informed about the immediate attrac-
tions (mostly financial) of a B.S. degree, but are
poorly informed about the (not always financial)
benefits of an advanced degree in chemical engi-
neering or other areas. Through numerous dis-
cussions with undergraduate students the author
has concluded that many of them are not aware
that they get a stipend during their graduate
studies period, or that a Ph.D. degree does not
necessarily mean an academic career, or that
knowledge obtained in their undergraduate pro-
gram may not be sufficient for job opportunities
in certain industrial sectors such as research and
development.
Therefore, a program of independent under-
graduate research may be a highly desirable
system of exposing undergraduates to the research
aspects of chemical engineering, and of inducing
their creativity and other skills.

THE PURDUE URAP IN POLYMERS
The Undergraduate Research Activities
Program (URAP) as applied to Polymer Science
and Engineering at Purdue University has been
discussed in a previous contribution [5]. Instead
of describing again the logistics of this system,
we will concentrate here on a possible correlation
between past education and academic performance
of participants, and their present job situation.
In a three year period (June 1977-May 1980)
37 undergraduate students participated in URAP
in polymers under the direction of this author. Two
students worked for a total of four semesters, two
students worked for three semesters and eleven
students worked for two semesters. The average

TABLE 1
Present Position of 37 URAP Participants

Undergraduates 2 5.4%
Graduate Students in ChE 12 32.4%
Medical School 3 8.1%
Business School 7 18.9%
Industry 13 35.1%


graduating index of all students was 5.61/6.00
and their present positions are analyzed in Table
1. Further analysis in this paper refers to the 35
participants who have already graduated.
According to this Table, 42.8% of these 35
students continued towards a graduate degree in
chemical engineering or Medical School as com-
pared to 17.6% for a group of 1980 seniors from
Purdue of similar scholastic caliber. To investigate
whether this group of URAP students was biased
towards research and graduate school before
actually participating in this program, the author
carried out an informal survey of 29 undergradu-
ate students who participated in URAP in
Polymers during the 1978-79 and 1979-80
academic years. Table 2 summarizes the answers
to some key questions concerning the participants'
evaluation of undergraduate research.

TABLE 2
"Yes" Responses of URAP Participants in Polymers
(N =29)

PRESENT POSITION
Grad. ChE/ Business
Industry Med. Sch. Sch.
QUESTION -(N=11) (N=13) (N=5)

Did you have previous
research experience? 5 2 0
Were you considering
Grad school before
URAP? 2 3 2
Did URAP affect
positively your decision
to go to Grad School? NA 11 4
Had URAP a major
influence? NA 7 1
Did URAP affect
negatively your
intention to go to
Grad School? 2 NA 1


As shown in this Table seven participants
thought that undergraduate research had a major
influence in their decision to continue their studies
and four participants felt that URAP affected
their decision to some extent. Since one cannot
always be successful with such programs there
were two students who had originally considered
graduate studies but they were turned off by their
undergraduate research experience. The author
takes the blame for this failure.


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









Although these results may not be considered
statistically important by some readers, they do
show a general trend in the development of a re-
search-oriented attitude, which is conducive to
advanced studies in chemical engineering or medi-
cal school. There is no doubt that in his three-
year URAP experience the author has encountered
the same problems of time and space (funding
was generous) that Fricke reported in his contri-
bution in this issue [6]. Undoubtedly the URAP
system is not new, and it cannot be applied as a
requirement for all students in schools with large
enrollments, such as Purdue. However, the re-
search performed was in many cases of high
caliber (although perhaps of limited scope). The
thirty seven participants in this program con-
tributed a total of nine original papers for student
contests (resulting in four regional and national
AIChE and SPE awards), and a considerable
number of manuscripts for presentations in regu-
lar scientific meetings of AIChE and SPE and
original publications for refereed polymer and
related journals.
Some final general comments and realizations
from my URAP experience may be helpful to
other educators as well. Undergraduate students
are usually very enthusiastic researchers, some-
times more enthusiastic than many graduate
students. Generally, they do not like to serve as
"assistants" to graduate students but they prefer


UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO


UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH IN
CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

WILLIAM B. KRANTZ
University of Colorado
Boulder, CO 80309


INTRODUCING UNDERGRADUATES to the excitement
of research may be our most effective means of
addressing the problem of the widening gap be-
tween supply and demand for chemical engineers
with M.S. and Ph.D. degrees. This article, which
reviews our efforts at the University of Colorado
to promote an interest in undergraduate research,
is organized as follows. First, I will discuss briefly
each course at the University of Colorado which
involves undergraduate research. I then will inject
my personal philosophy concerning undergraduate
research. In this latter section I will indicate how


to work independently and under the immediate
direction of a professor. Class scheduling may be
difficult to handle, especially with purely experi-
mental projects. A possible solution here (which
has worked for our research group) is to let the
students work any time they wish, including week-
ends and evenings.
Although the comments presented here refer to
the students directed by this author, most other
ChE faculty members at Purdue are equally active
in undergraduate research. In a particular aca-
demic year anywhere from 35 to 60 undergradu-
ates may conduct undergraduate research in a
formal or informal way, representing about one
third of a typical graduating class in chemical
engineering at Purdue. O
REFERENCES
1. T. L. Donaldson, "Chemical Engineering Enrollments,"
Chem. Eng. Progr., 76(4), 20, (1980).
2. R. N. Houze, "Handling Large Classes: Isn't it Nice
to be Popular?", Chem. Eng. Ed., 14, 114, (1980).
3. D. H. Barker, "Shortage of ChE Faculties," Chem.
Eng. Progr, 76(10), 9, (1980).
4. "Chemical Engineering Faculties 1977," A.I.Ch.E.,
New York.
5. N. A. Peppas, "Does Undergraduate Research Con-
tribute to a Chemical Engineering Curriculum?",
paper presented at the 71st Annual AIChE Meeting,
Miami, November, 1978.
6. A. L. Fricke, "Undergraduate Research: A Necessary
Educational Option and its Costs and Benefits," Chem.
Engin. Ed., this issue, page 126.



I attempt to motivate students to undertake an
undergraduate-research project, various forums
for disseminating the results of these projects, and
finally, possible sources of funding for undergradu-
ate research.

OPPORTUNITIES FOR UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH
Research is defined as "careful search," or "a
studious inquiry." In this context there are three
courses in our chemical engineering curriculum at
CU which involve undergraduate research. These
are ChE 940, Undergraduate Independent Study;
ChE 403, Chemical Engineering Laboratory; and
ChE 322, Chemical Engineering Principles II. The
nature of each of these courses will be discussed
briefly here.

Undergraduate Independent Study is an op-
tional course which can be used toward the 12 to


SUMMER 1981









23 semester hours of technical electives required
in our 136 credit hour program. Typically this
course is taken by seniors for two to three credit
hours for two consecutive semesters. This course
is not required to graduate with honors or any
other similar distinction. There is no minimum
grade-point average required to enroll in this
course. Approval for enrolling in the course is
contingent upon having one of our faculty agree
to supervise the research. The student may pro-
pose his own project or may select from a list
of projects which is updated in the Fall semester
of each year. The manner in which the course re-
quirements are to be satisfied is determined by the
faculty member supervising the research. A final
written report is not necessarily required. Permis-
sion can be obtained for undergraduates electing
to take the course to be assigned office and/or
laboratory space and the appropriate keys to pro-
vide access to the facilities after hours.
During the period 1970-1980 some 257 under-
graduates have enrolled in this independent study
course. This represents 68 percent of the total
number of students graduating during this same
period. Note, however, that this figure of 257 does
not distinguish between students who have enrolled
in independent study more than once. Hence, a
more representative figure for participation might
be 30-40 percent. A year-by-year breakdown of the
enrollment in our undergraduate independent
study course expressed as percentage of the
number receiving B.S. degrees in chemical engi-
neering that year reveals an interesting trend:
1971-115%; 1972-79%; 1973-45%; 1974-
59%; 1975-58%; 1976-43%; 1977-34%; 1978
-63%; 1979-93%; and 1980-73%. The decline
in popularity of undergraduate research appears
to parallel a decline in the number of our students
going on to graduate school. The recent increase in
participation is a result of our efforts to use under-
graduate research as a means of motivating our
students to go on to graduate school.
A broad classification of the undergraduate re-
search projects undertaken in this course would
include the following: design and construction of
new experiments for our chemical engineering
laboratory; obtaining additional data using equip-
ment developed via M.S. and Ph.D. research pro-
jects; exploring new research areas of interest to
our faculty where the topic may be highly specula-
tive or perhaps not sufficiently well defined or
financially supported to be posed as an M.S. or


S- -
William B. Krantz is a graduate of Saint Joseph's College in
Rensselaer, Indiana (BA '61), the University of Illinois at Urbana (BS
'62), and the University of California at Berkeley (PhD '68). He is a
professor in the Department of Chemical Engineering at the Uni-
versity of Colorado at Boulder. During 1977-78 he served as Director
of the Thermodynamics and Mass Transfer Program at NSF. He is a
member of the Publication Board of Chemical Engineering Education.
Recently he received the 1980 George Westinghouse award of ASEE
for his contributions to engineering education.

Ph.D. research project; a comprehensive litera-
ture survey in some promising research area; im-
plementation of a computer program or algorithm
in support of ongoing research or course develop-
ment; and assisting a graduate student on some
aspect of his research.
Chemical Engineering Laboratory is our re-
quired four credit hour senior laboratory course.
This course includes eight specified experiments in
fluid flow, heat transfer and mass transfer which
are performed by groups of three to five students.
In addition, each group is encouraged to select an
optional special project from an approved list
which is updated each semester. Although each
section of this course is taught by one faculty
member, these special projects involve several of
our faculty in the capacity of supervisors of pro-
jects in their specific areas of expertise. A formal
written report is required from each student work-
ing on a special project. These special projects
typically involve developing new experiments for
this laboratory, doing a more comprehensive
study on an existing apparatus in the laboratory,
implementing computer-assisted data acquisition
for experiments in this course, or testing and re-
pairing major pieces of equipment which are mal-
functioning. Student evaluations of the course re-
peatedly confirm that the special project is the
most enjoyable and satisfying aspect of this
course.


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










Participation in undergraduate research undoubtedly provides an opportunity for a student
to see if he enjoys research. Even summer job opportunities may not expose the student to the research
environment which a well-directed undergraduate research program can provide.


For the past 10 years I have taught one or
more sections of Chemical Engineering Principles
II, which is our introductory course in mass
transfer operations. Those in my section of this
course are divided into project groups of three to
five students. I choose a leader for each group from
either volunteers or those students in our com-
bined engineering-business administration degree
program. The latter person assumes supervision
of the group and is the only liaison between the
group and me. In this way I attempt to simulate
a typical technical management approach used in
industry. Each group may choose from a list of
research projects which I update each year and
has approximately eight to 10 weeks to complete
the project. These projects involve design, con-
struction and demonstration of experiments il-
lustrating the principles of this course. Many of
these projects have led to new experiments which
are used subsequently in our chemical engineer-
ing laboratory. Representative projects have
included design and construction of a freeze-drying
apparatus, a bubble column to separate surface-
active solutes, a liquid-membrane-separation
device, demonstration of Taylor-axial dispersion
in laminar flow, design of a falling film absorber,
and implementation of AIChE-CACHE programs
for the design of separation processes. Participa-
tion in these research projects usually stimulates
several of the juniors to elect to take independent
study during their senior year. Evaluations of
this course reveal that these junior-level research
projects are very well received by nearly all the
students.
PERSONAL PHILOSOPHY ON
UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH
Participation in undergraduate research un-
doubtedly provides an opportunity for a student
to see if he enjoys research. Even summer job
opportunities may not expose the student to the
research environment which a well directed under-
graduate-research program can provide. Further-
more, encouraging more students to elect under-
graduate research may be a possible way to in-
crease the number of our undergraduates going
on to graduate school. Another benefit from under-


graduate research is the interaction which it en-
courages between undergraduate and graduate
students. Several of the 28 independent study
projects which I have directed during the past 10
years have been codirected by one of my graduate
students. This provides good experience for both
the undergraduate and graduate student. In addi-
tion, it is another way to stimulate more under-
graduates to consider graduate study.
While discussing the benefits to the students,
one should also consider the benefits of under-
graduate research to the faculty. One scenario I
have heard is that if a research project is very
well defined, you proffer it as a Ph.D. thesis topic
since the latter must lead to positive results. If
the research is somewhat more speculative, you
restrict it to a M.S. thesis topic. However, if it is
highly speculative with little chance of positive
results, you assign it as an undergraduate research
project! I would hope this is more fanciful than
true-yet, undergraduate research is an excellent
way to explore a research area in which you are
not yet well funded or an acknowledged expert. I
am now committed to an interdisciplinary research
effort involving the Universities of Colorado and
Wyoming, and our Institute of Arctic and Alpine
Research concerning transport processes in perma-
frost which I initiated via an independent study
research project.
While staunchly supporting the concept of
undergraduate research as independent study, we
do not believe that it should be required of all
students. Of course, we do strongly encourage at
least some involvement in undergraduate research
in our ChE 403 and ChE 322 courses described
above. Whereas the latter two courses require a
final formal report on the project, our inde-
pendent study course ChE 940 does not. I would
argue that a final report is a very important
element in undergraduate research since it gives
the student much needed training in technical
writing. Finally, I believe that undergraduate re-
search should not be restricted to only those
students having high grade-point averages. Under-
graduate research may provide the motivation for
some students to do better in their course work.
Furthermore, many students may have a particu-


SUMMER 1981









lar ability for experimental work of a demanding
nature and yet not be outstanding academically.
Clearly, undergraduate research provides an op-
portunity to identify such students and to counsel
them appropriately.
Motivating students to elect to take under-
graduate research is essential. In addition to point-
ing out the merits of undergraduate independent
study with respect to the undergraduate's immin-
ent career decision, I use a goal-oriented approach
in motivating them. In particular, I encourage
them to undertake this research in order to com-
pete in a particular local, regional or national
technical papers competition. Competitions to keep
in mind here are the technical papers contests for
students sponsored by the student chapter of the
AIChE, the Oklahoma Engineers' Club, the Colloid
and Surface Chemistry Division of ACS, the
American Institute of Aeronautics and Astro-
nautics, as well as those of several other profes-
sional societies. Another motivating factor which
helps the students persevere in completing their
research is the commitment to publish their results
in some form. One need not consider only peer-
reviewed publications here. Indeed, only one of
my 28 undergraduate research projects has led to
a peer-reviewed paper. Consider publishing the re-
sults of a worthwhile undergraduate study in
college or university student magazines. News re-


leases to local as well as the students' hometown
newspapers are also an excellent way to recog-
nize the extra effort which an undergraduate re-
search project requires. This publicity is also of
value to our colleges and universities during these
times of critical appraisal of higher education,
particularly in tax-supported schools.
My final comments concern funding of under-
graduate research. The NSF undergraduate re-
search participation program is well known and
is, of course, an excellent source of funds. How-
ever, I would encourage researchers to include
some support for undergraduate assistants in their
proposals to the funding agencies. In addition,
some companies that are reluctant to support
graduate research programs may well support an
undergraduate research program if they recruit
primarily at the B.S. level. Finally, I have en-
couraged both our student chapter of the AIChE
and Omega Chi Epsilon, the chemical engineering
honor fraternity, to consider as chapter projects
underwriting some part of the cost incurred in
having our undergraduates participate in techni-
cal papers competitions or present papers at
technical meetings. In this way, all our chemical
engineering students become aware of our under-
graduate-research program and take pride in the
achievements of the students participating in this
program. O


NATIONAL TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS


UNDERGRADUATE RESEARCH AS A
PREREQUISITE FOR GRADUATION

EMMANUEL G. KOUKIOS
National Technical University of Athens
Athens, Greece

"T HE SWEETEST AND MOST inoffensive path of
life leads through the avenues of science
and learning; and whoever can either remove any
obstructions in this way or open up any new
prospect ought so far to be esteemed a benefactor
to mankind." In such a concise way David Hume
expressed the unity of teaching and research back
in 1748 [1]. A modern corollary of Hume's state-
ment may be found in Rutherford Aris' warning
that "the attempt to divorce teaching and research
is fatal to the life of a university department" [2].


One can hardly resist the temptation to add:
is this unity necessary even for undergraduate
education? Based on the discussion which has re-
cently started among chemical engineering educa-
tors in the United States [3], it seems that the
possible contribution of undergraduate research
to the curriculum is still questionable. Is it legiti-
mate then to consider this revitalization of the
interest in undergraduate research as a warning?
The fact is that several professors, alarmed by
some consequences of this separation of teaching
from research, think of optional research activity
as a remedy [4]. Are they right and to what
extent?
In this paper we will try to give an answer to
those questions not by an abstract approach, but
by examining a different educational system,
where undergraduate research is an organic part


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










of the curriculum. This author spent several years
in such an educational environment, at the School
of Chemical Engineering of the National Techni-
cal University of Athens (or NTU), in Greece,
first as a student and then as an instructor, having
supervised a total of twenty-five undergraduates
in the period 1976-1979. What follows is based on a
critical account of this experience.

TWO MAJOR SYSTEMS
Historically, chemical engineering has been de-
veloped around two poles: Germany and the
United States [5]. Many European countries
organized their particular educational systems
under the strong influence of the German model in
such a way that today we can talk about a major
European system [6, 7]. This system characterizes
practically all chemical engineering departments
in Western (with the exception of the Anglo-
Saxon countries), Central, North, and South Eu-
rope, and even some in Eastern Europe, e.g.
Poland [8].
A historical analysis of the chemical engineer-
ing curriculum at NTU shows that, since the mid-
sixties, there has been a significant influence of
the American model [9]. However, as in other
European countries[6], the outcome is a hybrid
that can still be classified under the label of
"European approach." There are sides of the
modern Greek system that, despite recent modi-


The idea that modern chemical engineering should not neglect
its economic and social implications has dominated first the studies
(Dipl. ChE, Dr. Eng., Dipl. Econom., M.S. Regional Devel., all from
NTU and other Greek Universities), and then the research and
teaching (biomass, industrial processes, technology transfer) of
Emmanuel Koukios. A second idea, that of a critical approach to
Science and Art, is the focal point of his other interests (movie
critique, epistemology, psychoanalysis, semiology). Currently on a
leave of absence from NTU of Athens, he is Visiting Assistant Pro-
fessor of Chemical Engineering at Purdue University.


TABLE 1
The Relative Position of Undergraduate Research in a
European Chemical Engineering Curriculum (NTU)

SEMESTER COURSES RESEARCH STEPS

(1) Meetings with faculty;
discussion of topics offered
9th Technical (2) Final assignment
Electives (3) Literature searching
(4) Familiarization with
methodology

(5) Preliminary oral presenta-
tion of collected informa-
tion and proposed plan of
work
(6) Full-time supervised re-
search
(7) Oral presentations in
regular research meetings
10th (8) Thesis writing
(9) Thesis submission
(10) Thesis presentation
(11) Grading by a Committee
composed of three faculty
members

(12) Continuation by another
student; the previous one
may be used as a
consultant


fications, continue the German tradition. The ex-
tensive teaching of chemical technology is one
example [10], and the required research for the
preparation of a Diploma Thesis is another one.
Table 1 presents the main steps of the pro-
cedure which take place in the last two semesters,
and lead to the submission and oral presentation
of the Diploma Thesis. It is clear that one whole
semester is available for research, while a sig-
nificant part of the previous semester is used for
the same purpose. Of course, it can be objected
that due to the fact that the program lasts ten
semesters, the preparation of the Diploma Thesis
corresponds to the preparation of a M.S. Thesis,
and therefore this work cannot be considered as
undergraduate research. If we neglect, for the
moment, the complicated problems of the official
equivalence between the two major systems, it
appears that, since this research is required for
graduation, it belongs to the undergraduate and
not the postgraduate stage.
Such a requirement cannot be found in the
American system. In this system research projects


SUMMER 1981









are sometimes offered as optional alternatives to
the "professional development" courses (design,
unit operations, laboratory) [11-13]. There are two
exceptions to this rule: the Senior Thesis required
by some universities, and the Thesis in the case of
a combined B.S.-M.S. program (or any other type
of five-year curriculum) [14, 15]. Despite some
similarities, the European Diploma Thesis takes
considerably more time and occupies quite a
different place in the curriculum as compared to
the American Senior Thesis (Table 1). On the
other hand, the various five-year programs either
represent a minor side of the American system,
or show some convergence to the European ap-
proach.

IMPACT ON THE ACADEMIC ENVIRONMENT

Table 2 summarizes the direct beneficial effects
of required undergraduate research on the life of
the academic community. It is obvious that these
advantages are exactly the same in both educa-
tional systems. But there are some quantitative
differences: according to the European system the
whole graduating class is affected instead of a
fraction and, at the same time, the effects are
usually stronger due to more favorable conditions
(time, supervision, supplies, financial support-
as described in Table 3).
Nevertheless, the examination of the indirect
consequences shows that there are also qualitative
differences between the two educational ap-
proaches. The required research system, by
familiarizing the students with the idea and
practice of scientific research, tends to increase the


TABLE 2
Major Beneficial Effects of Undergraduate
Research on Students and Faculty
1. Application of abstract knowledge.
2. Review of material covered during previous se-
mesters; detection of possible "gaps."
3. Some specialization in a specific field.
4. Increased contact between members of academic
community; better understanding of particular
educational problems.
5. First experience in scientific research; familiariza-
tion with research methodology and discipline.
6. Training in literature searching.
7. Possible publications; preliminary results for future
work.
8. Experience in oral presentation and report writing.
9. Contribution to the maturation process of the young
engineer.


The logic of the American program
does not necessarily lead to undergraduate
research projects, since research in the mind of
the student is associated with postgraduate studies.


percentage of graduates who want to continue
their studies: 30-40% of the NTU graduating
class, compared to less than 20% of the average
class in the United States [16]. This, increased
supply of chemical engineers with a higher degree
will be more useful in meeting the increasing de-
mand of industry for specialized staff. But, what
is more important is the realization that a greater
number of Ph.D.'s are attracted by the idea of an
academic career and want to become members of
the academic community. Thus there are fewer
problems for faculty renewal, and the whole uni-
versity life becomes healthier.
On the contrary, a similar analysis of the
American system would reveal the tough competi-
tion between industry and universities at all levels
(B.S., M.S., Ph.D.) [17, 18], the weaknesses of the
latter [19], and the peculiar role of foreign post-
graduate students (more than 40% of the total)
in this system [20, 21]. It seems that, indeed, there
is some relation between the lack of a certain re-
search experience in the curriculum and some
major problems of the American academic life.
But does "more research" automatically mean
fewer problems, and better education?

SOCIAL, CULTURAL AND ACADEMIC FACTORS
Both the American and the European educa-
tional systems are fruits of specific academic,
cultural and social conditions. Since the conditions
in the two cases are basically different, it is not
enough just to point out the effects of undergradu-
ate research and, then, compare them. Instead, we
must try to understand the different role played by
research in the two curricula.
A primary difference between the undergradu-
ate classes in the two major systems lies in their
homogeneity. To enroll, the European student
normally has to pass a series of nation-wide
examinations in Mathematics, Physics and
Chemistry. It must be noted that the chemical
engineering freshmen at NTU always belong to
the top 10% of the candidates. As a result, the
class is more homogeneous and responds more uni-
formly to all educational stimuli, compared with
the average American class.


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION













MAJOR PROBLEMS
Time


Supervision


Supplies
Financial Support

Total Cost

Space


GIVEN ANSWER
Open Labs, seven days a week, day
and night.
1:1 to 8:1 students: supervisor;
approx. 50 hrs/student/supervisor/
semester; occupation recognized as
a teaching tool by the University.
Provided by the Department.
Department covers report writing
expenses.
Estimated $250-450/student/
semester.
Same used for laboratory experi-
ments (no other regular activities
scheduled during that time);
approx. 50 ft2/student.


A second difference is related to the stronger
mathematical background of the students in Eu-
rope. This can be explained on the basis of the
regular high-school education plus the highly se-
lective procedure that precedes enrollment in
European countries. To give an example based on
the author's personal experience, the average
student at NTU cannot accept any new mathe-
matical formula without a proof, while in the
American class the same formula is regarded as a
tool for further application; therefore, a strict
proof is not always necessary.
However, all kinds of research are character-
ized by a disciplined approach which proceeds
through strict reasoning. For that reason, the pre-
paration of the Diploma Thesis is, more or less,
a logical consequence of the European system, a
real crown of the whole undergraduate program.
On the contrary, the logic of the American pro-
gram does not necessarily lead to undergraduate
research projects, since research in the mind of
the student is associated with postgraduate
studies.
At the same time, the social attitude towards
academic activities is different in the two systems.
Traditionally, the European university professor
has been a figure of high social status. Scientific
titles like Dozent and Doctor have both a high
academic and a social value in Europe. Conse-
quently, teaching (and especially research) are
treated with a deep respect, even outside the
academic community. Of course, these features


TABLE 3
Organizational and Financial
Conditions of Undergraduate Research at NTU


SUMMER 1981


force the European education to a more conserva-
tive and less productive attitude, as has been
proved by the evolution of the European system.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

Research is a necessary ingredient of the Euro-
pean program. It comes as a logical consequence
of this system and it permits its reproduction; this
is why it is a prerequisite for graduation. On the
contrary, the perpetuation of the American system
is based on a "free market" model, where each
university degree has a certain marketability [22].
This idea has led, logically enough, to the separa-
tion of research from undergraduate education.
The short-term effects of this "divorce" contri-
buted to a remarkable increase of efficiency. But,
gradually, the long-term effects move the system in
the opposite direction. In this context, any "injec-
tion" of more research into the curriculum will
give only a temporary relief. What is possibly
needed is a careful readjustment of the whole pro-
gram. Already in the process of rediscovering the
virtues of undergraduate research, American
chemical engineering educators could find par-
ticularly rewarding a study of the European ex-
perience. O

REFERENCES
1. D. Hume, "An Inquiry Concerning Human Under-
standing," origin, publ. 1748, Bobbs-Merril Educ. Publ.,
Indianapolis, 1977.
2. R. Aris, "Some Thoughts on the Nature of Academic
Research in Chemical Engineering," Chem. Eng. Ed.,
10, 2 (1970).
3. N. A. Peppas, "Does Undergraduate Research Con-
tribute to a Chemical Engineering Curriculum?",
paper presented at the 71st Annual AIChE Meeting,
Miami, Florida, November 1978.
4. N. A. Peppas, "Student Preparation for Graduate
Studies Through Undergraduate Research," Chem.
Eng. Ed., this issue, page 139.
5. 0. A. Hougen, "Chemical Engineers and How They
Grow," CHEMTECH, 9 (1), 10 (1979).
6. G. Lindner, "Chemical Engineering in Europe,"
Kemisk Tidskrift, 1976, NR2, 12, (in Swedish).
7. Ch. H. Barren, "Chemical Engineering Education in
Western Europe," Chem. Eng. Ed., 4, 33 (1970).
8. R. G. Griskey, "Chemical Engineering Education and
Research in Poland," Chem. Eng. Ed., 10, 48 (1976).
9. E. G. Koukios, and N. A. Peppas, "A Chemical Engi-
neering Curriculum Serving the National Needs: The
Greek System," paper presented at the 72nd Annual
AIChE Meeting, San Francisco, California, November
1979.
10. E. G. Koukios, "A Case of Modernizing a Descriptive
Undergraduate Course in a Chemical Engineering









Curriculum," paper presented at the 73rd Annual
AIChE Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, November 1980.
11. W. L. Kranich, et al., "The Project Approach to
Chemical Engineering Education Under the WPI
Plan," Chem. Eng. Ed., 8, 12 (1974).
12. D. R. Woods, "Teaching Process Design: A Survey
of Approaches Taken," Faculty of Engineering Report
No. 22, McMaster University, Canada, October 1975.
13. D. H. Barker, "Undergraduate Curricula 1976," Chem.
Eng. Ed., 18, 60 (1977).
14. R. M. Bethea, et al., "Experience at One University,"
Chem. Eng. Ed., 12, 181, (1977).
15. P. B. Deshpande, and Ch. A. Plank, "A Combined
Bachelors-Masters Program," Chem. Eng. Ed., 14, 138
(1979).
16. P. J. Sheridan, "Engineering and Technology En-


rollments, Fall 1978," Engineering Education, 71 (1),
46 (1980).
17. E. J. Henley, "On the Recruitment of Chemical Engi-
neers," Chem. Eng. Ed., 3, 34 (1969).
18. D. Allison, "The Industrial Career," CHEMTECH, 10
(3), 150 (1980).
19. R. R. Furgason, "Chemical Engineering Faculty
Salaries, 1979-80," Chem. Eng. Progress, 76 (6), 13
(1980).
20. L. Gupta, and D. T. Wasan, "Training of Foreign
Graduate Students-Problems and Solutions," Chem.
Eng. Ed., 7, 200 (1973).
21. AIChE, Student Members Bulletin, 1979-1980.
22. D. S. Small, "Career Planning During the First Five
Years," Chem. Eng. Progress, 75 (10), 28 (1979).


CONCLUDING REMARKS:


N. A. Peppas
In general, undergraduate research is viewed
as an important part of the chemical engineering
curriculum. Students develop a sense of independ-
ence and exercise their creativity. For the pro-
fessors this interaction could be the solution to
important preliminary research questions, which
may eventually lead to submission of a research
proposal, or solution of a "smaller" industrial re-
search problem. In many cases the research is of
such caliber as to lead to publication in refereed
Journals.
However, there are major problems to be over-
come. In schools where undergraduate research is
not a requirement, faculty time spent on the
projects is not usually recognized. Funding, es-
pecially for purely experimental research, is



book reviews

PRINCIPLES OF INDUSTRIAL CHEMISTRY
By Chris A. Clausen III and Guy Mattson
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1978. 412 pages.

Reviewed by Max S. Peters
University of Colorado

The stated purpose of this book is to help
chemistry students make the transition from the
academic to the industrial world. In reality, the
book is an elementary treatment of chemical engi-
neering written in a way to make it understand-
able and useful for chemistry majors. Most of the
fourteen chapters give a basic introduction to the
chemical engineering of the topic indicated. Thus,


rather difficult to obtain and despite the existence
of many educational grants (e.g. NSF etc.), most
of the research of this sort is carried out through
departmental funds, industrial unrestricted-use
funds, or as part of a funded research project.
One major problem without solution is laboratory

space.
Since the completion of these contributions,
several relevant articles appeared in the literature.
Further information on the shortage of ChE
graduate students was provided by Prof. A. B.
Metzner (Chem. Engin. Progr., 76 (10), 20, 1980).
The recently published History of Chemical Engi-
neering (W. F. Furter, Ed., Advances in Chemis-
try Series, Vol. 190, ACS, Washington, D.C. 1980)
is an excellent reference for the work of Prof.
Koukios in this issue. E

the second, third, and fourth chapters on basic
considerations, material accounting, and energy
accounting are simply a brief over-view of the
ideas of material and energy balances as presented
in any of the standard chemical engineering books
used for the sophomore chemical engineering
course. Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 8 on fluid flow, heat
transfer, kinetics, and separation processes are
elementary presentations of what is given in all
chemical engineering principles courses. The re-
maining chapters on instrumentation, developing
the process, chemical patents, economics, and re-
search are interesting reading, but they are highly
qualitative and are greatly generalized. The final
chapter is a good coverage of the overall aspects
of the development of a process for the production
of urea.
The book would be of essentially no interest


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









or value for a person who has had an education
in chemical engineering since he or she would
consider the presentation of almost all the topics
to be on an elementary level. On the other hand,
the book was not intended for use by chemical
engineers. It was written to help chemists become
aware of what goes on in industry or perhaps it
would be better to say it was written to teach
chemists some chemical engineering. From this
viewpoint, the book does an admirable job. It is
clearly written, and the chemist or technologist
would have no trouble in following the, mathe-
matics presented or the logic. It could serve as a
text for a single course for chemists or technolo-
gists at the end of their education to familiarize
them in general with chemical engineering and
applications in industry. Some of the chapters
have problems at the end for reader solution which
are on a level of difficulty appropriate for this
book.
On an overall basis, the book cannot be recom-
mended to anyone with a chemical engineering
background for anything except some general in-
formation and a chapter of details on the process
for producing urea. However, it is well adapted
for the use of its intended audience (chemists) and
could be very helpful to them in showing what
chemical engineering is and in helping them make
the transition from the academic world to in-
dustry. OE
FERMENTATION AND
ENZYME TECHNOLOGY
By D. I. C. Wang, C. L. Cooney, A. L. Demain,
P. Dunnill, A. E. Humhprey, and M. D. Lilly
John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1979, 374 pages,
$25
Reviewed by Alden Emery
Purdue University
A fermentation technology summer course of
one-week duration has been offered at M.I.T. for
5 years. One of the recent teams involved collabo-
rated in the writing of this book, presumably
transcribing the material of their lectures. The
stated function of the book is to aid persons taking
the summer course, both at the time of the course
and later. A slant toward commercial interests is
implied in the preface.
The chapters can be divided into three parts:
microbiology, engineering, and enzymes. The
microbiology part is almost all concerned with
subjects of primary concern to the industry now.


IJP conferences

CHEMISTRY AND PROPERTIES OF POLYMERIC
MATERIALS
October 2-4, 1981. Montreal, Canada
Short course on the state of the art on the chemistry and
properties of polymeric materials. Lecturers include M. N.
Bassim, R. B. Bird, D. De Kee, J. E. Mark, J. R. A. Pearson,
M. V. Sefton and J. L. White. For further information: Dr.
D. De Kee, ChE Dept., Univ. of Windsor; Windsor, On-
tario, Canada N9B 3P4.

POLYMER SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY SYMPOSIUM
September 28-29, 1981. Houghton, MI
Details may be obtained by contacting W. M. Lee, Sym-
posium Chairman, ChE Department, Michigan Technologi-
cal University, Houghton, MI 49931.

The engineering part is about half of immediate
concern to industry; the other half ought to be,
academics would argue, because it points the way
to the future. The enzyme part is all pertinent,
but of intermediate concern.
The writing in the beginning of the book is of
high caliber, carefully organized, interestingly
presented and with historical notes which heighten
interest. The end of the book is equally good, ex-
pansive and carefully presented, if a little dry.
The middle chapters unfortunately suffer from the
ills of haste to such an extent that one wonders if
there was any proofreading by the authors or
editing by the publisher.
Anyone in industry thrust into the field could
benefit by the organized explication of the major
interests and approaches given in the book, if the
enthusiastic review by Richard Myerly in S.I.M.
News (p. 45, July 1979) is any indication. As an
introduction and overview, this may be true. In
terms of comprehension, however, engineers with
no previous contact with biology will have trouble
understanding the terms in the microbiology
sections, since a background in biology is assumed;
the metabolic regulation in Chapter 1, for instance,
would not be intelligible without acquaintance
with genetics. Persons without exposure to engi-
neering may have problems with the philosophy,
approach, and methods of the engineering sections,
as a comprehension of mathematics and modelling
equal to an upperclass engineer is implied in the
presentations.
Academic chemical engineers will naturally
Continued on page 152.


SUMMER 1981










E administration


COPING WITH BULGING ChE ENROLLMENTS

(Are You or Aren't You)

ROBERT B. BECKMANN
University of Maryland
College Park, MD 20742


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING ENROLLMENTS and
those of all engineering, in general, have been
increasing at a rapid pace ever since the low point
during 1973-74. Beginning with the first upward
trend in 1974-75 and continuing to the present
time, undergraduate enrollments in all-engineering
(1974-75 compared to 1979-80) have risen 62.5%
and in chemical engineering 111%; graduate en-
rollments over the same period, for all-engineer-
ing and for chemical engineering have increased
11.6% and 35% respectively. An increase of this
magnitude would clearly place a severe strain on
the physical facility and faculty resources avail-
able unless concomitant increases in these re-
sources were available to maintain the quality of
instruction.
During the Spring of 1978, all of the chemical
engineering departments listed by the AIChE as
having accredited programs in chemical engineer-
ing were contacted to determine their willingness
to respond to a Questionnaire seeking information
about the, then, current situation (1977-78) with
regard to the financial support and operational
characteristics of their individual programs. The
primary impetus for this request was the oft-
noted comment in accreditation reports, and from
department chairmen, that the financial support
available for maintaining and developing chemi-
cal engineering programs was rapidly reaching a
crisis situation, compounded by problems of space
and faculty resources in a rapidly rising enroll-
ment situation. The original inquiry was sent to
126 chemical engineering departments, with over
90% of those responding and (70%) indicating
a willingness to participate. The final result was
that 94 institutions returned completed question-
naires. While some individual questions were not
answered, due to internal problems of obtaining

Copyright ChE Division, ASEE, 1981


Robert B. Beckmann is a native of St. Louis, Mo., and obtained his
BS from the University of Illinois and his PhD from the University of
Wisconsin, both in ChE. Following graduate studies he worked for
the Humble Oil & Refining Co. at Baytown Texas and subsequently
joined the ChE faculty at Carnegie-Mellon University (nee Carnegie
Inst. of Technology). In 1961 he moved to the University of Maryland
as Professor and Chairman of the ChE Department and served as
Dean of the Engineering College from 1966-77 before returning to his
present position as Professor. For over twenty years he has been
associated with the education and accreditation activities of the
AIChE and ABET (formerly ECPD).

the data, a range of 80-92 responses was available
from each question posed to the respondents.
The principle items of information sought in
this survey related to the following: financial
support, the instructional laboratory and research
facilities space situation, graduate teaching
assistant support, student faculty ratios and the
faculty workloads, and finally the individual de-
partment's assessment of its most critical needs.
The results are summarized in the following
sections.

FINANCIAL SUPPORT
This was the primary target of the survey.
Financial information for the 1977-78 fiscal year
was requested in two parts: (1) those general
operating funds, excluding salaries, budgeted for
the day-to-day departmental operation; and (2)
those funds allocated for capital equipment items,
excluding funds from external contract/grant or


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









gift sources.
The general picture presented by the financial
information seemed to verify that the vast ma-
jority of chemical engineering programs, indeed,
were facing a rapidly deteriorating situation-if
not already at the disaster stage-particularly
with regard to capital equipment funding for
laboratory maintenance and development. The
situation with regard to general operating funds
was equally distressing.
Over 60% of the reporting departments (84)'
reported the availability of less than $2,500 per
full time equivalent faculty (FTEF) member al-
located for general operation, and only 10% re-
ported funding in excess of $5000/FTEF. Since
"General Operating Funds" was specified to in-
clude funds for general departmental operation
and maintenance, travel, laboratory supplies,
etc. (exclusive of salary monies for personnel of
any classification) these funds should be relatively
indicative of the day-to-day operational funding
level. The funding level ($/FTEF) appeared
relatively independent of the "perceived" quality
rating of the institution, the general level of re-
search or graduate activity, or the size of the
program. This is particularly true of those pro-
grams (10%) reporting general operating funds
in excess of $5,000/FTEF. In some of these cases,
there appears a question as to whether or not some
unique situation exists in the program funding
situation (i.e. funds reported included some an-
cillary activity or perhaps total funds for a com-
bined department while faculty numbers were
reported solely for chemical engineering-result-
ing in an abnormal or pseudo indication of funds
available for the chemical engineering program
per se. Most importantly, it should be kept in mind
that the $/FTEF are on the high side with respect
to reality in that only the FTEF resident faculty
at the Assistant Professor or higher rank were
used in the calculation. Thus, a department with
a heavy reliance on instructors, part-time and
adjunct faculty would have a higher reported
$/FTEF than might be considered realistic.
The data showing the funds allocated for
capital equipment expenditures was particularly
distressing. Over half the reporting departments
had less than $1,000/FTEF, over 75% reported
less than $1,750/FTEF, and only 7% reported
capital funds in excess of $3,000/FTEF. Consider-
ing the current price range for laboratory equip-
ment, such a funding level will not maintain labo-
ratories, much less allow for laboratory develop-


The primary impetus for this request
was the oft-noted comment in accreditation
reports, and from department chairmen, that the
financial support available for maintaining and
developing chemical engineering programs
was rapidly reaching a crisis situation.

ment and/or innovations and new experiments.
Here again, the funding level was relatively in-
dependent of the size, perceived quality, or re-
search activity of the department.
Considering that some institutions might not
have a precise "General Operation/Equipment"
funding division within their budget or that such
a division of available funds might not relate to
actual fund expenditures, the data were also re-
viewed on a total dollar-per-FTEF basis. The
"total" picture was just as distressing. Over half
the departments reported less than $3,500/FTEF
for their total operation, two-thirds had $5,000/
FTEF or less, and 10% reported total funds avail-
able in excess of $8,000/FTEF.
Attempts to analyze the data on the basis of
student enrollment or degree productivity were of
little or no value. The rapidly changing enroll-
ment situation throughout all chemical engineering
programs, in many cases not yet reflected in the
degree productivity data, gave a more chaotic and
random picture.
As indicated above, there appeared no correla-
tion of funding level based upon faculty size,
graduate and research activity or the perceived
type or quality of the program. Two factors could
account for this: a lessening in the variety and/
or the degree of laboratory experiences in the
undergraduate program or, in some cases, living
on the inventory of capability built up through
externally funded research activity or the use of
external gifts or grants. Each of these is a stop-
gap resolution of the problem that will undoubtedly
reflect on the quality of undergraduate chemical
engineering education, and graduate/research ac-
tivity, in the near future.
Considering the above, what then is a reason-
able funding level for chemical engineering pro-
grams? One thing is certain: you will get as many
answers to this question as persons questioned-
and with no lack of positive opinions. There un-
doubtedly is no clear-cut answer since the re-
quired funding, assuming a stable or steady state
operation which is totally unrealistic, would still
depend upon the characteristics of the program


SUMMER 1981








with regard to the breadth and depth of laboratory
experiences, the degree of research and graduate
activity, and the availability of unrestricted
external gift/grant income. However, from a
completely general viewpoint, it would seem to
this author that a funding level, in terms of 1979
dollars, for the total program operation (including
equipment) in the range of $6,000-$9,000/FTEF
is a minimum for maintaining a quality under-
graduate program, even with occasional "special
allocations" for unique situations. The $9,000/
FTEF would presumably serve the smaller pro-
grams (with a minimum of 3 FTEF) and the
$6,000/FTEF for the largest of programs in terms
of faculty size with a minimum of $25,000-$30,000
for a small three resident full-time faculty pro-
gram to $175,000-$200,000 for a very large pro-
gram with a minimum of external resources avail-
able. This range of support dollars with allowance
for individual situations would provide reason-
able funding for maintenance, operation and
modest development or improvement, but would
not obviate the need for special funding for unique
situations such as building a wholly new laboratory
or unique facility.


. Attempts were made to see if there
were any correlating relationships on the basis of
the research and instructional space allocations.


INSTRUCTIONAL LABORATORY & RESEARCH SPACE
In reviewing the space allocations for chemical
engineering programs, it was decided to focus on
the figures reported for the instructional labora-
tories and research space, rather than the total
space (including offices and other) that is
generally reported for accreditation purposes. It
was felt this might be more realistic of the space
available for student experimental activities. The
average "Instructional & Research" space per
FTEF reported by the 83 institutions reporting
data in this category was 1890 sq. ft./FTEF, with
70% reporting less than 2000.
Keeping in mind that there is no precise split
between instructional laboratory and research
space and that these individual classifications will
depend upon individual departmental utilization
(classification) and the extent of research activity,
attempts were made to see if there were any cor-
relating relationships on the basis of the research
and instructional space allocations. Attempts to


interpret in terms of graduate/undergraduate en-
rollments or degree productivity were of no avail.
Considering the fluctuating and non-steady state
condition of these factors during the 1977-78 year,
this was not surprising.
If one assumes that institutions will arbitrarily
classify instructional and research space according
to the extent of graduate and research activity and
as the degree of graduate/research activity in-
creases the FTEF to some degree (thus lessening
the total space need per FTEF) the total space
allocation per FTEF might be expected to show a
decreasing tendency as the ratio of (Research/In-
structional Laboratory) space increases. While no
general correlation on this basis resulted, the data
could be placed in about four family groupings, all
showing approximately the same degree of change
with increasing ratio of (Research/Instructional
Laboratory) space. Coupling this with an ad-
mittedly qualitative judgment (relying heavily on
accreditation reports concerning the space situa-
tion), the following "rule-of-thumb" generaliza-
tions are offered:
If "T" = Total Instructional Laboratory & Research
Space/FTEF
"R" = Total Research Space allocation, ft.2
"I" = Total Instructional Laboratory Space alloca-
tion, ft.2
1. Excellent Space Situation
T 4,000 290 (R/I)
2. Good to Excellent Space Situation


T 2,500 290 (R/I)


3. Fair to Good Space Situation
T 1,500 290 (R/I) -
4. Poor or Marginal Space Situation
T < 1,500 290 (R/I)


GRADUATE TEACHING ASSISTANTSHIP SUPPORT
The use of graduate teaching assistantships
(GTA's) has been a hallmark of chemical engi-
neering education and graduate student support
over the years. The information sought attempted
to obtain data on the number of GTA's budgeted
to the chemical engineering program from institu-
tional funds and the number of additional GTA's
resulting from the availability of external funds
presumably resulting from salary savings due to
sabbatical leaves or academic year salary contribu-
tions from contract/grant resources. Research
graduate assistants were to be specifically ex-
cluded. The numbers of GTA's were to represent
what each institution considered a normal full-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION










The information ... attempted to obtain data on the number of GTA's budgeted
to the chemical engineering program from institutional funds and the number of additional
GTA's resulting from the availability of external funds presumably resulting from salary savings due to
sabbitical leaves or academic year contributions from contract/grant sources.


time GTA appointment and not on an FTE
(faculty equivalent) basis; thus a 1.0 would be
considered to be a single GTA putting in what
that institution considered a full-time service load.
Ninety-two institutions supplied data in this
category; 12 departments reported no budgeted
GTA's, and 10 reported no GTA's supported from
external fund resources.
Considering the GTA's supported by institu-
tional budget funds, and excluding those reporting
zero, the average was 0.6 GTA/FTEF with 75%
reporting 0.8 or less and only three institutions
reporting over 1.4 GTA/FTEF. When the GTA's
supported from non-budget resources are added
(again excluding those reporting a zero total) the
average rose to 0.95 GTA/FTEF with 75% re-
porting a total of 1.4/FTEF or less and 10% re-
porting totals in excess of 1.8/FTEF.
The data should not, however, be interpreted
as indicating a general plethora of GTA avail-
ability. The major increase was occasioned by
those institutions generally smaller in size or
having a relatively smaller fractional number of
budgeted GTA's/FTEF. There are also some cases
where the number of GTA's added through the
availability of external resources was abnormally
large when considered in the context of the size
and character of the institution. This could result
from the institution's unique classification of
GTA's resulting from funded intern or co-op
type graduate programs or possibly the use of
GTA appointment types for regular teaching ac-
tivities-rather than the usual assistant type
duties-caused by the large enrollment increases
and inability to add budgeted regular faculty.
To illustrate the above point, I arbitrarily
selected 25% (23) of the reporting schools that
would be considered, in this author's opinion, to
have strong chemical engineering programs, public
and private, large and small, with recognized
strong graduate programs. The results for these
institutions show the following:
Min. GTA/FTEF = 0.17 (Budgeted Funds only)
Max. GTA/FTEF = 1.87 (Budgeted Funds only)
Avg. GTA/FTEF = 0.68 (Budgeted Funds only)
Mean GTA/FTEF = 0.62 (Budgeted Funds only)


Of these 23 institutions, 14 added no (12) or
less than 0.1 GTA/FTEF (2) from the avail-
ability of external funds. Five added 1.0 or more
GTA/FTEF through external fund sources but
only one of these was initially above the average
noted above from budget resources; and three
were significantly below the average to start. Of
the remaining three, one remained well below aver-
age even with the additional resource utilization,
one used the added resources to bring their ratio
to the average budgeted level; and the other, above
budgeted average initially, increased its number of
GTA's FTEF by 80%.
The questionnaire also sought information
concerning the weekly service hours required of
GTA's. Only 69 schools responded with informa-
tion in this regard, the remaining not responding
or simply stating "variable" with no further
elaboration. Even for those institutions respond-
ing, the service requirements were indicated to be
quite variable, depending upon the specific service
activity. However, 78% of those reporting indi-
cated a service requirement of 15-20 hours per
week as an upper limit and just under 20% indi-
cated the upper limit service requirement to be
12 hours per week or less. Probably the most
prevalent comment of all was a statement along
the line: ". . require "x to y" hours per week but
they really only work one-half or one-third this
amount."

STUDENT FACULTY RATIOS & STUDENT
CREDIT HOUR TEACHING LOADS
Student/Faculty ratios and the student credit
hour (SCH) faculty loadings are frequently used
comparison measures for the relative evaluation
of work load requirements for similar programs
or educational situations. Unfortunately, 1977-78
was a year of dynamic change insofar as student
enrollments were concerned and the resultant im-
pact on student-faculty ratios and student credit-
hour work loads were concerned. In many cases,
the full impact of the dramatic increase in chemi-
cal engineering enrollments was just beginning to
reach the upper division (junior and senior years)


SUM~ER 1981








and hence any (Students/FTEF) or (SCH)/
FTEF ratios would not reflect the total situation.
Two other factors also enter such statistical
comparisons: in many institutions, freshmen do
not indicate major field (within engineering)
preferences at that level and even if they do, it is
not a very reliable barometer of eventual sopho-
more enrollments; and at a number of institutions,
faculty teach other than chemical engineering
courses to maintain institutional workload require-
ments or are involved in core-course instruction,
particularly at the lower division level. Nonethe-
less, the data were collected so some reporting is
in order. In looking at student faculty (FTEF)
ratios, it was decided to summarize only on the
basis of upper division undergraduates (juniors
and seniors) or upper division undergraduates
plus graduate students since the large majority of
faculty involvement is in these academic years.
The average student faculty ratio (Jr., Sr.)
was 12.7 with 50% ranging from 10 to 25. If the
ratio is based upon (Jr., Sr., Grad.), the average
increased to 16.7 with 86% of the programs having
ratios between 10 and 25 and 12% exceeding 25.
The data were also examined on a public/private
institution basis, and as would be expected, the
private institutions, having a more positive enroll-
ment control, showed significantly lower student
faculty ratios with a larger graduate student effect.
The ratios for private schools were 9.7 and 14.2
and for public schools the ratio averages were
14.0 and 17.8.
If one looks at the student-faculty ratio for all
undergraduates, not indicated above, the result is
rather horrifying: only 27 institutions have ratios
below 20, 59 (68.6%) exceed 20, 29 (33.7%)
exceed 30, and 11 (12.8%) exceed 40, without
allowing for the graduate student population.
The data on faculty workloads was informa-
tional, at best. Nonetheless, the student credit
hours (the sum of the number of students in a
given class section times the credit hour rating of
the course, summed for all courses taught by
chemical engineering faculty) per FTEF showed
an average of 330. Considered in context with in-
creased student-faculty ratios, lowered graduate
assistant availability, and the poor financial
support situation, the data illustrated the in-
creased faculty workload of the past several years.
It is difficult to assess what might be considered a
reasonable norm in this regard. If one considered
only undergraduate instruction, teaching two
courses per term with 25 students in each would


result in a (SCH) / (FTEF) of 300 yet this does
not consider the impact of graduate courses (with
generally smaller enrollments) or laboratory and/
or research instructional activities with demanding
but generally restricted enrollments. The fact that
over 55% of the schools have loads in excess of
300 (and 30% in excess of 400) indicates a serious
workload situation.

DEGREE PRODUCTIVITY INDEX

The questionnaire which served as the basis
for the above information was concerned solely
with chemical engineering programs. In an effort
to gain some insight as to how chemical engineer-
ing was faring in comparison to "all engineering"
the data on degree productivity, faculty numbers
(FTE Assistant Professor and higher ranks), ad-
junct faculty and teaching assistant appointments
and research dollars were extracted for 79 institu-
tions from the ASEE annual reports in the
March issue of Engineering Education [Vol. 69,
No. 6, March 1979 for 1977-78, and Vol. 70, No.
6, March 1980 for 1978-79]. The 79 institutions
were simply selected on the basis that the engineer-
ing unit have approximately 60 or more FTE
faculty (Assistant Professor and higher) and a
chemical engineering program. It was felt that
this would be representative of the major engi-
neering units in the United States. Table 1 sum-
marizes the overall results. The selected 79 institu-
tions account for 60% of all baccalaureates in
engineering and nearly 75% of those in chemical
engineering; with increasing shares of the total
M.S. and Ph.D. productivity in the U.S.
The FTE faculty at the Assistant Professor
and higher ranks increased 3.6% for all engineer-
ing and 1.0% for chemical engineering between
1977-78 and 1978-79. It should be noted that the
ASEE changed its reporting method for the
faculty FTE in these two years and the 1977-78
figure shown for "All Engineering" is an adjusted
number to compare with the 1978-79 information.
In 1977-78, the FTE faculty for teaching and re-
search were separately listed and the 1978-79
tabulation listed only the total FTE teaching
plus research faculty. The 1978-79 listing would
seem the more appropriate in providing a measure
of total faculty availability; also, the previous
method resulted in some "double counting" am-
biguities in reporting.
Two of the most interesting statistics apparent
in the data relate to what I term the "Degree Pro-


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION









TABLE 1
Overall Results: 79 Institutions

ALL ENGINEERING CHEMICAL ENGINEERING
LEGEND 1977-78 1978-79 1977-78 1978-79

Total FTE Faculty 10,275 10,647.5 965.4 975.2
Research $(x10-6) $398.18 $498.31 $36.07 $40.94
Research $/FTE(xlO-3) $ 37.88 $ 46.80 $37.36* $42.95*
Degrees, BS 28,515 (61.9%) 32,944 (62.6%) 3,418 (74%) 4,238 (72.6%)
MS & Prof. 11,910 (73.6%) 11,780 (73.5%) 1,026 (83.6%) 920 (79.9%)
Ph.D. 2,216 (86.1%) 2,297 (81.6%) 217 (83.8%) 260 (84.1%)
DPI 5.16 5.40 5.81 6.56
(Adj. Fac FTE
+ TA's)/FTE 0.85 0.89


No. in ( ) is the % of Total U.S. Production


ductivity Index" and the ratio of auxiliary teach-
ing support to the FTE faculty. In my view, both
have a direct effect on research productivity and
the faculty ability to handle classroom/laboratory
activities, not to mention a morale relationship. In
1977-78, the DPI (Degree Productivity Index) for
chemical engineering was 5.81 and for "All Engi-
neering," 5.16. Due to the lower division (Fr.
and Soph.) academic activities of other engineer-
ing departments, it is to be expected that chemical
engineering would show a somewhat higher DPI.
In comparing 1978-79 to 1977-78, the Index for
"All Engineering" rose 4.65% to 5.40 while that
for chemical engineering rose 12.9% to 6.56. The
degree productivity index is defined as the sum
of [(BS) + 1.5 (MS) + 3.0 (Ph.D.)] divided by
the FTE faculty.
Almost 70% of engineering units, as a whole,
have DPI's below 6.00 and 50% fall between 4.00
and 6.00 and only 5.1% have indices of 8.00 or
over. In contrast, only 45.6% of the chemical engi-
neering programs have DPI's below 6.00, over 30%
have indices above 8.00 and 7 chemical engineering
programs have indices in excess of 10. If one re-
moves the chemical engineering DPI from the
"All Engineering" DPI, the disparity between
chemical engineering and "All Engineering -
Ch.E." is even more pronounced.
It has long been my premise that teaching
loads, per se, research and/or scholarly activity
and other programmatic output measures cannot
be simplistically related to student/faculty or FTE
ratios alone without consideration of the auxiliary
faculty support services (primarily academic)
available. In my opinion, the provision of adjunct


faculty (part-time lecturers, instructors, etc.) and
particularly teaching assistants can do more to in-
crease research and scholarly activity, and to
maintain faculty morale with increasing class-
room/laboratory activities than the simple addi-
tion of incremental full-time faculty-and it is
much more cost effective. This is not to deny the
need for increased full-time faculty but rather to
indicate the companion need for institutionally
supported auxiliary faculty support (including
secretarial and technician support) if such addi-
tions are to realize full benefits in terms of morale,
research, and classroom productivity.
In my opinion, this is borne out to a consider-
able degree if one compares the DPI with the ratio
of (FTE Adj. Faculty + the No. of TA's) to the
basic FTE component of the institution. This is
illustrated for "All Engineering" at the 79 institu-
tions included in this survey in Table 3.

TABLE 2
1978-79 Degree Productivity Index Distribution
At 79 Institutions

ALL ENGR. CHEM. ENGR.
DPI RANGE No. of Instit. (Cum. % of Total)

Below 3.00 2 (2.5%) 2 (2.5%)
3.00-3.99 13 (19.0%) 8 (12.6%)
4.00-4.99 20 (44.3%) 14 (30.4%)
5.00-5.99 20 (69.6%) 12 (45.6%)
6.00-6.99 11 (83.5%) 8 (55.7%)
7.00-7.99 9 (94.9%) 11 (69.6%)
8.00-8.99 2 (97.5%) 6 (77.2%)
9.00-9.99 2 (100.0%) 11 (91.1%)
10.00 & Over 0 7 (100.0%)


SUMMER 1981


*77 schools









TABLE 3
Relationship Between The DPI and Academic
Support Personnel: All Engineering, 1978-79

Degree Productivity No. of (Adj. Faculty +
Index (DPI Schools TA's/FTE)*

Below 3.00 2 0.45/0.51
3.00-3.99 13 (1-na) 0.66/0.70
4.00-4.99 20 (1-na) 0.80/0.82
5.00-5.99 20 0.90/0.96
6.00-6.99 11 1.01/1.06
7.00-7.99 9 1.10/1.15
8.00 & Over 4 1.34/1.42
Avg. = 5.40 79 Avg. = 0.89
(77 Schools)

*The second figure is the Group Average excluding
the low number in the group.
The basic feature of Table 3 is not to deny that
institutions with relatively large DPI's are not in
need of additional FTE faculty, but simply to
point out that a combination of a high DPI and
a relatively low (Adj. Fac.-TA)/FTE ratio is a
potentially disastrous situation. To cope with an
increasing DPI requires increasing auxiliary
academic support, as a minimum, in order to
maintain program effectiveness and quality.
Unfortunately, the ASEE information does not
present comparable data for TA's and adjunct
faculty for individual engineering disciplines.
However, the previous data relating the GTA's
available for chemical engineering (1977-78)
showing an average of 0.6 GTA/FTEF from
budget funds and 0.95 supported from all re-
sources would appear compatible with the above
results.
There are some who feel the rapid growth of
chemical engineering programs, in terms of
student interest, exceeding that of engineering
in general is reminiscent of the "boom-and-bust"
phenomena affecting aerospace programs in the
early 70's. I disagree with this as the primary
base of the aerospace market relied on a singular
industry type; in contrast, the growth in chemical
engineering interests seems based on a broadening
of the industry base utilizing chemical engineers.
This is not to say there will not be a decreasing
demand as the secondary school productivity de-
creases, but rather that chemical engineering as a
professional engineering program will probably
retain a larger percentage of the total engineer-
ing population.
The final question posed in the aforementioned


survey of chemical engineering departments asked
for a realistic assessment of program needs rang-
ing from critical to generally satisfactory. In light
of the above, the results were not surprising.
40.9% listed added faculty as a critical need,
36.4% listed operating and equipment monies as
most critical; GTA's (10.2%), Space (6.8%) and
Faculty Salaries (3.4%) were also-ran candidates
insofar as being termed critical. Now that almost
three years have passed since this original survey,
perhaps a followup is in order to determine what
improvement, if any, has resulted. O

FERMENTATION TECHNOLOGY
Continued from page 145.
wonder about the suitability of the book for a
standard course. It may not be fair to comment
on this use, since the preface, except for one ex-
pansive sentence, carefully delineates its intended
use for the students of the M.I.T. summer course.
But for this journal, a comment is required.
Compared to the textbooks on biochemical
engineering now in use, the size is smaller, which
one would expect since much less material can be
transmitted in a one-week course. The texts in use
assume no background in biology, and explain the
fundamentals of microbiology and biochemistry
fairly carefully; their major thrust is with
generalizations, which they illustrate with some
examples. Wang et al. spend no time on the basics
but begin the discussions of microbiology at a
more advanced level, which will be a problem to
many. On the other hand, the presentation extends
more into specifics and examples of current prac-
tice. Three chapters contain material which is not
available in the current texts or elsewhere in one
place; the chapters on secondary metabolites, bio-
conversions, and enzyme production.
The engineering topics of this book are almost
all covered by the current texts, where they are
developed more expansively. On the other hand,
two chapters in this book have more content than
is found in the other books; the chapters on con-
tinuous culture and enzyme isolation.
In summary, the abbreviated presentation of
fundamentals, extended coverage of examples of
commercial practice, and awareness of industrial
needs will undoubtedly make the book valuable to
persons in the industry. For the academic class-
room, the book is probably not suitable as a
primary text for introductory courses in biochemi-
cal engineering as they are now constituted, but
would make a useful reference. El


CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION















ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


Departmental Sponsors:


The following 142 departments contributed


to the support of CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION in 1981 with bulk subscriptions.


University of Akron
University of Alabama
University of Alberta
Arizona State University
University of Arizona
University of Arkansas
Auburn University
Brigham Young University
University of British Columbia
Bucknell University
University of Calgary
California State Polytechnic
California Institute of Technology
University of California (Berkeley)
University of California (Davis)
University of California (Santa Barbara)
Carnegie-Mellon University
Case-Western Reserve University
University of Cincinnati
Clarkson College of Technology
Clemson University
Cleveland State University
University of Colorado
Colorado School of Mines
Columbia University
University of Connecticut
Cooper Union
Cornell University
University of Dayton
University of Delaware
U. of Detroit
Drexel University
Ecole Polytechnique (Canada)
University of Florida
Georgia Technical Institute
University of Houston
Howard University
University of Idaho
University of Illinois (Urbana)
Illinois Institute of Technology
Institute of Gas Technology
Institute of Paper Chemistry
University of Iowa
Iowa State University
Kansas State University
University of Kentucky
Lafayette College


Lamar University
Lehigh University
Loughborough University
Louisiana State University
Louisiana Tech. University
University of Louisville
University of Maine
University of Maryland
University of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
McMaster University
McNeese State University
University of Michigan
Michigan State University
Michigan Tech. University
University of Minnesota
University of Mississippi
University of Missouri (Columbia)
University of Missouri (Rolla)
Monash University
Montana State University
University of Nebraska
University of New Brunswick
New Jersey Inst. of Tech.
University of New Hampshire
New Mexico State University
University of New Mexico
City University of New York
Polytechnic Institute of New York
State University of N.Y. at Buffalo
North Carolina State University
University of North Dakota
Northeastern University
Northwestern University
University of Notre Dame
Nova Scotia Tech. College
Ohio State University
Ohio University
University of Oklahoma
Oklahoma State University
Oregon State University
University of Ottawa
University of Pennsylvania
Pennsylvania State University
University of Pittsburgh
Princeton University
University of Puerto Rico


Purdue University
Queen's University
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
University of Rhode Island
Rice University
University of Rochester
Rose-Hulman Institute
Rutgers U.
University of South Carolina
University of Saskatchewan
South Dakota School of Mines
University of South Florida
University of Southern California
Stanford University
Stevens Institute of Technology
Syracuse University
Teeside Polytechnic Institute
Tennessee Technological University
University of Tennessee
Texas A&M University
Texas A&I University
University of Texas at Austin
Texas Technological University
University of Toledo
University of Toronto
Tri-State University
Tufts University
Tulane University
University of Tulsa
University of Utah
Vanderbilt University
Villanova University
Virginia Polytechnic Institute
University of Virginia
Washington State University
University of Washington
Washington University
University of Waterloo
Wayne State University
West Virginia Inst. Technology
West Virginia University
University of Western Ontario
University of Windsor
University of Wisconsin (Madison)
Worcester Polytechnic Institute
University of Wyoming
Yale University
Youngstown State University


TO OUR READERS: If your department is not a contributor, please ask your
department chairman to write CHEMICAL ENGINEERING EDUCATION, c/o
Chemical Engineering Department, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
32611.












Monsanto Drive.
It takes you a very long way.


This sign marks the road that leads
into our International Headquarters in
St. Louis.
These words, "Monsanto Drive"
have another and more significant mean-
ing at Monsanto. It's a way of expressing
the special qualities of Monsanto people,
who have the will to meet challenges
head-on-to accomplish and succeed.
We offer bright and energetic people
with this drive the opportunity to help
solve some of the world's major problems
concerning food, energy, the environment
and others.
Challenging assignments exist for
engineers, scientists, accountants and


marketing majors at locations throughout
the U.S.
We offer you opportunities, training
and career paths that are geared for
upward mobility. If you are a person
who has set high goals and has an
achievement record, and who wants to
advance and succeed, be sure to talk
with the Monsanto representative when
he visits your campus or write to:
Buck Fetters, University Relations and
Professional Employment Director,
Monsanto Company, 800 North Lind-
bergh, St. Louis, MO 63166.

Monsanto
,\ 1 'l l| l ll )]p l n f iiij)!<>lllll{\ [ v III




Full Text