Sustainability competency: Anticipatory; Integrated problem-solving; Strategic; Systems thinking.
Related SDGs: SDG 4 (Quality education); SDG 13 (Climate action).
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Adapt and repurpose learning outcomes; Authentic assessment; Active pedagogies and mindset development.
Who is this article for?:⯠This article should be read by educators at all levels of higher education looking to embed and integrate ESD into curriculum, module, and / or programme design.
Learning and Teaching Notes:
Supported by AdvanceHE, this Toolkit provides a structured approach to integrating Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) into higher education curricula. It uses the CRAFTS methodology and empowers educators to enhance their modules and programs with sustainability competencies aligned with UN Sustainable Development Goals.
Key Features:
⢠Five-Phase Process: Analyse stakeholder needs, map current provision, reflect on opportunities for development, redesign with an ESD focus, and create an action plan for continuous enhancement.
⢠Practical Tools: Includes templates for stakeholder analysis, module planning, active learning activities, and evaluation.
⢠Flexible Implementation: Designed for use at both module and programme level.
⢠Competency-Based: Focuses on developing authentic learning experiences across cognitive, socio-emotional, and behavioural domains.
Benefits
⢠Identify stakeholder sustainability needs
⢠Map existing ESD elements in your curriculum
⢠Reflect on opportunities to enhance ESD integration
⢠Redesign modules with active learning approaches of ESD
⢠Create actionable plans for implementation and evaluation
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Authors: Dr. Kieran Higgins (Ulster University); Dr. Alison Calvert (Queenās University Belfast).
Who is this article for?: This article should be read by module coordinators, programme directors, and teaching teams in higher education who want to meaningfully integrate ESD into their curriculum design and delivery.
Itās always a struggle to get started on something new in the time- and resource-poor environment that is higher education. Sustainability can become just another box to tick rather than the world-changing priority it should be.
We knew there was more to ESD than simply labelling a module handbook with the SDG logos, especially when it was only SDG4 because it happens to mention education. There was a need to become familiar and comfortable with a deeper perspective on the SDGs and their related targets and indicators ā without becoming intimidated by them. ESD should prepare students to tackle unforeseen challenges and navigate complex systems, rather than focusing on content alone. As higher education professionals, we recognised the inherent challenges of this.
As a result, we developed our CRAFTS (Co-Designing Reflective Approaches for the Teaching of Sustainability) model of curriculum design, based on an adaptation of Design Thinking, to provide a structured and usable, yet accessible, flexible, and not discipline-specific means of embedding and embodying ESD in the curriculum. We were then approached by AdvanceHE to develop this further into a practical, systematic resource that would empower educators to take genuine ownership of sustainability in their teaching and assessment.
The Toolkit helps tackle these issues in a straightforward way by breaking them down into five stages.
First, it shows how to analyse what stakeholders like students, employers and accrediting bodies want and need from a module when it comes to sustainability.
Then, it guides educators to map exactly what is being taught as the curriculum stands, aligning it to the SDGs and the ESD Competencies. This is a moment of real relief for many people, who discover that much of what they already do aligns perfectly with ESD.
After that, thereās a guided reflection to see where stronger integration might happen or where superficial coverage can be expanded into something more meaningful.
The redesign process helps to embed active learning and authentic assessments and finishes off with an action plan for moving forward and measuring impact for future evaluation.
We find it heartening to watch colleagues pivot from feeling like ESD is an add-on to realising it can enhance what they already do. Instead of worrying that they must become experts in every single SDG, the Toolkit reminds them that authentic engagement with a few well-chosen goals can lead to the deeper kind of learning we all aspire to provide.
This personal, reflective approach has helped academics overcome the sense that sustainability in the curriculum is an overwhelming requirement. They see it as a powerful lens through which students learn to handle uncertainty, become resilient critical thinkers and gain the confidence to tackle real-world problems.
We hope the Toolkit continues to spark conversations and encourage more creative approaches to ESD across disciplines. We don’t believe thereās a one-size-fits-all solution. It has been inspiring to see colleagues reclaim that sense of possibility and excitement, reassured that teaching for a sustainable future can be woven into what theyāre already doing ā just with an extra layer of intentionality and reflection.
If youāre looking for a way to bring ESD into your own classroom, we hope the Toolkit will be a reliable companion on that journey.
Dr Kieran Higgins (Lecturer in Higher Education Practice, Ulster University) and Dr Alison Calvert (Senior Lecturer in Biological Sciences, Queenās University Belfast) have collaborated on Education for Sustainable Development projects for over 4 years, drawing on extensive and wide ranging experiences of higher education and sustainability. Their vision is of transformed global higher education curricula that empowers all graduates, regardless of discipline or career path, to become champions of a sustainable future.
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Have YOU used the Sustainability Toolkit? Weāre trying to understand the impact that this educational resource has had since its launch in March 2024. Understanding impact is key to our ability to further develop and expand the Toolkitās reach.Ā
You can help us by answering a few quick questions (below) and by forwarding this questionnaire to anyone you know who might also have used the Sustainability Toolkit. There is no deadline for submitting this form; we are interested in your ongoing experiences.
If you would be interested in contributing a blog on teaching sustainability or your use of the Sustainability Toolkit, please contact Sarah Hitt for further discussion.
“Engineers are uniquely equipped to help achieve the UNās 17 Sustainable Development Goals.
The United Nationsā 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) represent a holistic approach to global progress, demanding a united effort to eradicate poverty and inequality alongside advancements in health, education, and sustainable economic growth. Recognizing the interconnectedness of these challenges, the SDGs emphasize tackling climate change and environmental degradation to ensure a viable future.
Engineering for One Planet (EOP) aligns with this vision by equipping future engineers with the necessary expertise to address these complex, interrelated issues. Through this focus, EOP directly contributes to achieving the UNās ambitious agenda for a more sustainable future.” – Engineering for One Planet
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Mike Murray, [Senior Teaching Fellow in Construction Management], discusses how he developed and implemented a teaching resource in the Sustainability Toolkit, and what heās learned from integrating it into his modules over the years.
It has been said that āpedagogical innovation stems from very personal origins within the university teacher, who appears to seek to move towards their pedagogical idealā (Walder, 2014). So, please bear with me as I travel back along the path to where the story begins.Ā
I introduced the coursework on Developing Intercultural Competence in my Engineering and Society module in 2015, and nine years on I am unable to recall why! It may have been an epiphany. I now carry a notepad in case I forget. I travel to university by train, and this affords an opportunity to gaze through the picture frame windows at the Perthshire countryside, and to daydream. Some of my best pedagogical interventions have been developed on train journeys, and more often than not they are informed by my readings of books and papers (and highlighting, see my penchant for stationery later!) on pedagogy in higher education. So, the intervention was not a macro-level programme intervention, it was not a meso-level case of Action Research, rather it was bottom-up micro-level, a do-it-yourself, intuitive pedagogy. No permission requested, no questions asked. Indeed, many of the teaching resources in the Sustainability Toolkit fall into this category. I rather like the idea of punk, guerilla, and pirate pedagogy (Murray,2023).Ā However, on reflecting on the matter, I can see that my fascination with internationalising the curriculum has been a slow burner.Ā Ā
Ā
“We’re all Jock Tamson’s Bairns”Ā
This is a colloquial conversational term used in Scotland to denote that we are all the same; we are all equal. On a global scale it suggests we are all world citizens. It has resonance with the UNSustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and it sits comfortably in my outlook on life. It reflects my own maxim for academics in higher education- to treat each student as if they were your son, daughter, niece or nephew. That is, I have sought to reduce the power that I am granted as an expert and to see my students as co-learners travelling the same path. This is not a case of āsparing the rod to spoil the childā, it is not about ākilling my students by kindnessā, it is not about encouraging student to satisfice. Rather, it is a belief that universities should not be a sort of exam factory schooling that depends on many sages on the stages. I seek to introduce my students to the spirit and soul of learning, to ālearn along the wayā, to focus on the journey and not solely the destination. In these learning spaces, students can develop habits of mind consistent with lifelong learners such as curiosity about the world and other cultures and people.Ā Ā
This then is an apt moment to explain the title of this blog. The quote is taken from the Scottish novelist and travel writer Robert Louis Stevenson, grandson of lighthouse builder Robert Stevenson.Ā For me, it says something about how we should look upon our planet and its people. Whilst it would be naively optimistic to suggest that our planet has no travel boundaries (i.e. North Korea) we all have something in common given we share space on our planets surface. This is everyoneās link to humanity. Whilst our cultures and customers may be different, we are global citizens on planet earth.Ā
Ā
My Internationalisation at homeĀ
My journey to intercultural competence started long before I reached university. As a sixteen-year-old apprentice plumber attending Perth Technical College (1980-1984), I witnessed students from Uganda, Iran, and Iraq, who were enrolled on an air training course. Whilst I recall being somewhat envious of these students, thinking that they were cool and quite exotic, I know now they must have had their own issues settling into studies in a foreign country. My next exposure to international students came when I was a lecturer at North East Surrey College of Technology (1988-1992). In addition to my teaching role, I was a live in warden in a small student hostel, accommodating twelve male students each year. With students from Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Lesotho, my knowledge of the African continent was enhanced.Ā Ā
In my current role at Strathclyde I was involved in a European Union (EU) Tempus project (2004-2006) to establish a MSc Construction Management programme for the Department of Civil Engineering, University of Aleppo, Syria. Visting Syria, and hosting academics and students from Syria in Scotland, was a lesson in the generous hospitality extended to guests in Muslim societies. The project also involved partner academics from universities in France and Germany and all meetings were undertaken with a great sense of collegiality and conviviality. This project conveyed a sense of ābrotherhoodā in learning, and a mission to improve industry practice and society in Syria.Ā It was a great sense of personal disappointment to me when the war in Syria began in 2011, and thereafter when the UK populace voted to leave the EU in 2016. Of late, my students who hail from Syria, and the Ukraine (with refugee status) have helped my first-year students to see past the media coverage of their countries as only war-torn.Ā Ā
These episodes, and others, have shaped my professional interest in internationalisation. I have a healthy disrespect for treating our international guests as ācash cowsā for UK Higher Education. In 2014 I established an International Society for students in the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department, with associated annual events (Robert Burns lunch) and a social calendar with visits to engineering projects. And in 2015 I introduced the internationalisation at home coursework for my first-year students.Ā
Ā
Flags, Flags, FlagsĀ
Since 2015 the coursework has involved 147 international mentors, representing sixty nationalities*. Reading the list, I imagine the flags of these countries on poles, fluttering proudly in the wind above my university campus, a symbolic image that conveys a sense of a āUnited Nationsā. Given the revised coursework brief places added importance on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) it is important to recognise the disparity that is evident in this list vis-Ć -vis the SDGs. There are significant complexities and contradictions in hosting internation students from countries who are at war with each other, who have opposing religious and / or political views, who hail from countries damaged by climate change because of another countryās pollution. I have to confess that to date I have avoided this arena. I have not courted conflict and sought out divergent views on global issues. I have assumed (wrongly!) that all students are somewhat neutral.Ā Ā
When I heard that the Sustainability Toolkit was seeking examples of coursework that integrates ESD and the SDGs in engineering, I was eager to share this resource. Now, I hope others can learn from my experience as well as from the challenges I faced in implementing it and the lessons Iāve learned in doing so.Ā
*Afghanistan, Angola, Australia, AustriaĀ Bulgaria, Brazil, Canada, China, Croatia, Democratic Republic Congo, Egypt, Ethiopia Eritrea, Estonia, Ghana, Hungary, Finland, France, Germany, Guyana, Greece, India, Indonesia, Iran, Italy, Ireland, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lithuanian, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malta, Malaysia Netherlands, Nepal, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Pakistan, Poland, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Switzerland, Syria, Turks and Caicos Islands, , USA, Ukraine, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe.Ā
Ā
Time for ReflectionĀ
Academic writing for publication is typically peer reviewed by critical friends. The process for submitting resources to the Toolkit was no different and has been subject to a āreview-revise-resubmitā process. This afforded an opportunity for self-reflection and to improve the coursework brief. The revised brief bolsters the link between Intercultural Competence (IC) and ESDthrough more explicit cognizance of SDGs. Moreover, given the original purpose of the coursework was to improve students IC, the revised coursework has a symbiotic link to engaging students in a decolonisation of the engineering curriculum, and for them to consider social justice and climate justice in engineering practice.Ā
Ā
ChallengesĀ
Post-Brexit, there are fewer EU students across our undergraduate programmes. Over the past nine years I have sought assistance from students studying on our MSc & PhD programmes. However, a sizeable number of these students do not have an undergraduate civil engineering qualification. With a little persuasion, I explain to these students that they only require a general tourist guidebook knowledge of their home countries buildings and infrastructure.Ā With the revised coursework brief putting more emphasis on theSDGs, it is to be expected that the conversations between students will become more exploratory.Ā
The international mentors include students from across our programmes. It is not possible to coordinate the various timetables for them to meet the first-year students in the Engineering and Society class in which the coursework is assigned. I request that each first-year group nominates a point of contact with the international mentor. As I have circa twenty-two groups each year, I adopt a hands-off approach and resolve problemsas they arise. Micromanaging this process through a sign-up system may be appropriate, but it will also make a ārod for your own backā and there are many other daily tasks competing for our time!Ā
Communication between student peers, and between the groups and their international mentors can be troublesome. Despite emphasising the need for students to read their emails daily, and for prompt responses, not all students appreciate the need for professional and collegiate behaviour. This is a perennial issue, despite emphasising to students how employers value professional behaviours. Helping students to accept their agency and become independent learners is problematic if they are treated as passive learners, abused by a banking model of learning!Ā
Some students may consider the task to be āedutainmentā and that such playful learning lacks the rigour they expected in a civil engineering degree. Feedback (reflective writing) suggests that on completion of the poster, these students tend to re-evaluate their views, signifying a shift in their personal conceptions of learning. There is much work still to be done in engineering education on finding time to consider studentās epistemic beliefs, and for them to build these into their Personal Development Plans!Ā Ā
Lessons LearntĀ
One key development was to introduce a session on sketching to help raise studentsā self-confidence in preparing the final deliverables. Some students have graphical communications skills from school. However, there appears to be a general fear of sketching and embarrassment amongst the first-year cohorts. As an essential skill for engineers (and an important way to communicate), sketching should be more dominant throughout our programmes.Ā
Ā
ScalabilityĀ
In this example there are circa 80-100 students (20-25 groups) each year. Increasing the cohort size would not present a significant burden on the time to assess the submissions. However, a major challenge would be securing additional international mentors. The mentors receive a thank you letter for their support, and this is evidence of their own Initial Professional Development (IPD) during their studies. It is conceivable that that this may be a sufficient attraction to invite international students from other engineering disciplines (interdisciplinary) or from other faculties (transdisciplinary) such as humanities. The latter would provide an early opportunity to introduce students to the āliberal engineerā with the associated knowledge of Government policy, politics, finance, and human behaviour issues.Ā Ā
Ā
Suggestions for TransferabilityĀ
Whilst the poster deliverable for my module focuses on buildings and structures, this coursework could be easily replicated by other engineering disciplines.Ā With modification on the subjects to be sketched, there is potential to consider engineering components / artifacts / structures, such as naval vessels / aeroplanes / cars, and wide number of products and components that have particular significance to a country (i.e., Swiss Army Knife).Ā
No matter what adaptations you make to this or any other resource in the Sustainability Toolkit, itās essential that we emphasise how intercultural competence informs a globally responsible approach to the role of an engineer. Using the Sustainability Toolkit to help our students develop these mindsets is a very good way to do that, and I recommend it to all educators ā the wealth of the resource cannot be understated in its support to a teacherās session design and, most importantly, to a studentās learning.Ā
You can find out more about getting involved or contributing to the Sustainability Toolkit here.Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.
Authors: The Lemelson Foundation; Cynthia Anderson, Sarah Jayne Hitt and Jonathan Truslove (Eds.)Ā
Topic: Accreditation mapping for sustainability in engineering education.Ā
Tool type: Guidance.Ā
Engineering disciplines:⯠Any.
Keywords: Accreditation and standards; Learning outcomes; AHEP; Student support; Sustainability; Higher education; Students; Teaching or embedding sustainability.
Sustainability competency: Critical thinking; Systems thinking; Integrated problem-solving; Collaboration.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses themes from the UKās Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4). See details about mapping within the guide.Ā
Related SDGs: SDG 12 (Responsible consumption and production).Ā
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Adapt and repurpose learning outcomes; More real-world complexity; Cross-disciplinarity.The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Learning and teaching notes:
This guide, currently under review by the Engineering Council, maps theĀ Engineering for One Planet (EOP) Framework to AHEP4. The EOP Framework is a practical tool for curricular supplementation and modification, comprising 93 sustainability focused learning outcomes in 9 topic areas.Ā
The Lemelson Foundation, VentureWell, and Alula Consulting stewarded the co-development of the EOP Framework with hundreds of individuals mostly situated in the United States. Now, in collaboration with the EPC and Engineers Without Borders UK, the EOP Frameworkās student learning outcomes have been mapped to AHEP4 at the Chartered Engineer (CEng) level to ensure that UK educators can more easily align these outcomes and corresponding resources with learning activities, coursework, and assessments within their modules.Ā Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Authors: Dr Homeira Shayesteh (Senior Lecturer/Programme Leader for Architectural Technology, Design Engineering & Mathematics Department, Faculty of Science & Technology, Middlesex University),Professor Jarka GlasseyĀ (Director of Education, School of Engineering, Newcastle University).Ā
Topic: How to integrate the SDGs using a practical framework. āÆĀ
Type: Guidance.āÆĀ
Relevant disciplines: Any.āÆĀ
Keywords: Accreditation and standards; Assessment; Global responsibility; Learning outcomes; Sustainability; AHEP; SDGs; Curriculum design; Course design; Higher education; Pedagogy.Ā
Sustainability competency: Anticipatory; Integrated problem-solving; Strategic.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses two of the themes from the UKās Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4):āÆThe Engineer and SocietyāÆ(acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) andāÆEngineering PracticeāÆ(the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4āÆhereāÆand navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.āÆāÆĀ
Related SDGs: SDG 4 (Quality education); SDG 13 (Climate action).āÆĀ
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Adapt and repurpose learning outcomes; Authentic assessment; Active pedagogies and mindset development.The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Who is this article for?⯠This article should be read by educators at all levels of higher education looking to embed and integrate sustainability into curriculum, module, and / or programme design.Ā Ā
Premise:Ā
The critical role of engineers in developing sustainable solutions to grand societal challenges is undisputable. A wealth of literature and a range of initiatives supporting the embedding of sustainability into engineering curricula already exists. However, a practicing engineering educator responsible for achieving this embedding would be best supported by a practical framework providing a step-by-step guide with example resources for either programme or module/course-level embedding of sustainability into their practice. This practical framework illustrates a tested approach to programme wide as well as module alignment with SDGs, including further resources as well as examples of implementation for each step. This workflow diagram provides a visual illustration of the steps outlined below. The constructive alignment tool found in the Ethics Toolkit may also be adapted to a Sustainability context.Ā
b. Review government targets and discipline-specific guidance.Ā
c. Review accreditation body requirements such as found in AHEP4 and guidance from professional bodies. For example, IChemE highlights the creation of a culture of sustainability, not just a process of embedding the topic.Ā
e. Consider convening focus groups with employers in general and some employers of course alumni in particular. Carefully select attendees to represent a broad range of employers with a range of roles (recruiters, managers, strategy leaders, etc.). Conduct semi-structured focus groups, opening with broad themes identified from steps a through d. Identify any missing knowledge, skills, and competencies specific to particular employers, and prioritize those needed to be delivered by the programme together with the level of competency required (aware, competent, or expert).Ā
Ā
2. Look back. The outcome of this phase is a programme map (see appendix) of the SDGs that are currently delivered and highlighting gaps in provision.Ā Ā
b. Conduct a SWOT analysis as a team, considering the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the programme from the perspective of sustainability and relevance/competitiveness.Ā
c. Convene an alumni focus group to identify gaps in current and previous provision, carefully selecting attendees to represent a broad range of possible employment sectors with a range of experiences (fresh graduates to mid-career). Conduct semi-structured discussions opening with broad themes identified from steps 1a-e. Identify any missing knowledge, skills, and competencies specific to particular sectors, and those missing or insufficiently delivered by the programme together with the level of competency required (aware, competent, or expert).Ā
d. Convene a focus group of current students from various stages of the programme. Conduct semi-structured discussions opening with broad themes identified from steps 1a-e and 2a-c. Identify student perceptions of knowledge, skills, and competencies missing from the course in light of the themes identified.Ā
e. Review external examiner feedback, considering any feedback specific to the sustainability content of the programme. Ā
Ā
Ā 3. Look ahead. The goal of this phase is programme delivery that is aligned with the SDGs and can be evidenced as such.Ā
b. Revise module descriptors so that there are clear linkages to sustainability competencies or the SDGs generally within the aims of the modules.Ā Ā
c. Revise learning outcomes according to which SDGs relate to the module content, projects or activities. The Reimagined Degree Map and the Constructive Alignment Tool for Ethics provides guidance on revising module outcomes. An example that also references AHEP4 ILOS is:Ā
āApply comprehensive knowledge of mathematics, biology, and engineering principles to solve a complex bioprocess engineering challenge based on critical awareness of new developments in this area. This will be demonstrated by designing solutions appropriate within the health and safety, diversity, inclusion, cultural, societal, environmental, and commercial requirements and codes of practice to minimise adverse impacts (M1, M5, M7).āĀ
e. Create an implementation plan with clear timelines for module descriptor approvals and modification of delivery materials.Ā Ā
Ā
For module-wide alignment:Ā
1. Look around. The outcome of this phase is a confirmed approach to embedding sustainability within a particular module or theme.Ā
a. Seek resources available on the SDGs and sustainability teaching in this discipline/theme. For instance, review these examples for Computing, Chemical Engineering and Robotics. Ā
b. Determine any specific guidelines, standards, and regulations for this theme within the discipline.Ā
Ā
2. Look back. The outcome of this phase is a module-level map of SDGs currently delivered, highlighting any gaps.Ā Ā
b. Conduct a SWOT analysis as a module team that considers the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the module from the perspective of sustainability and relevance of the module to contribute to programme-level delivery on sustainability and/or the SDGs.Ā
c. Review feedback from current students on the clarity of the modules links to the SDGs.Ā
d. Review feedback from external examiners on the sustainability content of the module.Ā
3. Look ahead.Ā Ā
a. Create introduction slides for the modules that explicitly reference how sustainability topics will be integrated.Ā Ā
b. Embed specific activities involving the SDGs in a given theme, and include students in identifying these. See below for suggestions, and visit the Teaching resources in this toolkit for more options. Ā
Ā
Appendix:
A. Outcome I.2 (programme level mapping) Ā
B. Outcome II.5 (module level mapping) ā same as above, but instead of the modules in individual lines, themes delivered within the module can be used to make sure the themes are mapped directly to SDGs.Ā
Ā
Ā C. II.6.b ā Specific activitiesĀ
Activity 1: Best carried out at the start of the module and then repeated near the end of the module to compare students perception and learning. Split students into groups of 3-4, at the start of the module use the module template (attached as a resource) to clearly outline the ILOs. Then present the SDGs and ask students to spend no more than 5 min identifying the top 3 SDGs they believe the material delivered in the module will enable them to address. Justify the selection. Can either feed back or exchange ideas with the group to their right. Capture these SDGs for comparison of the repeat exercise towards the end of the module. How has the perception of the group changed following the delivery of the module and why?
Activity 2: Variation on the above activity ā student groups to arrange the SDGs in a pyramid with the most relevant ones at the top, capture the picture and return to it later in module delivery
Activity 3:Ā Suitable particularly for the earlier stages. Use https://go-goals.org/ to increase the general awareness of SDGs.
Activity 4: The coursework geared to the SDGs, with each student choosing a goal of their choice and developing a webmap to demonstrate the role of module-relevant data and analysis in tackling that goal.Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Author: Mike Murray BSc (Hons) MSc PhD AMICE SFHEA (Senior Teaching Fellow in Construction Management, Department of Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Strathclyde).Ā
Topic: Links between education for sustainable development (ESD) and intercultural competence.Ā
Tool type: Teaching.āÆĀ
Engineering disciplines:āÆCivil; Any.Ā
Keywords: AHEP;Sustainability; Student support; Local community; Higher education; Assessment; Pedagogy; Education for sustainable development; Internationalisation; Global reach; Global responsibility; EDI.Ā
Sustainability competency: Self-awareness; Collaboration; Critical thinking.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses two of the themes from the UKās Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): The Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4 here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.āÆĀ
Related SDGs: SDG 4 (Quality education); SDG 16 (Peace, justice, and strong institutions).Ā
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: More real-world complexity; Active pedagogies and mindset development; Authentic assessment.The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Educational level: Beginner.Ā
Learning and teaching notes:āÆĀ
This resource describes a coursework aligned to three key pedagogical approaches of ESD. (1) It positions the students as autonomous learners (learner-centred); (2) who are engaged in action and reflect on their experiences (action-oriented); and (3) empowers and challenges learners to alter their worldviews (transformative learning). Specifically, it requires students to engage in collaborative peer learning (Einfalt, Alford, and Theobald 2022; UNESCO 2021). The coursework is an innovative Assessment for Learningā (AfL) (Sambell, McDowell, and Montgomery, 2013) internationalisation at home (Universities UK, 2021) group and individual assessment for first-year civil & environmental engineers enrolled on two programmes (BEng (Hons) / MEng Civil Engineering & BEng (Hons) / MEng Civil & Environmental Engineering). However, the coursework could easily be adapted to any other engineering discipline by shifting the theme of the example subjects. With a modification on the subjects, there is potential to consider engineering components / artifacts / structures, such as naval vessels / aeroplanes / cars, and a wide number of products and components that have particular significance to a country (i.e., Swiss Army Knife).
Learners have the opportunity to:Ā
Engage in collaborative peer learning and socialise with students from different countries.Ā
Gain knowledge related to the design and construction of civil engineering buildings and structures.Ā
Develop a āglobal engineering mindset.ā
Teachers have the opportunity to:Ā
Promote, recognise, and reward intercultural engagement and the development of intercultural competence (IC).Ā
Raise student awareness of an engineerās role in the UNSDGs.Ā
There have been several calls to educate the global engineer through imbedding people and planet issues in the engineering curriculum (Bourn and Neal, 2008; Grandin and Hirleman 2009). Students should be accepting of this practice given that prospective freshers are āpositively attracted by the possibility of learning alongside people from the rest of the worldā (Higher Education Policy Unit, 2015:4). Correspondingly, āinternational students often report that an important reason in their decision to study abroad is a desire to learn about the host country and to meet people from other culturesā (Scudamore, 2013:14). Michel (2010:358) defines this ācultural mobilityā as āsharing views (or life) with people from other cultures, for better understanding that the world is not based on a unique, linear thoughtā.Ā Ā
Civil Engineering is an expansive industry with projects across many subdisciplines (i.e. Bridges, Buildings, Coastal & Marine, Environmental, Geotechnical, Highways, Power including Renewables. In a group students are required to consult with an international mentor and investigate civil engineering (buildings & structures) in the mentorās home country. Each student should select a different example. These can be historical projects, current projects or projects planned for the future, particularly those projects that are addressing the climate emergency. Students will then complete two tasks:Ā
Task 1: Group International Poster (10% weighting)Ā
a. Reasoning for coursework with reference to transnational engineering employers and examples of international engineering projects and work across national boundaries.Ā
b. Links between engineering, people, and planet through the example of biomimicry in civil engineering design (Hayes, Desha, & Baumeister, 2020) or nature-based solutions in the context of civil engineering technology (Cassina and Matthews ,2021).Ā
c. Existence of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) such as RedR UK (2023) Water Aid (2023) and Bridges to Prosperity (2023).Ā
d. The use of corporate social responsibility (CSR) to address problematic issues such as human rights abuses (Human Rights Watch, 2006) and bribery and corruption (Stansbury and Stansbury) in global engineering projects.Ā Ā
Ā
2. Assign students to groups:
a. Identify international mentors. After checking the module registration list, identify international students and invite them to become a mentor to their peers.Ā Seek not to be coercive and explain that it is a voluntary role and to say no will have no impact on their studies. In our experience, less than a handful have turned down this opportunity. The peer international students are then used as foundation members to build each group of four first-year students. Additional international student mentors can be sourced from outside the module to assist each group.Ā
3. Allow for group work time throughout the module to complete the tasks (full description can be found in the complete brief).Ā
Ā
Assessment criteria:Ā
The coursework constitutes a 20% weighting of a 10-Credit elective module- Engineering & Society. The submission has two assessed components: Task 1) a group international poster with annotated sketches of buildings & structures (10% weighting); and Task 2) A short individual reflective writing report (10% weighting) that seeks to ascertain the students experience of engaging in a collaborative peer activity (process), and their views on their poster (product). Vogel et al, (2023, 45) note that the use of posters is āwell-suited to demonstrating a range of sustainability learning outcomesā. Whilst introducing reflective writing in a first-year engineering course has its challenges, it is recognised thatĀ reflective practice is an appropriate task for ESD- āThe teaching approaches most associated with developing transformative sustainability values stimulate critical reflection and self-reflectionā (Vogel et al, 2023, 6).Ā
The coursework has been undertaken by nine cohorts of first-year undergraduate civil engineers (N=738) over seven academic sessions between 2015-2024. To date this has involved (N=147) mentors, representing sixty nationalities. Between 2015-2024 the international mentors have been first-year peers (N=67); senior year undergraduate & post-graduate students undertaking studies in the department (N=58) and visiting ERASMUS & International students (N =22) enrolled on programmes within the department.Ā Ā
Whilst the aim for the original coursework aligns with ESD (āESD is also an education in values, aiming to transform studentsā worldviews, and build their capacity to alter wider societyā -Vogel et al ,2023:21) the reflective reports indicate that the studentsā IC gain was at a perfunctory level. Whilst there were references to āa sense of belonging, āpride in representing my countryā, ādeveloping friendshipsā, āinternational mentorsā enthusiasmā this narrative indicates a more generic learning gain that is known to help students acquire dispositions to stay and to succeed at university (Harding and Thompson, 2011). The coursework brief fell short of addressing the call āto transform engineering education curricula and learning approaches to meet the challenges of the SDGsā (UNESCO,2021:125). Indeed, as a provocateur pedagogy, āESD recognises that education in its current form is unsustainable and requires radical changeā (Vogel et al ,2023, 4).Ā Ā
Given the above it is clear that the coursework requirement for peer collaboration and reflective practice aligns to three of the eight key competencies (collaboration, self-awareness, critical thinking) for sustainability (UNESCO, 2017:10). Scudamore (2013:26) notes the importance of these competencies when she refers to engaging home and international students in dialogue- āthe inevitable misunderstandings, which demand patience and tolerance to overcome, form an essential part of the learning process for all involvedā. Moreover, Beagon et al (2023) have acknowledged the importance of interpersonal competencies to prepare engineering graduates for the challenges of the SDGās. Thus, the revised coursework brief prompts students to journey āthrough the mirrorā and to reflect on how gaining IC can assist their knowledge of, and actions towards the SDGās.Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Sustainability competency: Integrated problem-solving, Critical thinking.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses two of the themes from the UKās Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4):āÆThe Engineer and SocietyāÆ(acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) andāÆEngineering PracticeāÆ(the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4āÆhereāÆand navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.āÆĀ
Related SDGs: SDG 4 (Quality education); SDG 13 (Climate action).Ā
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Authentic assessment; Active pedagogies and mindset development. The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Who is this article for? This article should be read by educators at all levels of higher education looking to embed and integrate sustainability into curriculum design. It may also be of interest for students practising lifelong learning to articulate and explore how their learning translates into competency development as they embark on their careers.Ā
Premise:Ā
Today we know that how we engineer is changing – and this change is happening at a quicker pace than in previous decades. The decisions engineers make throughout their careers shape the world we all inhabit. Consequently, the education of engineers has a profound impact on society. Ensuring our degrees are up to date is of pressing importance to prepare all future practitioners and professionals. Arguably, it is especially important for engineers to act sustainably, ethically and equitably.Ā
How do engineers understand their roles when sustainability becomes a key driver in the context of their work? What does sustainability look like in learning journeys, and how can it be incorporated into assessments? This article does not advocate for simply adding ‘sustainability’ to degrees; rather, it encourages the connection between sustainability competencies and engineering assessments.Ā
Ā
Developing 21st-century engineersĀ
Choosing to become an engineer is a great way to be useful to society. Studying an engineering degree can develop what people can do (skills), what they know (knowledge) and how they think (mindset), as well as open up a diverse range of career opportunities.Ā
The path to becoming an engineer can start at university (though there are other routes in). Weaving in a focus on globally responsible engineering throughout a degree course is about embracing the need to develop a broader set of competencies in engineers and expand the types of projects they practise on during their degree to reflect the problems they may encounter during their career.Ā
This doesn’t mean that engineering degrees as they are aren’t valuable or useful. It’s about strengthening the building blocks of degrees to ensure that 21st-century engineers have space to play their role in addressing 21st-century societal challenges. These building blocks are what learning outcomes are prioritised, what pedagogies are used, the types of projects students work on, who they work with and the way we assess learning. All of these elements can be aggregated to develop competence in sustainable engineering practice.Ā
What are sustainability competency frameworks saying?Ā
There are many frameworks exploring what are the competencies most needed today (such as UNESCO Education for Sustainable Development competencies, EU GreenComp, Inner Development Goals). Many frameworks are calling for similar things that allow us to shift focus, attention and energy onto how to truly develop a person over the three to five plus years of experience they might gain at university.Ā Ā
By designing education to meet learning outcomes, you build and evidence a range of competencies, including developing the mindsets of learners. Practically, it is the use of different competency frameworks, and the associated updates to learning outcomes, and how we deliver education and assessment that really matters. The table below, in the second column, synthesises various competency frameworks to clearly articulate what it means a learner can then do. Rather than argue different frameworks, focusing on what a student can do as a result is really key.Ā Ā
By reading through this table, you can see that this is more than just about āsustainabilityā – these are useful things for a person to be able to do. Ask yourself, what if we don’t develop these in our graduates? Will they be better or worse off?Ā
Graduates can then build on this learning they have had at university to continue to develop as engineers working in practice. The Global Responsibility Competency Compass for example points practitioners to the capabilities needed to stay relevant and provides practical ways to develop themselves. It is made up of 12 competencies and is organised around the four guiding principles of global responsibility – Responsible, Purposeful, Inclusive and Regenerative.Ā Ā
What needs to shift in engineering education?Ā
The shifts required to the building blocks of an engineering degree are:Ā Ā
To adapt and repurpose learning outcomes.Ā
To integrate more real-world complexity within project briefs.Ā
To be excellent at active pedagogies and mindset development.Ā
To ensure authentic assessment.Ā
To maximise cross-disciplinary experience and expertise.Ā Ā
All of the above need to be designed with mechanisms that work at scale. Letās spotlight two of these shifts, āto adapt and repurpose learning outcomesā and āto integrate authentic assessmentā so we can see how sustainability competence relates.Ā
Adapt and repurpose learning outcomes.Ā
We can build on what is already working well within a degree to bring about positive changes. Many degrees exhibit strengths in their learning outcomes such as, developing the ability to understand a concept or a problem and apply that understanding through a disciplinary lens focused on simple/complicated problems. However, it is crucial to maintain a balance between addressing straightforward problems and tackling more complex ones that encourage learners to be curious and inquisitive.Ā Ā
For example, a simple problem (where the problem and solution are known) may involve ācalculating the output of a solar panel in a communityā. A complex problem (where the problem and solution are unknown) may involve āhow to improve a communityās livelihood and environmental systems, which may involve exploring the interconnectedness, challenges and opportunities that may exist in the system.Ā
Enhancing the learning experience by allowing students to investigate and examine a context for ideas to emerge is more reflective of real-world practice. Success is not solely measured by learners accurately completing a set of problem sets; rather, it lies in their ability to apply concepts in a way that creates a better, more sustainable system.Ā
See how this rebalancing is represented in the visual below:Ā
Figure 2. āāāāRebalancing learning within degrees to be relevant to the future we face. Source: Engineers Without Borders UK.Ā
Ā
Keeping up to date and meeting accreditation standards is another important consideration. Relating the intended learning outcomes to the latest language associated with accreditation requirements, such as AHEP4 (UK), ABET (US) or ECSA (SA), doesn’t mean you have to just add more in. You can adapt what you’ve already got for a new purpose and context. For instance, the Engineering for One Planet frameworkās 93 (46 Core and 46 Advanced) sustainability-focused learning outcomes that hundreds of academics, engineering professionals, and other key stakeholders have identified as necessary for preparing all graduating engineers ā regardless of subdiscipline ā with the skills, knowledge, and understanding to protect and improve our planet and our lives. These outcomes have also been mapped to AHEP4.Ā
Integrate authentic assessment:Ā
It is important that intended learning outcomes and assessment methods are aligned so that they reinforce each other and lead to the desired competency development. An important distinction exists between assessment of learning and assessment as or for learning:Ā
Assessment OF learning e.g. traditional methods of assessment of student learning against learning outcomes and standards that typically measure students’ knowledge-based learning.
Assessment AS/FOR learning e.g. reflective and performance-based (e.g. self-assessments, peer assessments and feedback from educators using reflective journals or portfolios) where the learning journey is part of the assessment process that captures learners’ insights and critical thinking, and empowers learners to identify possibilities for improvement.Ā Ā
Assessment should incorporate a mix of methods when evaluating aspects like sustainability, to bring in authenticity which strengthens the integrity of the assessment process and mirrors how engineers work in practice. For example, University College London and Kings College London both recognise that critical evaluation, interpretation, analysis, and judgement are all key skills which will become more and more important, and making assessment rubrics more accessible for students and educators. Authentic assessment can mirror professional practices, such as having learners assessed within design reviews, or asking students to develop a portfolio across modules.Ā Ā
Engineers Without Borders UK | Assessing competencies through design challenges:Ā
Below is an example of what Engineers Without Borders UK has done to translate competencies into assessment through our educational offerings. The Engineering for People Design Challenge (embedded in-curriculum focuses on placing the community context at the heart of working through real-world project-based learning experiences) and Reshaping Engineering (a co-curricular voluntary design month to explore how to make the engineering sector more globally responsible). The competencies in the Global Responsibility Competency Compass are aligned and evidenced through the learning outcomes and assessment process in both challenges.Ā Ā
Please note – the Global Responsibility Competency Compass points practitioners to the capabilities needed to stay relevant and provides practical ways to develop themselves.Ā
For educators looking to keep curriculum and learning outcomes relevant, the Compass provides a useful framing to inform learning outcomes throughout the curriculum that encourages lifelong learning for emerging engineers or supports the reskilling of engineering professionals (to pursue topics that may have been absent from the user’s formal education), and constantly evolving their competency through educational activities.Ā
For students, this may be of interest as you begin your journey as future engineering professionals and student members of professional engineering institutions exploring what continued professional development you wish to pursue in your careers.Ā Ā
See below an example of the logic behind translating competencies acquired by participants to assessment during the design challenges.Ā Ā
Figure 3. Example of the logic behind translating the Global Responsibility Competency Compass to assessment during the design challenges. Source: Engineers Without Borders UK.Ā Ā
Ā
The Competencies developed through the educational offering are orientated around the Global Responsibility Competency Compass to align with the learning journey from undergraduate to practising globally responsible individuals in learners’ future careers.
We then align learning outcomes to the competency and purpose of the design challenge using simple and concise language.
Ā a. Useful resources that were used to help frame, align and iterate the learning outcomes and marking criteria areĀ shared at the end of this article.
The Marking Criteria draws on the assessment methods previously mentioned under āAssessment OFā and āAssessment AS/FORā while aligning to the context of intended learning i.e. design focussed, individual journals reflecting on the learning journey, and collaborating in teams.
We frame and align key action words from Competency to learning outcome to marking criteria using Bloom’s taxonomy (in Figure 2) to scale appropriately, the context of learning and what the intended outcome of learning/area of assessment would be.Ā Ā
Conclusions:Ā
How your students think matters. How they engage in critical conversations matters. What they value matters. How we educate engineers matters.Ā Ā
These may feel like daunting shifts to make but developing people to navigate our future is important for them, and us. Sustainability competencies are actually about competencies that are useful – the label āsustainabilityā may or may not help but it’s the underlying concepts that matters most. The interventions that we make to instil these competencies in the learning journeys of future engineers are required – so degrees can be continuously improved and will be valuable over the long term. Making assessment mirror real practice helps with life-long learning. That’s useful in general, not just about sustainability. This is a major opportunity to attract more people into engineering, keep them and enable them to be part of addressing urgent 21st century challenges.Ā
Ā Ā
āSustainability is more than a word or concept, it is actually a culture, and if we aim to see it mirrored in the near future, what better way exists than that of planting it in the young hearts of today knowing they are the leaders of the tomorrow we are not guaranteed of? It is possible.āĀ
2021 South African university student (after participating in the Engineering for People Design Challenge during their degree course)Ā
Ā
Useful resources:Ā
There are some excellent resources out there that help us understand and articulate what sustainability competencies and learning outcomes look like, and how to embed them into teaching, learning and assessment. Some of them were used in the example above. Here are some resources that we have found useful in translating the competencies in the Compass into learning outcomes in our educational offerings:Ā
Bloomās Taxonomy:Ā a hierarchical model that categorises learning objectives into levels of complexity is a useful model to explore the proficiency of learning outcomes (and used in many of the resources in this list). You can use the verbs outlined in Bloomās Taxonomy to modify or scale up the proficiency of your learning outcomes within the context of the programme and accreditation requirements. This is useful if you are unable to replace or introduce new learning outcomes into your module or programme.Ā
Engineering for One Planet Framework and guide to teaching core learning outcomes: contains a curated list of core and advanced sustainability-focused student learning outcomes to help educators embed sustainability into engineering education, which can be adapted as needed to the context of learning.Ā
Engineers Professors Council Ethics Toolkit Using a constructive alignment tool to plan ethics teaching: a tool to reinforce the ethical dimension of engineering and encourages the ethical development of engineer used at Aston University and endorsed by the CDIO.Ā Ā
UNESCOās Education for Sustainable Development Goals 2017: emphasises that to develop competencies in sustainable development, education needs to transition to learning that is āaction-orientated and supports self-directed learning, participation and collaboration, problem-orientation, inter-and transdisciplinarity, and links formal and informal learning togetherā.Ā
UNESCOās Engineering for Sustainable Development 2021: describes how the Cynefin framework is a useful way of understanding how teaching and learning methods are combined with the increasing need to understand complexities that nurture different competencies.Ā
The World Economic Forum Future of Skills Report 2020 and 2023: highlights the skills needed for 2025 including creativity, critical thinking and navigating complexity.Ā
Redman et al. (2021) Current practice of assessing studentsā sustainability competencies: a review of tools (2021): explores tools are currently used for assessing studentsā sustainability competencies and provides guidance to sustainability (science) instructors, researchers, and program directors who are interested in using competencies assessment tools in more informed ways.Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā
Keywords: Built environment; Housing; Energy efficiency; Decarbonisation; AHEP; Sustainability; Higher education; Pedagogy.Ā
Sustainability competency: Systems thinking; Critical thinking; Integrated problem-solving.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses several of the themes from the UKās Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4):āÆThe Engineer and SocietyāÆ(acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and the following specific themes fromāÆEngineering PracticeāÆ(the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4āÆhereāÆand navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.āÆĀ
F1.Apply knowledge of mathematics, statistics, natural science and engineering principles to broadly defined problems.Ā
F4.Select and use technical literature and other sources of information to address broadly defined problems.Ā
F6.Apply a systematic approach to the solution of broadly-defined problems.Ā
F7. Evaluate the environmental and societal impact of solutions to broadly-defined problems.Ā Ā
Related SDGs: SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities); SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production); SDG 13 (Climate Action).Ā
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Active pedagogies and mindsets; More real-world complexity.The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Educational level: Beginner / intermediate. Learners are required to have basic (level 2) science knowledge, and ability to populate a mathematical formula and use units correctly.Ā
Ā
Learning and teaching notes:Ā
This activity allows students to consider the dilemmas around providing housing that is cheap to heat as well as cheap to buy or rent. It starts with researching these issues using contemporary news and policy, continues with an in-depth study of insulation, together with calculations of U values, heat energy and indicative costs.
Learners have the opportunity to:Ā
solve given technical tasks relating to insulation properties (AHEP: SM1m)Ā
assess the heating requirement of a given house (AHEP: EA1m)Ā
research a contemporary issue using websites and guided materialĀ
Teachers have the opportunity to:Ā
introduce concepts related to heating and energy theoryĀ
develop learnersā mathematical skills in a practical context.Ā
Structure a task around a sustainability issue and recognise the economic, social and cultural issues, as well as the technical onesĀ
Supporting resources:Ā Ā
To prepare for these activities, teachers may want to explain, or assign students to pre-read articles relating to heating a house with respect to:Ā
Provide the stimulus to motivate the students by considering the dilemma: How do we provide affordable housing whilst minimising heating requirement? There are not enough homes in the UK for everyone who needs one. Some of the houses we do have are expensive to run, poorly maintained and cost a fortune in rent. How do we get the housing builders to provide enough affordable, cheap to run housing for the population?Ā
One possible solution is adopting Passivhaus standards. The Passivhaus is a building that conforms to a standard around heating requirements that ensures the insulation (U value) of the building material, including doors, windows and floors, prevents heat leaving the building so that a minimum heating requirement is needed. If all houses conformed to Passivhaus standards, the running costs for the householder would be reduced.Ā
Teaching schedule:Ā
Provide stimulus by highlighting the housing crisis in the UK:Ā Ā
How many houses are needed, now and in the future?
How many people currently live in temporary accommodation, and is this number expected to change?Ā
Are developers required to add affordable housing to their plot? Should they be?Ā Ā
People requiring affordable housing for rent are likely to be among the poorest, so how many people are in āfuel povertyā?Ā
Affordable housing needs to be built in such a way as to minimise the heat needed to keep the house warm. What categories of people are especially vulnerable?Ā
What features/standards must a Passivhaus satisfy? How does this standard address the problems?Ā Ā
Ā
Students can work in groups to work on the extent of the problem from the bullet points provided. This activity can be used to develop design skills (Define the problem)Ā
Ā
1. Get the engineering knowledge about preventing heat leaving a house:
If you can prevent heat leaving, you wonāt need to add any more, it will stay at the same temperature. Related engineering concepts are:Ā Ā Ā
Newtons law of coolingĀ
U valuesĀ
Heat transferĀ
2. Task:
a. Start with a standard footprint of a three-bed semi, from local estate agents. Make some assumptions about inside and outside temperatures, height of ceilings and any other values that may be needed.
b. Use the U value table to calculate the heat loss for this house (in Watts). The excel table has been pre-populated or you can do this as a group
With uninsulated materials (single glazing, empty cavity wall, no loft insulation.Ā
With standard insulation (double glazing, loft insulation, cavity wall insulation.Ā
If Passivhaus standards were used to build the house.Ā
Ā c. Costs
Find the typical cost for heating per kWh
Compare the costs for replacing the heat lost.
Ā d. Final synoptic activity
Passivhaus costs a lot more than standard new build. How do housebuilders afford it?
Provide examples of the cost of building a Passivhaus standard building materials and reduced heating bills.
Suggest some ācarrotsā and āsticksā that could be used to make sure housing in the UK is affordable to rent/buy and run.
3. Assessment:
The spreadsheet can be assessed, and the students could write a report giving facts and figures comparing different levels of insulation and the effects on running costs.Ā
Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professorsā Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.Ā