Implementation of a modular distillation tower improves learning outcomes in chemical engineering, indicating benefits for critical thinking and collaboration.
Several authors have reported the disconnection between the skills, abilities, and attitudes of graduates from STEM careers with the current needs of the labour market. In science and engineering fields, research has found the need for interdisciplinary approaches that encourage meaningful learning. 3D printing has demonstrated its ability to enable the design of meaningful learning experiences to enhance academic knowledge, process design, creativity, and critical thinking. In the specific case of the distillation process, a lack of knowledge appropriation has been documented, and consequently, the students retrieve information without understanding it. This hinders the development of higher‐level thinking skills. This work documents the implementation of a 3D‐printed modular distillation tower within a classroom laboratory. The design of this modular tower allows different configurations to be assembled and evaluated. In the present study, two of these, tray number and tray type, were explored. Its use in class was intended as an educational support to provide students with the elements to design their own distillation towers. Therefore, although 3D printing is a learning process by itself, in this case the main purpose is the pedagogical tool for the distillation process. The reported experience consisted of comparing student groups that did or did not use the 3D‐printed distillation tower for the development of a laboratory experiment. The scope of the work included the assessment of general learning outcomes, particularly critical thinking, problem solving, collaboration, motivation, and creativity. Academic content knowledge was also assessed through a written test about the distillation process.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eva Patricia Bermúdez‐García (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: