How we teach: Capstone design

David L. Silverstein, Lisa G. Bullard, Warren D. Seider, Margot A. Vigeant

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperpeer-review

14 Scopus citations


The authors present the statistical results of the 2012 AIChE Education Division survey on how chemical engineering courses are taught. This year's survey covers the capstone design sequence as defined by each institution. The survey was conducted of faculty members teaching design courses at their institution during the 2011-2012 academic year. In addition to covering institutions in the United States, the results include a significant number of institutions worldwide who had faculty members participate. Department administrators were solicited via email requesting that the instructors responsible for teaching design at their institution respond to the survey. Later, instructors of record for relevant courses were contacted directly by email and requested to respond. The survey was conducted online using the open-source survey package LimeSurvey. For the first time since the start of this survey series, an incentive consisting of a case study normally sold by the CACHE Corporation was offered to responding faculty members. The report consists primarily of the statistical and demographic characterization of the course and its content, with some additional summary responses related to the course from openended questions. Additionally, the survey seeks to bring out the most innovative and effective approaches to teaching the course as cited by instructors. Comparison with a related survey conducted in 1965 is made where appropriate.

Original languageEnglish
StatePublished - 2013
Event120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition - Atlanta, GA, United States
Duration: Jun 23 2013Jun 26 2013


Conference120th ASEE Annual Conference and Exposition
Country/TerritoryUnited States
CityAtlanta, GA

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General Engineering


Dive into the research topics of 'How we teach: Capstone design'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this