Comparing the Outcomes of Horizontal and Vertical Integration of Sustainability Content into Engineering Curricula Using Concept Maps

Abstract

The goal of this project was to compare the conceptual sustainability knowledge of students at two institutions that differ in their approaches of integrating sustainability into curricula. One institution is a research-intensive university that has implemented a sustainability-focused course (vertical integration), and the second is a teaching-focused university that has woven sustainability into a variety of classes across its curriculum (horizontal integration). At both institutions, students beginning their capstone design experience created concept maps (cmaps) on the focus question: "What is sustainability?" Structure of student knowledge was analyzed using the traditional cmap scoring method, while specific content was evaluated using word clouds. Results support that students engaging in the curriculum with horizontal integration demonstrated broader, deeper, and more connected knowledge than students enrolled in the vertically-integrated curriculum. Furthermore, students participating in the horizontallyintegrated curriculum demonstrated a more balanced understanding of sustainability, with the oftenneglected social dimension being significantly represented in their cmaps, as compared to students from the vertically-integrated curriculum. Economic sustainability was a common weakness.

Validating Content of a Sustainable Design Rubric Using Established Frameworks

“…5 The rubric includes two four-point rating scales to aid evaluators in judging capstone reports based on the 16 sustainable design criteria. The earned points scale [0][1][2][3] captures the extent to which students consider each sustainable design criterion in their capstone projects. Evaluators assign a score of 0 to projects that show no evidence of incorporating the design criterion, while a score of 3 is assigned if the project shows evidence of extensive criterion application.…”

“…Evaluators assign a score of 0 to projects that show no evidence of incorporating the design criterion, while a score of 3 is assigned if the project shows evidence of extensive criterion application. The potential points scale [0][1][2][3] describes the extent to which each sustainable design criterion is applicable to a given capstone project. Evaluators assign a score of 0 if the criterion is not applicable to the project.…”

“…In this table, a "higher" score is worse and may indicate a criterion that is not widely applicable to sustainability or across disciplines. Based on the comparison of our 34 draft criteria against the sustainability categories included in the other three frameworks, summarized in Figure 4 and Table 5, criteria fall into three groups: (1) criteria validated by the established frameworks and thus important to keep in the rubric, (2) criteria that need to be added or modified in order to reflect important themes in the frameworks that are missing or not emphasized in our rubric, and (3) criteria included in our rubric but not emphasized in the frameworks and thus could be omitted or combined with other criteria.…”

“…Most assessment tools have been aimed at capturing students' conceptual understanding of sustainability using surveys 1 and concept maps. 2 While it is critical to ensure that students grasp the complexity of sustainability topics, it is especially important for engineering students to be able to apply this knowledge in the design process. Unfortunately, less discussion in the literature has been devoted to how to assess student sustainable design abilities.…”

First-Year Students' Conceptions of Sustainability as Revealed through Concept Maps

“…8 More specifically, concept maps have been previously used to evaluate student knowledge of sustainability and related ideas. 2,9,10,20,[44][45][46][47] Segalas et al 34 found that "courses that apply a more community-oriented and constructive, active learning pedagogical approach, increase students' knowledge of [sustainable development]." p. 275…”