Today's engineering educators emphasize lecturing, recitation, and laboratories. The dominant characteristics of these “traditional approaches” are the (1) following of the procedures and the (2) completion of the tasks. “Effective” activities are typically considered to be those theoretical and experimental cases that are carefully-planned and trouble-free. When encountered, even the most simple mistake or difficulty is often blamed on the instructor and leaves students waiting for the master to fix the problem. This approach would be great if real-life problems could be solved with a cookbook and if a chef was always there to correct things when the recipe goes wrong. However, experiments fail, theories do not match data, and computational models do not always correctly predict observed trends. That's real life!

Instructors in some enhanced approaches assign the task to the students on exploring a given device for an experiment and students are not supplied with an explanation from the instructor. This is, indeed, a much better approach that those that spoon fed the students with all details about the device and even the protocol for the experiment! The students in these environments become, then, wonderful “technicians” instead of engineers in the making; moreover, the device will always eventually work since it is all proof and has been used before. The story would be completely different if this apparatus is not there and students must bring it to reality from fundamental engineering concepts. For example, within the AIChE, the Chem-E-Car Team project is a wonderful example that, when properly implemented, enhances the students learning with real world experiences.

As an alternative to prescriptive training as those approaches described above, the authors will describe the use of experimental prototypes to create a more realistic learning environment in engineering laboratory settings. In this environment, students are required to plan, design, and test devices that must deliver an outcome, such as the measurement of a property (i.e., viscosity; thermal conductivity;, etc.) or a process condition (i.e., flow rate or flow field, heat transfer coefficient, etc.). Here, the application of fundamental principles helps students to understand the device performance, whereas constructing to a budget and meeting scheduled deadlines help students explore real world constraints. Moreover, interacting with engineers in industry allows students to enhance realistic learning experiences. Experimental prototypes for fluid mechanic and/or heat transfer applications are used here to illustrate the methodology.