Search results

The purpose of this paper is to report on methods developed, within a three‐year Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) project at Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden, to achieve a higher degree of embedding of ESD in engineering programmes. The major emphasis is on methods used, results achieved and lessons learned from the work.

The basic idea that methods and activities were built on was that the only way to achieve long‐term changes is to increase the motivation and capacity of lecturers and program directors to perform the required changes.

Activities that were developed and tested focused on coaching discussions and on workshops for teachers, gathering teachers from one programme at a time. These activities aimed at starting learning processes in individuals. Special care was taken into keeping the feeling of responsibility and initiative in the faculty members within the programmes. A special “resource group” of experienced ESD teachers was available as support for programme directors and lecturers.

The methods reported on are further developments of a method that has been used in Delft University of Technology (the Individual Interaction Method) in the Netherlands. The experiences from Chalmers are discussed in such a way that they provide useful insights for others aiming at similar changes at university.

The purpose of this paper is to present the strategy used for achieving change towards sustainability at Chalmers University of Technology (Chalmers). Examples of how this strategy has been used are described and discussed, and exemplified with different lines of activities in a project on Education for Sustainable Development, the ESD project.

The strategy consists of three important building blocks: Create a neutral arena; Build on individual engagement and involvement; and Communicate a clear commitment from the management team. The analysis is made along three different lines of activities in the ESD project: The work to improve the quality of the compulsory courses on sustainable development; The efforts to integrate ESD into educational programmes; and The work to collect and spread information on good teaching practices within ESD. Some other related examples where the strategy has been applied are also presented.

The ESD project functioned as a neutral arena since it was not placed at any specific department but rather engaged participants from many departments. This neutral arena has been important, for example, to increase the willingness of teachers to share their good teaching examples. The process was successful in creating a shared responsibility and for starting learning processes in many individuals by the involvement of a broad range of educational actors at Chalmers. The strong and clear commitment from the management team has worked as a driving force.

This paper can provide valuable input to universities that struggle with change processes.

The purpose of this paper is to study how experts on teaching sustainability in engineering education contextualize sustainability; also to evaluate the understanding of sustainability by engineering students. The final aim is to evaluate what pedagogy experts believe provides better opportunities for learning about sustainability in engineering education.

The authors used conceptual maps (cmaps) analysis with two taxonomies of four and ten categories. The first taxonomy clusters the significance of sustainability in environmental, technological, social and institutional aspects and shows the main trends; the second (of ten categories) divides the previous categories into greater detail. To evaluate the experts' cmaps two indices were defined that provide information about what experts think sustainability is most related to and evaluate how complex they see the sustainability concept. In total, 500 students from five European engineering universities were then surveyed and the results compared with those of the experts. Finally, interviews were held with experts to try to determine the best pedagogy to apply to achieve learning around sustainability.

The results show that Engineering Education for Sustainable Development (EESD) experts consider that institutional and social aspects are more relevant to sustainability than environmental and technological ones. The results were compared with the understanding of sustainability by a sample of more than 500 engineering students who had taken courses on sustainability at five technical universities in Europe. This comparison shows a mismatch among the EESD “experts'” and the students' understanding of sustainability, which suggest that sustainability courses in engineering degrees should emphasise the social and institutional aspects versus environmental and technological ones. Moreover, courses should emphasize more the complexity of sustainability.

The paper emphasizes the lack of priority that social and institutional aspects are given in sustainability courses and promotes a discussion about how these two elements and complex thinking can increase their importance in the engineering curriculum.

The aim of this study is to contribute to the quality improvement and long‐term strategic development of education for sustainable development (ESD) in engineering education curricula.

The content in 70 courses in environment and SD were characterized and quantified using course document text analysis. Additionally, two questionnaires were sent to students and alumni at Chalmers, and interviews and focus group discussions were conducted with representatives from 16 Swedish companies and five organizations.

It was found that industry demands a broader range of competences in SD amongst engineers in general than what is currently provided. In total, 35 per cent of alumni claim they encounter sustainability issues from sometimes to daily in their work. However, only half of them believe they possess enough competences to make decisions from a sustainability perspective. Quantity, coverage and the level of integration in the educational programme all appear to be important for the students' perceived competences on SD and for the importance that they put on achieving SD.

Earlier research has reported on how to further develop the idea and design of ESD and on competence needs in general. Few attempts have been made to assess industry's needs of competences in SD. This paper sheds light on how engineering universities educate for SD and benchmarks this to industry's needs in an exploratory case study, using Chalmers as an example.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the process of changing engineering universities towards sustainable development (SD). It outlines the types of changes needed, both in respect of approaches, visions, philosophies and cultural change, which are crucial for engineering universities which want to implement sustainable development as part of their progammes.

The paper describes various experiences which show how SD education programmes can be implemented at universities, and some of the challenges faced in efforts towards achieving such a goal. It considers the various processes involved and raises some questions which can help to understand how universities, as learning organisations, can engage in the implementation of SD programmes.

The paper has established that engineers have to learn to think long term and position their activities in a pathway towards long‐term sustainable solutions. This requires insight into the social environment of engineering as a technology, and the extent to which engineers should know about the intricacies of SD problems.

The paper shows that engineers should understand the complexities of the societal setting in which they are developing solutions, and the complexities of making short‐term improvements that fit into a long‐term SD.

This paper sets out to discuss the commonalities that can be found in learning outcomes (LOs) for education for sustainable development in the context of the Tbilisi and Barcelona declarations. The commonalities include systemic or holistic thinking, the integration of different perspectives, skills such as critical thinking, change agent abilities and communication, and finally different attitudes and values.

An analysis of LOs that are proposed in the Tbilisi and Barcelona declarations is conducted, showing specific issues for the commonalities presented. Examples of LOs from Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM) in Mexico, as well as various associations from the USA is shown. A brief discussion is done on the means to achieve these LOs and learning evaluation.

In the example sets of LOs shown, the commonalities presented in the paper's first section appear in the LOs proposed by the institutions. Based on current knowledge and perception, sustainability is properly addressed in the examples.

The paper can be used to foster a wider discussion and analysis of LOs for sustainability education, also further work on teachers' capacity building for sustainability, as well as the assessment needed for future professionals in higher education institutions.

The paper presents the onset of discussing and comparing commonalities among higher education institutions regarding sustainability LOs.

The purpose of the paper is to examine how a number of key themes are introduced in the Master's programme in Engineering for Sustainable Development, at Cambridge University, through student‐centred activities. These themes include dealing with complexity, uncertainty, change, other disciplines, people, environmental limits, whole life costs, and trade‐offs.

The range of exercises and assignments designed to encourage students to test their own assumptions and abilities to develop competencies in these areas are analysed by mapping the key themes onto the formal activities which all students undertake throughout the core MPhil programme. The paper reviews the range of these activities that are designed to help support the formal delivery of the taught programme. These include residential field courses, role plays, change challenges, games, systems thinking, multi criteria decision making, awareness of literature from other disciplines and consultancy projects. An axial coding approach to the analysis of routine feedback questionnaires drawn from recent years has been used to identify how a student's own awareness develops. Also results of two surveys are presented which test the students' perceptions about whether or not the course is providing learning environments to develop awareness and skills in these areas.

Students generally perform well against these tasks with a significant feature being the mutual support they give to each other in their learning. The paper concludes that for students from an engineering background it is an holistic approach to delivering a new way of thinking through a combination of lectures, class activities, assignments, interactions between class members, and access to material elsewhere in the University that enables participants to develop their skills in each of the key themes.

The paper provides a reflection on different pedagogical approaches to exploring key sustainable themes and reports students' own perceptions of the value of these kinds of activities. Experiences are shared of running a range of diverse learning activities within a professional practice Master's programme.

The purpose of this paper is to ascertain the engagement and response of students to the teaching of engineering ethics incorporating a macro ethical framework whereby sustainability is viewed as context to professional practice. This involves incorporating a broader conception of engineering than is typically applied in conventional teaching of engineering ethics.

A real life wicked problem case study assignment was developed. Students' understanding and practical application of the concepts were considered. A survey was conducted to gauge students' appreciation of the professional importance and their enjoyment of the subject matter.

It was found that students appreciate and enjoy a macro ethical sustainability informed approach, but find it more challenging to apply in practice.

The paper demonstrates an approach to the teaching of engineering ethics using a practical example, which can help broaden engineers' self‐perceived role towards one where sustainability is context. It also shows how students can find such an approach to teaching ethics to be both enjoyable and relevant.

Engineers educated to perceive the importance of engaging with macro ethical issues as part of professional practice will be significantly better placed to inform public and industry policy towards greater good and engage with other professional and expert groups.

In this paper, an approach to engineering ethics which diverges from the traditional is proposed. This can be of value to those involved in the teaching of engineering ethics, particularly those seeking to incorporate sustainability and other macro ethical issues.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the issues involved in designing appropriate problems or scenarios suitable for sustainable development (SD) education, in the context of problem‐based learning (PBL) and experiential learning. Manchester's PBL approach to interdisciplinary Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) has been well reported, for example, in papers at the Educating Engineers in Sustainable Development conference in 2008. This paper poses the question: to achieve transformational education, is design of student problems for ESD itself a wicked problem? The design process that has been used to generate ESD projects for one PBL unit is reflected upon, to share good practices and highlight points of ongoing contention.

Working from the background to the original pilot project to develop an inter‐disciplinary course to heighten student skills in sustainability and change management, the paper looks at some of the theoretical approaches taken to the design of PBL scenarios and tries to place these in the context of education for SD.

The initial project found that using inter‐disciplinary, problem‐based approaches to embedding SD in the curriculum is not only practicable but also desirable. However, the approach to design of problem scenarios has to be adjusted to the nature of the “wickedness” of sustainability issues and be appropriate to the student cohort and institution.

The approaches are felt to be applicable to a much wider range of situations than is demonstrated in the paper but, clearly, the findings can only be grounded on the particular situation of the project.

The 2006 curriculum development action research project was intended to help other institutions to replicate the process but, much of the external attention since that time has focussed, inappropriately, on simply re‐using the scenarios that were described in the initial project rather than applying the design process that has been developed in order to devise new scenarios more appropriate to another course or institution.