Guidelines to improve engineering education for sustainability through transdisciplinarity learning processes

Actions for sustainability are promoted from the different areas of environment, society, technology and economy, with the common aspiration to face interconnected crises in a world that can no longer be conceived as “society without nature and nature without society”. From this imperative for the integration of epistemics, university is called to restructuring boundaries and processes to properly serve society. Given that engineering principles are aligned with that logic, it is argued that engineering education (EE) have to evolve to being engineering-problem oriented and further developed into socio-technically oriented. Transdisciplinarity emerged in this context pursuing integration of academic and practical or traditional knowledge outside the academia, to co-produce outcomes both socially robust and transferable, that is, useful for transitioning and scientifically innovative to formulate new guiding principles. In order to improve engineering education in sustainability (EESD) through transdisciplinary learning approaches, we performed a three phases research. Firstly, we analysed how sustainability was approached in EE, through a co-word analysis and characterization of the keywords’ networks of three relevant journals in the EESD field. The journal networks evolution analysis suggested that social concern in engineering is growing. The keywords characterisation showed relevant categories being related to transdisciplinary education strategies for applying sustainability and to cross-boundary schemes. Finally, a modularity analysis showed that keywords related to transdisciplinarity spread throughout all the areas of knowledge addressed by the journals, indicating a widening interest. The second phase studied how emergent EESD initiatives were approached from transdisciplinarity discourses. Most of them fitted in the problem-solving discourse, where co-production of knowledge and method-driven aspects are also relevant. Deepening this discourse, most initiatives corresponded to the real- world argument promoting science-society collaboration in societal problems (EU contexts); others looked for convergence of sciences in pursuit of human well-being (innovation argument, US contexts); and some initiatives brought together students and entities in a team-based learning process with social purpose (transcendent interdisciplinary research-TIR argument). None of the initiatives fitted the transgression discourse, attempting to reformulate the establishment, no longer for society but with society. The last phase consisted in the implementation of a transdisciplinary learning environment experience in a 5 ETCS course of the UPC Master degree in Sustainability Science and Technology. Civil organisations, students and educators undertook collaborative research on real-life sustainability case studies, following two cycles of action-reflection. While the course mainly fitted in the real-world argument of problem solving, service learning and CampusLab schemes also reproduced team-based learning with societal purpose (TIR argument). The transgression discourse was addressed through service learning focusing on social justice. Some students engaged further as professional researchers-activists. Additionally, a well- valued Emotional Intelligence module was developed to help students face some process paralyzing uncertainties. From the lessons learned, we proposed a set of fundamental features to be considered for an effective scheme for a transdisciplinary approach in EESD, methodically framing the science-society discourse on the issue at stake: work in real-world complex problems; involve diverse disciplines and fields cooperation; involve science-society cooperation and mutual learning processes; integrate types of knowledge; rely on disciplinary and cross-disciplinary practices

Gemma Tejedor1, Anna-Karin Högfeldt2, Jordi Segalas1, Lena Gumaelius2

Two contemporary academic movements can be argued to be important for the integration of more field- practice- and cross disciplinary team-based learning experiences into the engineering education curriculum. Firstly, the growth of research in sustainability challenges in combination with the need for change in engineering education, which is seen to evolve from environmental focus to the inclusion of social and transdisciplinary approaches. Secondly, the evolution of engineering education in general: from traditional and instructive to student centered, constructive and practice oriented as well as from isolated and exclusive to an inter-twined part of society, where society’s need for “socially responsible future entrepreneurs, innovators and leaders”. This implies that all engineers need to be equipped with knowledge, skills, values and experiences in order to meet the needs of society. Challenge driven education (CDE) is an evolving concept that can bridge engineering and sustainability. In the challenge driven education, students are working on real-life and often real-time challenges in society and industry. The students work with open-ended, ill-defined problems that do not have a single right answer. With the challenge driven education approach, the aim is to position ideas, innovations and decision making in the forefront of the learning process. InnoEnergy is a transnational educational initiative supported by the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT). From the investigation made on the integration of CDE in seven international and cross- border InnoEnergy Masters’ programs, the need appeared for a common understanding on CDE within the knowledge innovation community. The investigation aimed to explore: the perceived drivers and barriers for CDE; the different approaches for integrating CDE in the seven masters’ programs; and the perceived scope for CDE mapped to the achievement of competences for sustainability. Preliminary findings showed that there was a common core of successful initiation of the integration of the CDE approach, although differently in the seven masters’ programs, from different perceptions of CDE for sustainability within the community. Furthermore, the findings revealed a narrow view of sustainability, where the concept is implicitly integrated or “obviously” in some programs with a intend at finding more sustainable energy solutions. An InnoEnergy CDE White Paper has been elaborated, setting the goal for the future progress of challenge driven InnoEnergy MSc education. The paper contributes the definition behind this concept and a strategy on the future development, as well as some best practices of the work so far. Furthermore, the overarching learning outcomes for EIT programs and the UNESCO cross-cutting key competences needed for problem solving for sustainable development, have been merged as new expected outcomes, so that intended learning outcomes based on both perspectives are developed

Sustainability Education in the Spanish Higher Education System: Faculty Practice, Concerns and Needs

This article presents the results of the EDINSOST project in relation to the university faculty’s practice concerns and the need to embed sustainability education in the Spanish Higher Education system. Four questions were devised to determine (1) which conceptions the university faculty has about sustainability in the context of the Spanish higher education (2) what sustainability competencies the university faculty holds (3) the ways in which sustainability teaching strategies are implemented and (4) the ways in which practical coursework related to sustainability is undertaken in a Spanish university context. The methodology that was applied was comprised of a discourse analysis of faculty focus groups. To that end, a category system and a focus group implementation protocol were designed and validated, as well as processes of construct elaboration based on the analysis of the focus groups’ discourses. Among the most relevant contributions stemming from the research questions regarding the faculty’s assumptions was the evidence that the holistic conception of sustainability is not addressed in all its dimensions and the environmental dimension is overemphasised. The need for training to teach sustainability competencies and the faculty’s lack of awareness were also identified. As far as sustainability teaching strategies are concerned, project-based learning prevails, with service-learning emerging as the most effective strategy, even though its application is hindered by faculty training gaps. Finally, the absence of sustainability in teaching guides and study plans and the scarce institutional support for establishing sustainability as a strategic subject in the university were significant findings

Educating engineers for/in sustainable development? What we knew, what we learned, and what we should learn

In the past decade, several engineering universities, mainly in Europe, but also in Australia, North America, and Japan, have been addressing the issue of sustainable development. Engineering education in sustainable development has been discussed at many occasions. What questions have been addressed, what answers have been provided, and what are the main remaining topics for research into engineering education in sustainable development? What should engineers learn regarding sustainable development? How to trigger institutional change within engineering schools: top-down or bottom-up? How to trigger cultural change, how to win the hearts and souls of the faculty? Curriculum change: starting new programs or changing existing ones? The contribution of active learning and project based learning? The role of external stakeholders, external cooperation? How to measure sustainable development learning effects? Practice what you preach: how to green the campus, diminish resource consumption and sustainabilise procurement? How to teach normative content in an academic context? The paper, based mainly on the European literature on EESD of the last decade, discusses the answers that were provided and present an agenda for further research in EESD (This paper has mainly a European perspective. An overview of sustainable development engineering education in the USA can be found in [80]

Selection and framing of briefs for educational circular design projects

© 2021, Emerald Publishing Limited.Purpose: This paper aims to present key characteristics of educational design briefs for the circular economy (CE) through the analysis of 11 design briefs focussing on real-life challenges related to sustainability and the CE, developed with collaborating industry partners for four consecutive circular design internships conducted in Ireland, Catalunya, The Netherlands and Sweden. Design/methodology/approach: These four internships were conducted between September 2017 and June 2019 and each internship lasted three to four months. The supervisors for each internship collaborated with local industry partners genuinely interested in adopting sustainable business practices to develop design briefs focussing on real-life challenges they face. The briefs for each internship were developed further according to the feedback of the interns, industry partners and supervisors of previous internships. Findings: Five steps of brief making for circular design were identified as reviewing the existing resources, emphasizing the importance of systems thinking, emphasizing the importance of collaboration for the CE, focussing on circularity and communicating expectations. The paper outlines how design briefs changed throughout the consecutive internships according to the different curricula and the characteristics of an educational circular design brief. Originality/value: For design educators and researchers, the value of this paper lies in presenting the steps for the brief making of educational circular design projects. Additionally, the characteristics of circular design briefs are outlined, discussing their focus and content to act as a guide for design educators

Selection and framing of briefs for educational circular design projects

Purpose: This paper aims to present key characteristics of educational design briefs for the circular economy (CE) through the analysis of 11 design briefs focussing on real-life challenges related to sustainability and the CE, developed with collaborating industry partners for four consecutive circular design internships conducted in Ireland, Catalunya, The Netherlands and Sweden. Design/methodology/approach: These four internships were conducted between September 2017 and June 2019 and each internship lasted three to four months. The supervisors for each internship collaborated with local industry partners genuinely interested in adopting sustainable business practices to develop design briefs focussing on real-life challenges they face. The briefs for each internship were developed further according to the feedback of the interns, industry partners and supervisors of previous internships. Findings: Five steps of brief making for circular design were identified as reviewing the existing resources, emphasizing the importance of systems thinking, emphasizing the importance of collaboration for the CE, focussing on circularity and communicating expectations. The paper outlines how design briefs changed throughout the consecutive internships according to the different curricula and the characteristics of an educational circular design brief. Originality/value: For design educators and researchers, the value of this paper lies in presenting the steps for the brief making of educational circular design projects. Additionally, the characteristics of circular design briefs are outlined, discussing their focus and content to act as a guide for design educators