A Systematic Review of the Different Methods Assessing Sustainability Integration in Engineering Curricula
Abstract
:1. Introduction, Background, and Literature Review
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Aim and Research Questions
- (A)
- What are the conducted methods to analyze sustainability’s incorporation into the engineering curriculum?
- (B)
- Are there any explicitly mentioned limitations or challenges encountered in the process? And are there any mentioned advantages for the used assessment method?
- (C)
- What kinds of findings are obtained according to each method?
2.2. Search Strategy
2.3. Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
2.4. Trial Flow/Selection Process
3. Results
- Results of the Research Questions
3.1. What Are the Conducted Methods to Analyze Sustainability’s Incorporation into the Engineering Curriculum?
- ⮚
- Sofri et al. (2023), “Analysis of chemical engineering curriculum to improve process safety competency” [15]
- ⮚
- Jahan et al. (2022), “Integrating inclusivity and sustainability in civil engineering courses” [16]
- ⮚
- Gannon et al. (2022), “Engineering faculty views on sustainability and education research: Survey results and analyses” [17]
- ⮚
- Gomez-Martin et al. (2021), “Boosting the sustainable development goals in a civil engineering bachelor degree program” [18]
- ⮚
- Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021), “Tools for embedding and assessing sustainable development goals in engineering education” [19]
- ⮚
- Nikolić and Vukić (2021), “Sustainable development as a challenge of engineering education” [20]
- ⮚
- Aginako and Guraya (2021), “Students’ perception about sustainability in the engineering school of Bilbao (University of the Basque Country): Insertion level and importance” [21]
- ⮚
- Damigos et al. (2021), “The factors impacting the incorporation of the sustainable development goals into raw materials engineering curricula” [22]
- ⮚
- Arefin et al. (2021), “Incorporating sustainability in engineering curriculum: A study of the Australian universities” [23]
- ⮚
- Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2020), “Analysis of sustainability presence in Spanish higher education” [24]
- ⮚
- Qu et al. (2020), “Applying sustainability into engineering curriculum under the background of new engineering education” (NEE)” [25]
- ⮚
- Ashraf and Alanezi (2020), “Incorporation of sustainability concepts into the engineering core program by adopting a micro curriculum approach: A case study in Saudi Arabia” [26]
- ⮚
- Alexa et al. (2020), “Engineers changing the world: Education for sustainability in Romanian technical universities-An empirical web-based content analysis” [27]
- ⮚
- Akeel et al. (2019), “Assessing the sustainability content of the Nigerian engineering curriculum” [28]
- ⮚
- Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2019), “A methodology to analyze the presence of sustainability in engineering curricula. Case of study: Ten Spanish Engineering degree curricula” [29]
- ⮚
- Trad (2019), “A framework for mapping sustainability within tertiary curriculum” [4]
- ⮚
- Onyilo et al. (2019), “Sustainable development and sustainability in engineering education in Nigeria” [30]
- ⮚
- Rampasso et al. (2019), “Some of the challenges in implementing education for sustainable development: Perspectives from Brazilian engineering students” [3]
- ⮚
- Rubio et al. (2019), “Embedding sustainability competences into engineering education. The case of informatics engineering and industrial engineering degree programs at Spanish Universities” [31]
- ⮚
- Roure et al. (2018), “Systematic curriculum integration of sustainable development using life cycle approaches” [32]
- ⮚
- Colombo and Alves (2017), “Sustainability in engineering programs in a Portuguese public university” [33]
- ⮚
- Thürer et al. (2018), “A systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula” [34]
- ⮚
- Arsat et al. (2017), “Integrating sustainability in a student-centered learning environment for engineering education” [35]
- ⮚
- Nazzal et al. (2015), “Introduction of sustainability concepts into industrial engineering education: A modular approach” [36]
- ⮚
- Watson et al. (2013), “Assessing curricula contribution to sustainability more holistically: Experiences from the integration of curricula assessment and students’ perceptions at the Georgia Institute of Technology” [37]
- ⮚
- Salem and Harb (2012), “Education for sustainable development: Assessment of the current situation at the faculty of Notre Dame University (NDU)—Louaize” [38]
- ⮚
- Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011), “The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering and construction education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula” [39]
- ⮚
- Murphy et al. (2009), “Sustainability in engineering education and research at U.S. universities” [40]
- ⮚
- Galvič (2006), “Sustainability engineering education” [41]
- ⮚
- Kumar et al. (2005), “Infusing sustainability principles into manufacturing/mechanical engineering curricula” [42]
3.2. Are There Any Explicitly Mentioned Limitations or Challenges Encountered in the Process? And Are There Any Mentioned Advantages for the Assessment Method Used?
3.3. What Kinds of Findings Are Obtained in the Articles?
4. Discussion and Conclusions
4.1. Methods
4.2. Dissecting the Curriculum
4.3. Advantages, Limitations, and Access to a Precise Type of Result
5. Limitations
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Casañ, M.J.; Alier, M.; Llorens, A. A collaborative learning activity to analyze the sustainability of an innovation using PESTLE. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moreira, A.C.S. Application of the sustainable logistics plan in the public administration. Braz. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2018, 15, 137–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rampasso, I.S.; Siqueira, R.G.; Anholon, R.; Silva, D.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Leal Filho, W.; Brandli, L.L. Some of the challenges in implementing education for sustainable development: Perspectives from Brazilian engineering students. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2019, 26, 367–376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trad, S.P. A framework for mapping sustainability within tertiary curriculum. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019, 20, 289–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosen, M. Engineering sustainability: A technical approach to sustainability. Sustainability 2012, 4, 2270–2292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cardona Gil, E.; Gardelle, L.; Tabas, B. From technological innovation to situated innovation: Improving the adaptation of engineering training to the societal challenges of the 21st century. Chapter 1. In Training Engineers for Innovation; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018; ISBN 9781786303561. [Google Scholar]
- Nakad, M.; Kovesi, K. What about sustainability? Investigating engineering students sustainability awareness and attitude. In Proceedings of the SEFI 50th Annual Conference of The European Society for Engineering Education, Barcelona, Spain, 19–22 September 2022; pp. 541–549. [Google Scholar]
- Nakad, M.; Kovesi, K.; Gardelle, L.; Abboud, R.J. Engineering students’ perceptions towards promoting sustainability. In Proceedings of the 2023 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Kuwait, Kuwait, 1–4 May 2023; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Paten, C.J.K.; Palousis, N.; Hargroves, K.; Smith, M. Engineering sustainable solutions program. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2005, 6, 265–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Desha, C.; Hargroves, K. Surveying the State of Higher Education in Energy Efficiency, in Australian Engineering Curriculum. Int. J. Clean. Prod. 2010, 18, 652–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Romero, S.; Alaez, M.; Amo, D.; Fonseca, D. Systematic review of how engineering schools around the world are deploying the 2023 agenda. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5035. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guerra, A.; Holgaard, J.E. Organisational learning and integration of sustainability in engineering education. In Proceedings of the 44th SEFI Conference, Tampere, Finland, 12–15 September 2016. [Google Scholar]
- De La Harpe, B.; Thomas, I. Curriculum change in universities: Conditions that facilitate education for sustainable development. J. Educ. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 3, 75–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liénard, G.; Mangez, É. Curriculum (sociologie du). In Dictionnaire de l’éducation, 2nd ed.; van Zanten, A., Rayou, P., Eds.; PUF: Paris, France, 2009; pp. 134–139. [Google Scholar]
- Sofri, S.; Reddy Prasad, D.M.; Hazwan Bin Azri, M.; Timbang, A. Analysis of chemical engineering curriculum to improve process safety competency. Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. 2023, 29, 642–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jahan, K.; Farrell, S.; Hartman, H.; Forin, T. Integrating inclusivity and sustainability in civil engineering courses. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2022, 38, 727–741. [Google Scholar]
- Gannon, P.; Anderson, R.; Plumb, C.; Hacker, D.; Shephard, K. Engineering faculty views on sustainability and education research: Survey results and analyses. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 2022, 38, 611–620. [Google Scholar]
- Gomez-Martin, M.E.; Gimenez-Carbo, E.; Sndres-Domenech, I.; Pellicer, E. Boosting the sustainable development goals in a civil engineering bachelor degree program. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2021, 22, 125–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Carracedo, F.; Segalas, J.; Bueno, G.; Busquets, P.; Climent, J.; Galofré, V.G.; Lazzarini, B.; Lopez, D.; Martín, C.; Miñano, R.; et al. Tools for embedding and assessing sustainable development goals in engineering education. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nikolić, V.M.; Vukić, T.M. Sustainable development as a challenge of engineering education. Therm. Sci. 2021, 25, 1921–1933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aginako, Z.; Guraya, T. Students’ perception about sustainability in the engineering school of Bilbao (University of the Basque Country): Insertion level and importance. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8673. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Damigos, D.; Valakas, G.; Gaki, A.; Adam, K. The factors impacting the incorporation of the sustainable development goals into raw materials engineering curricula. J. Sustain. Min. 2021, 20, 178–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arefin, M.A.; Nabi, M.N.; Sadeque, S.; Gudmetla, P. Incorporating sustainability in engineering curriculum: A study of the Australian universities. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2021, 22, 576–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Carracedo, F.; Carbonell, B.S.; Moreno-Pino, F.M. Analysis of sustainability presence in Spanish higher education. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2020, 21, 393–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qu, Z.; Huang, W.; Zhou, Z. Applying sustainability into engineering curriculum under the background of new engineering education. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2020, 21, 1169–1187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ashraf, M.W.; Alanezi, F. Incorporation of sustainability concepts into the engineering core program by adopting a micro curriculum approach: A case study in Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 2020, 12, 2901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexa, L.; Maier, V.; Serban, A.; Craciunescu, R. Engineers changing the world: Education for sustainability in Romanian technical universities-An empirical web-based content analysis. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1983. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Akeel, U.U.; Bell, S.J.; Mitchell, J.E. Assessing the sustainability content of the Nigerian engineering curriculum. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2019, 20, 590–613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sánchez-Carracedo, F.; Moreno-Pino, F.M.; Sureda, B.; Antunez, M.; Gutierrez, I. A methodology to analyze the presence of sustainability in engineering curricula. Case of study: Ten Spanish Engineering degree curricula. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Onyilo, I.R.; Bin Arsat, M.; Akor, T.S.; Abdul Latif, A.; Amin, N.F.M. Sustainable development and sustainability in engineering education in Nigeria. Int. J. Eng. Adv. Technol. 2019, 8, 515–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rubio, R.M.; Uribe, D.; Moreno-Romero, A.; Yanez, S. Embedding sustainability competences into engineering education. The case of informatics engineering and industrial engineering degree programs at Spanish Universities. Sustainability 2019, 11, 5832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Roure, B.; Anand, C.; Bisaillon, V.; Amo, B. Systematic curriculum integration of sustainable development using life cycle approaches. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2018, 19, 589–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colombo, C.R.; Alves, A.C. Sustainability in engineering programs in a Portuguese public university. Production 2017, 27, e20162214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thürer, M.; Tomsevic, I.; Stevenson, M.; Qu, T.; Huisingh, D. A systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 181, 608–617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arsat, M.; Amin, N.F.; Latif, A.A.; Arsat, R. Integrating Sustainability in a Student-Centered Learning Environment for Engineering Education. Adv. Sci. Lett. 2017, 23, 651–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nazzal, D.; Zabinski, J.; Hugar, A.; Reinhart, D.; Karwowski, W.; Madani, K. Introduction of sustainability concepts into industrial engineering education: A modular approach. Adv. Eng. Educ. 2015, 4, n4. [Google Scholar]
- Watson, M.K.; Lozano, R.; Noyes, C.; Rodgers, M. Assessing curricula contribution to sustainability more holistically: Experiences from the integration of curricula assessment and students’ perceptions at the Georgia Institute of Technology. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 61, 106–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salem, T.; Harb, J. Education for Sustainable Development: Assessment of the Current Situation at the Faculty of Engineering of Notre Dame University–Louaize. Discourse Commun. Sustain. Educ. 2012, 3, 100–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Becerik-Gerber, B.; Gerber, D.J.; Ku, K. The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering and construction education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula. J. Inf. Technol. Constr. 2011, 16, 411–432. [Google Scholar]
- Murphy, C.F.; Allen, D.; Allenby, B.; Crittenden, J.; Davidson, C.I.; Hendrickson, C.; Matthews, H.S. Sustainability in engineering education and research at US universities. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2009, 5558–5564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galvič, P. Sustainability engineering education. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2006, 8, 24–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, V.; Haapala, K.R.; Rivera, J.L.; Hutchins, M.J.; Endres, W.J.; Gershenson, J.K.; Sutherland, J.W. Infusing sustainability principles into manufacturing/mechanical engineering curricula. J. Manuf. Syst. 2005, 24, 215–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perrenoud, P. La fabrication de l’excellence scolaire: Du curriculum aux pratiques d’évaluation, Genève, Droz; Librairie Droz: Geneva, Switzerland, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Rickinson, M.; Reid, A. Synthesis of research in higher education for sustainable development. In Routledge Handbook of Higher Education for Sustainable Development; Routledge: London, UK, 2015; pp. 142–160. [Google Scholar]
- Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021, 372, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Search Terms | Database | Results |
---|---|---|
(“sustainability” AND “engineering education” AND “curriculum”) | SCOPUS | 1060 |
(“sustainability” AND “engineering education” AND “curriculum”) | ERIC | 90 |
Article | Researchers’ Affiliated Country | University—Country of Assessed Curriculum |
---|---|---|
Sofri et al. (2023) [15] | Brunei Darussalam | From the top 300 2019 Quacquarelli Symonds ranking universities |
Jahan et al. (2022) [16] | USA | Rowan University—USA |
Gannon et al. (2022) [17] | USA and New Zealand | University in the USA |
Gomez-Martin et al. (2021) [18] | Spain | Universitat Politècnica de València—Spain |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021) [19] | Spain | Polytechnic University of Madrid (UPM), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC-BarcelonaTech), and University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU)—Spain |
Nikolić and Vukić (2021) [20] | Serbia | University of Novi Sad, University of Belgrade, University of Kragujevac, University of Nis, and University of Pris—Serbia |
Aginako and Guraya (2021) [21] | Spain | University of the Basque Country, Engineering school of Bilbao—Spain |
Damigos et al. (2021) [22] | Greece | Universities in Greece, Poland, and Slovakia |
Arefin et al. (2021) [23] | Bangladesh and Australia | Universities in Australia |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2020) [24] | Spain | Autonomous University of Madrid (UAM), University of Cádiz (UCA), University of Cordoba (UCO), International University of Catalonia (UIC), University of Seville (US), University of Salamanca (USAL), and Camilo José Cela University (UCJC)—Spain |
Qu et al. (2020) [25] | Australia and China | Tongling University—China |
Ashraf and Alanezi (2020) [26] | Saudi Arabia | Prince Mohammad Bin Fahd University—Saudi Arabia |
Alexa et al. (2020) [27] | Romania | Polytechnic University of Bucharest (UPB), Technical University of Civil Engineering of Bucharest (UTCB), Technical University of Cluj Napoca (TUCN), Technical University “Gheorghe Asachi” Iasi (TUIASI), and Polytechnic University of Timisoara (UPT)—Romania |
Akeel et al. (2019) [28] | Nigeria and UK | Universities in Nigeria |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2019) [29] | Spain | University of Córdoba (UCO), Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya–BarcelonaTech (UPC), and Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM)—Spain |
Trad (2019) [4] | Australia | University of Technology Sydney (UTS)—Australia |
Onyilo et al. (2019) [30] | Malaysia | Universities in Nigeria |
Rampasso et al. (2019) [3] | Brazil and Germany | Universities in Brazil |
Rubio et al. (2019) [31] | Spain | Universities in Spain |
Roure et al. (2018) [32] | Canada | Sherbooke University—Canada |
Colombo and Alves (2017) [33] | Brazil and Portugal | A Portuguese Public University—Portugal |
Thürer et al. (2018) [34] | China, Serbia, UK, and USA | N/A |
Arsat et al. (2017) [35] | Malaysia | University Teknologi Malaysia—Malaysia |
Nazzal et al. (2015) [36] | USA and UK | Highly ranked US universities—USA |
Watson et al. (2013) [37] | USA, Netherlands, and UK | Georgia Institute of Technology—USA |
Salem and Harb (2012) [38] | Lebanon | Notre Dame University—Lebanon |
Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) [39] | USA | 101 AEC programs—USA |
Murphy et al. (2009) [40] | USA | USA |
Galvič (2006) [41] | Slovenia | The 100 top universities in Europe and the USA |
Kumar et al. (2005) [42] | USA | Michigan Technological University—USA |
Method | Articles |
---|---|
Content analysis | [15,20,27,28,33,35,36,41] |
Engineering Sustainability Map | [19,24,29] |
Sustainability presence map | [19,24,29] |
Tracing sustainability learning outcomes within the faculty’s graduate attributes, subject learning outcomes, and assessment learning outcomes | [4] |
Survey/questionnaire | [3,16,17,19,21,25,26,32,36,37,38,39,40,42] |
Fuzzy Cognitive Maps | [22] |
Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model | [25] |
Systematic review | [3,4,20,23,30,34] |
STAUNCH (Sustainability Tool for Auditing University Curricula in Higher Education) | [18,37] |
TOPSIS | [3] |
Benchmarking | [31,40,42] |
Comparative analysis | [39] |
Interviews | [22,35] |
Students’ deliverables (quizzes, projects, etc.) | [26,36] |
Authorship | Method(s) Used | Advantages Expressed by the Authors of the Papers | Limitations or Challenges Expressed by the Authors of the Papers |
---|---|---|---|
Sofri et al. (2023), “Analysis of chemical engineering curriculum to improve process safety competency” [15] | Content analysis using Excel | N/A | N/A |
Jahan et al. (2022), “Integrating inclusivity and sustainability in civil engineering courses” [16] | Survey | N/A | N/A |
Gannon et al. (2022), “Engineering faculty views on sustainability and education research: Survey results and analyses” [17] | Survey | Effective in measuring engineering faculty support toward engineering education and sustainability education | N/A |
Gomez-Martin et al. (2021), “Boosting the sustainable development goals in a civil engineering bachelor degree program” [18] | STAUNCH (SDGS targets) | Systematic method that can be carried out in different bachelor’s degrees to find subjects that have the potential to incorporate the SDGs into their program | It is necessary to complete the analysis by surveying students on the degree of knowledge of the 2030 Agenda and the SDGs throughout the academic years, to be able to assess their increase in knowledge on the subject. |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021), “Tools for embedding and assessing sustainable development goals in engineering education” [19] | (a) Engineering Sustainability Map Questionnaire for teachers for the creation of a degree sustainability presence map (b) Questionnaire for students on self-perception of their sustainability training | Exportable tools to other disciplines with little adaptation of the tools Not only for the improvement of the sustainability competencies but to embed the SDGs in teaching | N/A |
Nikolić and Vukić (2021), “Sustainable development as a challenge of engineering education” [20] | (a) Systematic review (b) Content analysis/name related courses | N/A | N/A |
Aginako and Guraya (2021), “Students’ perception about sustainability in the engineering school of Bilbao (University of the Basque Country): Insertion level and importance” [21] | Survey | N/A | N/A |
Damigos et al. (2021), “The factors impacting the incorporation of the sustainable development goals into raw materials engineering curricula” [22] | Interviews and Fuzzy Cognitive Maps (FCMs) | FCMs are a popular method used for studying the structure and behavior of complex systems | N/A |
Arefin et al. (2021), “Incorporating sustainability in engineering curriculum: A study of the Australian universities” [23] | Systematic review | N/A | N/A |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2020), “Analysis of sustainability presence in Spanish higher education” [24] | Engineering Sustainability Map and sustainability presence map | As per the authors knowledge, this was conducted as the largest study to analyze the presence of sustainability in curricula | N/A |
Qu et al. (2020), “Applying sustainability into engineering curriculum under the background of “new engineering education”(NEE)” [25] | (a) Pre- and post-questionnaire surveys (b) Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model | N/A | N/A |
Ashraf and Alanezi (2020), “Incorporation of sustainability concepts into the engineering core program by adopting a micro curriculum approach: A case study in Saudi Arabia” [26] | Survey and students’ deliverables | N/A | N/A |
Alexa et al. (2020), “Engineers changing the world: Education for sustainability in Romanian technical universities-An empirical web-based content analysis” [27] | Content analysis (empirical analysis) | N/A | This study was limited to the content of the curricula and to the information retrieved from the universities’ public websites (the authors indicated that interviewing professors and students should be undertaken too to obtain better results). |
Akeel et al. (2019), “Assessing the sustainability content of the Nigerian engineering curriculum” [28] | Content analysis by using NVivo 11 Pro | N/A | This study is constrained by the problem of defining sustainability content. |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2019), “A methodology to analyze the presence of sustainability in engineering curricula. Case of study: Ten Spanish Engineering degree curricula” [29] | (a) Engineering Sustainability Map (b) Sustainability presence map | Such a diagnosis would reveal the areas in which teachers need more training and also enable the design of a training program aimed at covering the needs of each degree | For a given cell, it is known whether or not there is a presence but not how large this presence may be. A cell in the Engineering Sustainability Map may contain several learning outcomes. However, it is sufficient for a single learning outcome of the cell to be developed in a single subject of the degree in order to define the whole presence of the cell. In addition, the cell corresponds to a single domain level of a certain competency unit, although the fact that the cell is considered as “present” leads to both the presence of the competency unit and the presence of the related sustainability competency. That is, developing a single learning outcome results in the determination of the presence of competency and a competency unit in the degree, regardless of the number of subjects and hours that the degree dedicates to developing the learning outcome. The analysis presented was conducted on the basis of the degrees’ learning guides only. Therefore, activities different from those indicated in the learning guides could be undertaken by the subjects. |
Trad (2019), “A framework for mapping sustainability within tertiary curriculum” [4] | Tracing sustainability learning outcomes within the faculty’s graduate attributes, subject learning outcomes and assessment learning outcomes | It is an in-depth assessment method that analyzed detailed data | This method focused on tracing learning outcomes through the curriculum and did not take into consideration how learning and teaching takes place, which can promote or discourage ESD as well. |
Onyilo et al. (2019), “Sustainable development and sustainability in engineering education in Nigeria” [30] | Systematic review | N/A | N/A |
Rampasso et al. (2019), “Some of the challenges in implementing education for sustainable development: Perspectives from Brazilian engineering students” [3] | (a) Systematic review (b) Survey (c) TOPSIS | N/A | The data evaluated were only from 91 engineering students who completed the survey. |
Rubio et al. (2019), “Embedding sustainability competences into engineering education. The case of informatics engineering and industrial engineering degree programs at Spanish Universities” [31] | Benchmarking | Breadth of data collected and detailed description of the process and derived results, make the study valid. | (a) The analysis was carried out in specific years, 2014/15 and 2015/16 only. (b) The information was from learning guides (syllabi) only. (c) This study did not cover all Spanish universities. |
Roure et al. (2018), “Systematic curriculum integration of sustainable development using life cycle approaches” [32] | Survey | N/A | N/A |
Thürer et al. (2018), “A systematic review of the literature on integrating sustainability into engineering curricula” [34] | Systematic review | N/A | N/A |
Colombo and Alves (2017), Sustainability in engineering programs in a Portuguese public university” [33] | Content analysis by using Excel | N/A | This study was limited to the information from the official website. |
Arsat et al. (2017), “Integrating sustainability in a student-centered learning environment for engineering education” [35] | (a) Content analysis (b) Interviews | N/A | N/A |
Nazzal et al. (2015), “Introduction of sustainability concepts into industrial engineering education: A modular approach” [36] | (a) Before new modules: Content analysis (b) After new modules: Students’ deliverables and end-of-course surveys | (a) Maintaining communication with faculty members and students through surveys ensures more effective curriculum modification (b) Effective and applicable approach | This study was limited in scope. |
Watson et al. (2013), “Assessing curricula contribution to sustainability more holistically: Experiences from the integration of curricula assessment and students’ perceptions at the Georgia Institute of Technology” [37] | (a) STAUNCH (b) Two surveys | Both methods can be useful and provide a holistic overview for curricula assessments | STAUNCH results were based on the course documentation. It did not include SD education delivered in the classroom. |
Salem and Harb (2012), “Education for sustainable development: Assessment of the current situation at the faculty of Notre Dame University—Louaize” [38] | (a) Survey (b) Survey before and after courses | N/A | N/A |
Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011), “The pace of technological innovation in architecture, engineering and construction education: Integrating recent trends into the curricula” [39] | (a) Survey (b) Comparative analysis | N/A | N/A |
Murphy et al. (2009), “Sustainability in engineering education and research at U.S. universities” [40] | Benchmarking Survey | N/A | N/A |
Galvič (2006), “sustainability engineering education” [41] | Content analysis | N/A | This study included limited work. |
Kumar et al. (2005), “Infusing sustainability principles into manufacturing/mechanical engineering curricula” [42] | Benchmarking Survey | N/A | N/A |
Article | Findings from the Articles | Authors’ (Our) Interpretations |
---|---|---|
Sofri et al. (2023) [15] | Sustainability was demonstrated as a new process safety topic in undergraduate chemical engineering programs. The goal of including sustainability topics in the process safety chemical engineering curriculum is to raise students’ knowledge of how industrial activities contribute to environmental issues like climate change and ozone depletion. | The content analysis evaluated the presence of sustainability in chemical engineering curricula in many QS-ranked universities to raise students’ awareness and knowledge to understand environmental issues. |
Jahan et al. (2022) [16] | The outcomes derived from the sustainability content incorporated into specific courses displayed a consistent pattern. Among the courses, namely Statics, Solid Mechanics, Surveying, and CEE Systems, scores were below 80% when compared to the remaining courses. It is noteworthy that all these courses are at the sophomore level, with the first three carrying two credits each. Despite this, the overall findings are positive, particularly in the case of junior-level core courses, where students affirm that the curriculum effectively introduces them to sustainability and green engineering concepts. | The survey focused on one university and evaluated the presence of sustainability. It allowed the authors to assess how students perceive sustainability concepts after the introduction of courses. |
Gannon et al. (2022) [17] | The survey successfully assessed the level of support from engineering faculty for both engineering education research and sustainability education. Additionally, the survey included items that contributed to gauging attitudes toward climate change, teaching methods, curriculum, and the implementation of research-driven pedagogies. The study provided statistical analyses of the survey’s structure, along with recommendations for its continued development and potential applications. | The survey focused on one university and measured engineering educators’ attitudes and dispositions toward engineering education research and sustainability education. |
Gomez-Martin et al. (2021) [18] | Forty-five courses (75%) addressed or had the potential to address targets covering the 17 SDGs. | The STAUNCH method proved to be a useful tool to assess sustainability’s presence at their university. |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021) [19] | In this study, it was found that only just over a quarter of the SDG learning objectives existed in all engineering degrees. Two SDGs (SDG 2 and SDG 14) lack appropriate learning objectives within any engineering degree. To address this shortfall, the Engineering Sustainability Map incorporates certain learning outcomes that may not directly align with SDG learning objectives but are pertinent to the SDGs. Consequently, the Engineering Sustainability Map complements the UNESCO document, contributing to the fulfillment of SDGs from both engineering and technological perspectives. | This paper describes three tools that the authors developed as part of a large project on SDGs and which were validated to be used in the project. |
Nikolić and Vukić (2021) [20] | From the international context, there are two main ways to integrate sustainability: designing special courses dedicated to sustainable development or an integrative approach. Challenges include a lack of space for new courses, the complexity of the issues, insufficient teaching staff knowledge, and resistance to change. In Serbia, the analysis of the engineering curricula showed that courses dedicated to sustainable development were found at all levels (undergraduate, master, doctoral), as well as within the specialist, applied, and integrated studies, and they are almost equally represented in undergraduate and master’s studies. Sustainable development courses at the undergraduate level are typically studied during either the second or fourth academic year. Most courses related to sustainable development are elective. | A systematic review was conducted to explore the approaches of integrating sustainability in engineering programs globally. Furthermore, content analysis was performed to analyze sustainability’s presence in the engineering curricula in Serbia. |
Aginako and Guraya (2021) [21] | The authors found that sustainability is hardly inserted in the assessed programs. The authors showed that the environmental dimension had the highest result in being integrated in the programs. | The survey method assessed sustainability’s presence at one university. |
Damigos et al. (2021) [22] | The authors highlighted the importance of the various stakeholders’ respective roles in forging a sustained cooperation for enhancing the curricula, which can in turn enhance cooperation and interest, leading to improved SDG fulfillment. All stakeholders agreed that it is crucial to integrate sustainability in the engineering curriculum. The stakeholders equally agreed that the existing curriculum lacks transferrable presentation skills, which should be addressed urgently to allow the integration of multidisciplinary project implementation. It became apparent that RM engineers, like all other engineers, require comprehensive knowledge of sustainability principles, presentations and transferable skills, innovative thinking, and strong professional attitudes. A number of simulations were then conducted to ascertain the correlation between industry needs and SDGs, as the external sector, and university environmental factors, as the internal sector, related to faculty knowledge about SDGs and their inclusion in courses. Internships were a critical link between both sectors and a serious improvement is needed to integrate SD in the curriculum as only a few courses provided the basics of SD principles. The latter should be actively integrated and embedded in as many technical courses as possible. The FCM method was used for the first time to evaluate SD principles, which created the possibility to assess the fifteen factors identified by the stakeholders in the RM whole value chain SDGs–education–innovation eco-system. | FCMs are a tool that needs further validation to be used widely as they provide a comprehensive assessment of sustainability in teaching. The interviews complimented the FCM to explore the educational needs and challenges of achieving the SDGs. |
Arefin et al. (2021) [23] | The literature highlighted that Australian universities are taking this matter seriously. Most of them successfully incorporated sustainability and the remaining universities are in the process of incorporating sustainability in the engineering program. | The systematic review played a critical role in evaluating sustainability’s presence in many universities in Australia. |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2020) [24] | The results of the study showed that many courses have developed sustainability courses to a given degree. The results varied from one university to another. | Through the dual methods of Engineering Sustainability Maps and sustainability presence maps, sustainability’s presence was investigated in many universities. |
Qu et al. (2020) [25] | The authors depicted that, following the new curriculum’s implementation, there were significant changes in attitudes and knowledge. | The effectiveness of applying sustainability to the engineering curricula was evaluated using pre- and post-questionnaire surveys as well as a Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation model. |
Ashraf and Alanezi (2020) [26] | The authors concluded that stand-alone courses focusing on sustainability are the most effective strategy. | Survey and students’ deliverables helped in determining the effectiveness of stand-alone courses needed to promote sustainability. |
Alexa et al. (2020) [27] | The results showed that there are discrepancies in the number of sustainability-related courses among universities, faculties, and degrees. For example, master’s courses integrate sustainability more than bachelor’s courses. | The content analysis (empirical analysis) helped in investigating sustainability’s presence in many universities. |
Akeel et al. (2019) [28] | The results revealed that the Nigerian engineering curricula suffer from a low sustainability content with more focus on environmental concepts versus social topics. | The content analysis helped in investigating sustainability’s presence in many universities. |
Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2019) [29] | The findings suggested that the competency least prevalent across all degrees in terms of sustainability is “participation in community processes that promote sustainability”, registering an average presence of 23.3%. Conversely, the most prevalent competency is the “application of ethical principles related to the values of sustainability in personal and professional behavior”, with an average presence of 76.6%. On average, sustainability-related learning outcomes exhibit a presence of 52.1%, indicating that roughly half of the learning outcomes (cells) in the ten Engineering Sustainability Maps are not addressed in the degrees under examination. | Through the dual methods of Engineering Sustainability Maps and sustainability presence maps, sustainability’s presence was investigated in many universities. |
Trad (2019) [4] | From the Student Outcomes (SOs), it was found that declared education for sustainable development (ESD) outcomes comprised 22.4% of undergraduate courses within the Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology (FEIT). A more thorough investigation, which included evaluating subject content and student experiences for the seven ESD outcomes, revealed a 7.7% integration of sustainability into FEIT undergraduate courses. The tables that were generated using SPSS illustrated the distribution of individual competencies across the duration of course candidature. Lifecycle assessment was obviously absent from the curriculum. | The method used traced sustainability learning outcomes through the engineering curriculum. However, as it only involved one university used as a case study, the outcomes are limited in value and cannot be generalized. |
Onyilo et al. (2019) [30] | The findings indicated a lack of awareness about ESD even among engineering stakeholders. Scholars globally have employed approaches like modular/Bolt-in, Project-Based Learning (PBL), Integrative Learning, Problem Project-Based Learning (PPBL), among others to infuse sustainability into their engineering education programs. These approaches could be implemented as stand-alone courses or integrated into existing programs. The authors suggested that institutions and faculties planning to integrate sustainability could consider adopting any of these approaches. | The systematic review was used to assess the level of awareness of SD and the approaches adopted to integrate sustainability in Nigeria. |
Rampasso et al. (2019) [3] | TOPSIS revealed the following challenges: ‘Sustainable issues debated only in specific disciplines in a limited extent’; ‘Difficulty to integrate disciplines for the broad teaching of sustainability’; ‘Lack of practical and real examples of how sustainability can be embedded in the specific context of the course’; and ‘Activities and examples presented focus exclusively on environmental issues’. The authors concluded that Brazilian universities have to make a big effort to integrate sustainability in their engineering courses. | The combined methodology of a systematic review, survey, and TOPSIS was used to analyze the challenges of integrating sustainability in Brazil. |
Rubio et al. (2019) [31] | The authors found great diversity in how sustainability competences had been integrated in the curricula. There were extended variations between both degrees in what they included in the relationship to the to the Key dimensions. For example, whilst informatics significantly lacks environmental dimensions, industry lacks the ethical dimension. This extended variation was equally found when the holistic and systematic integration of sustainability in the curricula was assessed by evaluating the number and type of courses offered that include them in their syllabuses. One noticeable finding is that not a single university in either discipline managed to cover all four key dimensions. | Benchmarking was used to investigate many degrees in Spanish universities. |
Roure et al. (2018) [32] | The results indicated an 85% positive response rate, reflecting engineering students’ appreciation for the introduced SD modules. The capstone project yielded the most favorable outcomes, highlighting the students’ ability to apply their SD knowledge at this stage. | The survey helped in evaluating the curriculum in one university. |
Colombo and Alves (2017) [33] | The authors investigated the integrated master’s programs, which were then categorized as “Strongest” (comprising three programs, equivalent to 20% of the total), “Medium” (consisting of six programs, or 40%), and “Weakest” (with six programs falling into this group, making up the remaining 40%). Regarding master’s programs (second cycle), 3 were designated as “Strongest” (constituting 11%), 7 as “Medium” (accounting for 26%), and 17 as “Weakest” (representing 63%). In the case of doctoral programs, 3 were classified under the “Strongest” category (making up 13%), 4 as “Medium” (17%), and 17 programs lacked any sustainability approach, placing them in the “Weakest” category (constituting 71%). | The content analysis helped in evaluating sustainability’s presence in one university. |
Thürer et al. (2018) [34] | The analysis led to the identification of twelve prospective research questions. The aim was to address these questions and, in turn, improve education, ensuring that engineers are well-equipped, actively involved, and empowered to address the environmental, social, and economic challenges of the 21st century. | The systematic review was used to assess the integration of SD in engineering curricula globally. |
Arsat et al. (2017) [35] | The analysis of the results followed a systematic approach, categorizing them into three factors: input, throughput, and output. The study then revealed three primary findings: (1) the complete implementation of sustainability is lacking across all engineering courses, (2) a student-centered learning environment should provide a platform for integrating sustainability without compromising technical and engineering content, and (3) when implemented, the integration of sustainability is focused on one pillar, specifically the environmental aspect. | The content analysis helped in evaluating sustainability’s presence in one university, which was complemented by interviews. |
Nazzal et al. (2015) [36] | The authors concluded that the positive response from the students confirms that the introduced approach had indeed made a positive impact, demonstrating its effectiveness and practical applicability. | The content analysis helped in evaluating sustainability’s presence in many universities before introducing SD modules. Post implementing SD modules, surveys were conducted to assess their success. |
Watson et al. (2013) [37] | The STAUNCH results revealed a predominant focus on environmental issues in the courses, suggesting a potential need for enhanced depth of coverage. The results from student surveys aligned with the curriculum assessment, although discrepancies were noted specifically in relation to social issues. Employing both assessment methods offered a comprehensive perspective on the impact of engineering courses and degrees on sustainability. This dual approach helped identify disparities between the sustainability content outlined in the syllabus and its actual implementation in the classroom. | The STAUNCH method and the two conducted surveys proved to be a useful method to assess sustainability’s presence at their university. |
Salem and Harb (2012) [38] | The results highlighted the limited courses on offer for sustainability, of which most of them are offered by the department of civil and environmental engineering. In addition, they do not adequately educate students about the institution’s role in social and ecological systems. Furthermore, the analysis of the survey completed by the students before taking the courses showed that there is a need to add a new mandatory course about environmental knowledge, values, and ideas (results after courses are not available). | The survey was used to identify the challenges and to assess the current status of SD in the curricula. |
Becerik-Gerber et al. (2011) [39] | The results showed that discrepancies exist in the 101 US AEC educational programs, necessitating a reorientation to cultivate a future workforce capable of spearheading transformations in the AEC industry. | The survey was used to identify factors related to SD. Then, a comparative analysis was conducted to ascertain similarities and differences between the programs. |
Murphy et al. (2009) [40] | Sustainable engineering is at a critical stage, with significant grassroots activity in education and research. The benchmarking was used as an inventory of what is currently available and can serve as a resource as standards develop in classifying courses under four specific categories: sustainable engineering courses, traditional engineering courses with sustainable engineering content, cross-disciplinary courses offered jointly with a non-engineering department, and sustainable engineering technology courses which address technologies viewed as enabling sustainability. | Benchmarking was used to investigate sustainability’s presence in the programs in many universities. |
Galvič (2006) [41] | Universities continue to uphold courses rooted in traditional approaches like pollution and control. Sustainability has been incorporated into undergraduate programs, while in postgraduate studies, it is available as a module with multiple associated courses. | Content analysis was used to investigate sustainability’s presence in the curricula in many universities. |
Kumar et al. (2005) [42] | This paper suggests that the ideas presented should serve as a guideline for curriculum development, with each university’s culture and educational objectives determining its vision for its manufacturing/mechanical engineering curriculum. The authors believe that integrating sustainability into engineering curricula, including course development and faculty engagement, will help students to better understand the world around them. | A survey and benchmarking were used to investigate sustainability’s presence and barriers in one university. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Nakad, M.; Gardelle, L.; Abboud, R.J. A Systematic Review of the Different Methods Assessing Sustainability Integration in Engineering Curricula. Sustainability 2024, 16, 4549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114549
Nakad M, Gardelle L, Abboud RJ. A Systematic Review of the Different Methods Assessing Sustainability Integration in Engineering Curricula. Sustainability. 2024; 16(11):4549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114549
Chicago/Turabian StyleNakad, Mantoura, Linda Gardelle, and Rami J. Abboud. 2024. "A Systematic Review of the Different Methods Assessing Sustainability Integration in Engineering Curricula" Sustainability 16, no. 11: 4549. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16114549