Why not try active learning?

Falconer, John L.

doi:10.1002/aic.15387

Cited by 19 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[37][38][39][40][41] The other mechanism suggests that CO 2 is methanated directly without the formation of a CO intermediate. One assumes that CO 2 is converted to CO which is then converted to methane.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

Upham

Derk

Sharma

et al. 2015

Catal. Sci. Technol.

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ru 0.05 Ce 0.95 O x is an active catalyst for methanation of CO 2 with H 2 . Under reaction conditions one expects that oxygen vacancies are present on the oxide catalyst surface and that their steady-state concentration depends upon the relative ratio of the oxidant (CO 2 ) to the reductant (H 2 ). We show that the activity of the catalyst is sensitive to the degree of surface reduction: a surface that is too reduced or too oxidized loses activity. Exposing the oxidized surface to CO 2 and then to H 2 produces no methane, while on a reduced surface methane is produced by exposure to CO 2 followed by H 2 . If the reaction is carried out at the steady state, purged, and then exposed to only hydrogen, methane is produced. Methane is formed through the reaction of hydrogen with surface species, whose infrared spectrum is associated with a variety of surface carbonates, and not through CO or a formate intermediate.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

Upham

Derk

Sharma

et al. 2015

Catal. Sci. Technol.

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The definition used for engaged learning by Freeman et al was rather broad, and included: “occasional group problem‐solving, worksheets or tutorials completed during class, use of personal response systems with or without peer instruction, and studio or workshop course designs” (Freeman et al, , p. 8410). Although this definition is indeed very broad, the study by Freeman et al indicates that mobilizing students one way or another makes sense, which is also supported by more personal and qualitative testimonials (e.g., Falconer, ).…”

Section: The Need For a Change In Stem Education And Engaged Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving towards engaged learning in STEM domains; there is no simple answer, but clearly a road ahead

Jong

2019

Computer Assisted Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What is the best approach to educating students is, evidently, the pivotal question in educational research. In the general debate on this question, clear positions are often taken―for example, whether teacher‐led instruction or more student‐directed approaches should be followed. In the current narrative review, this central question and the different stances taken are explored for a specific field of learning, STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) domains. The current article starts with an argument as to why the traditional, more directive teacher‐led educational approach to STEM learning may not always lead to deep conceptual knowledge and proposes exploring more engaged forms of learning. More specifically, a particular arrangement for engaged learning, inquiry learning, is taken as an example in this exploration. It is argued that the effects of educational methods are influenced by a multitude of (interacting) factors related to student and teacher characteristics, context, domain, frequency of use, timing, and probably more. Therefore, this article tries to outline a more nuanced and balanced stance towards choosing educational approaches. A picture is presented to show that adopting and combining different approaches, at both the lesson and the curricular levels, may be necessary to reach optimal levels of learning. Existing and upcoming technologies may play a decisive role in realizing this more complex, but also more realistic view of learning in STEM.

show abstract

“…For example, Ed Cussler wrote a provocative perspective in 2015 on the future of the lecture . The following year, John Falconer from my department encouraged faculty to introduce active learning in their classrooms and presented anecdotes and data on improved student learning. More recently, Phil Wankat advocated for teaching professional skills, and Robert Davidson described the importance of safety awareness in chemical engineering for both students and practitioners .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the faculty‐student experience in chemical engineering

Davis

2020

AIChE Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Why not try active learning?

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

Moving towards engaged learning in STEM domains; there is no simple answer, but clearly a road ahead

Improving the faculty‐student experience in chemical engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Why not try active learning?

Cited by 19 publications

References 28 publications

CO2methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

CO2methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

Moving towards engaged learning in STEM domains; there is no simple answer, but clearly a road ahead

Improving the faculty‐student experience in chemical engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface

CO₂methanation by Ru-doped ceria: the role of the oxidation state of the surface