The subject, Chemical Reactor Eng is taught on the Chemical Engineering degree course at the Technical School of Engineering (UPV/EHU). The syllabus that appears in the Official State Gazette nº 260 of October, 1998 includes the subject Chemical Reactors as a core subject in the 2nd cycle of six credits and which is taught in the fourth year during the eighth four-month term. To date, practical credits have consisted of the solving of problems both in the classroom and the calculus centre.

With a view to adapting this core subject to the future EHEA, the protocol is established for the teaching plan proposal according to the ECTS norms. After carrying out the aforementioned protocol, the idea came about to request that assignments should be carried out in small groups for their evaluation throughout the four-month term. Two assignments are required: the first is to be carried out in the classroom during the practicals and the second is to be carried out outside the classroom. The main aim is to modify the evaluation strategy with a view to improving student motivation. In this way, it is also hoped that teamwork will be encouraged.

The initial approach was that, out of a total of 86 pupils, 56 wished to follow the methodology and were willing to do so by attending classes and 15 wished to follow the methodology but, as they were resitting subjects, they only attended the practicals. Finally, there remains the group of approximately 15 pupils of whom some do not attend class on a regular basis and others simply do not attend classes and only sit the final exam. The conflict arises when the teacher’s interest in searching for a new way of training/evaluating the pupils clashes with the rights of the other group of pupils, protected by the Rules and Regulations regarding Academic Management and who feel they are at a slight disadvantage as they cannot follow this new way. At the time of finding a solution to the situation, the discussion/negotiation fluctuated between interests and rights. After several weeks of negotiation, a solution to the situation was found and the following conclusions may be reached:

- As desired, the establishment of the aforementioned methodology has served as a tool for the evaluation of the pupils’ work throughout the year.
- The subjects that figure in the Syllabus have been taught and, as far as the proposed practicals are concerned, it was proposed that they should be broadened or that the official subjects should be gone into more deeply.
- As far as academic results are concerned, it was observed that, from the very first moment, the pupils who attended classes were greatly implicated in the practicals, due to higher motivation and this served to improve their final marks.
- The cooperative learning methodology employed has meant that greater advantage has been taken of the tutorials as few pupils requested tutorials during the year and, in most cases, they did so but a few weeks before the exams.
- All groups requested tutorials at least once. As a result, there was a more effective monitoring of the pupils and communication was more fluent. It is worth pointing out that pupils requested tutorials at the pre-established times and at other times.
- Those pupils who did not attend classes showed their disagreement with the methodology followed. But on fulfilling the Regulations and sitting a final exam that accounts for 100% of the mark, they were left no alternative to adapt.