Engineers must take a leading role in addressing the challenges of mitigating climate change and adapting to the inevitable changes that our world is facing. To improve climate literacy, technical education must include problem formulation and solutions that consider complex interactions between engineered, Earth, and societal systems, including trade-offs among benefits, costs, and risks. Improving engineering students’ climate literacy must also inspire students’ motivation to work toward climate solutions. This paper highlights the content and pedagogical approach used in a class for engineering students that helped contribute to significant gains in engineering students’ climate literacy and critical thinking competencies. A total of 89 students fully participated in a pre/post climate literacy questionnaire over four years of study. As a whole, students demonstrated significant gains in climate-related content knowledge, affect, and behavior. Substantial differences were observed between students in different engineering disciplines and male vs. female students. Assessment of critical thinking showed that students did an excellent job formulating problem statements and solutions in a manner that incorporated a multidimensional systems perspective. These skills are critical for students to address climate change effectively in their eventual professions.

Engineering graduates must be prepared with sound technical knowledge and a range of 21st century competencies and professional skills such as creativity, interdisciplinary collaboration, communication, and innovation to successfully solve today’s complex, global problems. Equally important is a deep appreciation of the degree to which technological solutions are situated within the context of human and natural environments. Despite calls from the National Academy of Engineering and several professional organizations to broaden engineering education to embrace these skills, most engineering programs persistently focus on the importance of technical skills. This paper describes an open-ended team-based design challenge that integrates entrepreneurial-minded (EM) skill development into an interdisciplinary first-year engineering course that approaches engineering from a socio-technical perspective. The challenge was implemented in two simultaneous first-year classes (n = 49), with the goal of fostering students’ broad professional skills and their appreciation of the links between engineering technologies and societal context. The action research study used a quasi-experimental design with convenience sampling and no control group to explore students’ self-perceived entrepreneurial-minded (EM) skills development. Data were collected with a retrospective questionnaire comprised of a series of 5-point Likert-type questions that asked students to assess the development of their EM skills in all three areas of the EM framework: Exhibit Curiosity, Establish Connections, and Create Value (the “3C” framework). Results indicate that students felt they developed EM skills in all three areas of the 3C Framework, with more fully developed skills in the Establish Connections and Create Value categories. Overall, this study suggests the effectiveness of using open-ended, socio-technical engineering design challenges for developing skills that will better prepare students to work collaboratively on complex and interdisciplinary problems they will face in their professional careers.

In recent years, there has been a rise in recognition of the need for computing education to bridge the gap between academia and industry. In addition, educational researchers are also interested in increasing student engagement by grounding learning experiences in real-life concerns, community issues, or personal interests. Unfortunately, traditional lecture-based teaching techniques often fail to prepare students for the challenges they will face in real-world software development scenarios. Project-Based Learning (PjBL) takes a different approach by immersing students in real-world software engineering projects, allowing them to apply theoretical knowledge in practical contexts, building practical skills, fostering critical thinking, and improving problem-solving abilities. Prior literature reviews have explored aspects of PjBL in computing education, such as communication support, educational effectiveness, sprint organization, and capstone course design. However, no literature review extensively and comprehensively examines the following questions as a whole: where PjBL is used, how it is taught, why it should be used, and what challenges to expect in software-related computing courses. The review takes a systematic approach, incorporating a thorough search strategy across four academic databases and targeting keywords associated with PjBL and software computing in higher education. A total of 34 PjBL course attributes were extracted from 184 selected primary studies, which contributed to answering six research questions: (1) What computing courses use PjBL? (2) What is the nature of software projects used? (3) How are these projects organized? (4) How are students assessed and evaluated? (5) What are the reported impacts of PjBL? and (6) How are students supported throughout the projects? The literature review makes four key contributions: a description of the nature of software projects used and how these projects are organized, a highlight of the impacts of PjBL and the methods used to measure those impacts, a summary of the various forms of support provided to students throughout their projects, and the list of challenges encountered in implementing PjBL and recommendations to alleviate those challenges. This comprehensive review offers new insights and serves as a catalog of best practices for computing educators.

Classroom units were developed for high-school environmental science and college industrial ecology classes to introduce life-cycle perspectives and systems analysis of transportation fuel/vehicle systems. The units at both levels emphasize the need to consider energy and environmental issues related to the nation’s transportation sector that extend well beyond the gasoline pump and vehicle emissions. The units include several lessons to introduce environmental issues, understand the fuel and vehicle technologies (high-school level only), and conceptually and quantitatively evaluate differences among the expected future fuels through a life-cycle assessment. The quantitative assessment of the high-school students shows that the units helped students to significantly raise their energy knowledge and change their attitudes. Anecdotal information from the students indicates that the increased awareness about the seriousness of energy issues has caused them to be more conservative and conscientious about thei...

Background: Many instructors made an emergency shift to online teaching during the Spring 2020 semester. There is reason to expect that instructors would have dramatically changed their pedagogy and teaching philosophies. At the same time, there are reasons that engineering instructors might be hesitant to introduce some changes to their courses.Purpose/Hypothesis: This study explores pedagogical and philosophical adaptations using instructors' accounts of emergency remote teaching during the Spring 2020 semester.Design/Method: In‐depth interviews with six engineering instructors were conducted to examine their teaching experiences and the way they responded to the online transition. Interview transcripts were analyzed for general themes and commonalities.Results: Instructors made many changes during the transition, some of which were general and others individualized after a problem came to their attention. However, other changes were uncommon or even avoided, in particular, reducing content difficulty and shifting their teaching philosophies. Our interviews suggest several explanations for their choices, including the degree to which course design rendered change unnecessary, or the influence of the instructors' existing skillset, their desire to protect the validity of grades, and their sense of the scope of engineering pedagogy.Conclusions: These interviews contribute to our understanding of how the emergency transition to online teaching impacted engineering instructors and how instructors might improve resilience during future crises. The conceptual tools and thought processes elucidated by this study can inform future analyses. Further research should pursue comparisons with other disciplines and consider the long‐term effects of pandemic teaching.

Engineering graduates must be prepared to support our world’s need for a clean and sustainable energy future. Complex problems related to energy and sustainability require engineers to consider the broad spectrum of interrelated consequences including human and environmental health, sociopolitical, and economic factors. Teaching engineering students about energy within a societal context, simultaneous with developing technical knowledge and skills, will better prepare them to solve real-world problems. Yet few energy courses that approach energy topics from a human-centered perspective exist within engineering programs. Engineering students enrolled in energy programs often take such courses as supplemental to their course of study. This paper presents an engineering course that approaches energy education from a socio-technical perspective, emphasizing the complex interactions of energy technologies with sustainability dimensions. Course content and learning activities are structured around learning outcomes that require students to gain technical knowledge as well as an understanding of broader energy-related impacts. The course attracts students from a variety of majors and grade levels. A mixed quantitative/qualitative assessment conducted from 2019–2021 indicates successful achievement of course learning outcomes. Students demonstrated significant gains in technical content knowledge as well as the ability to critically address complex sociotechnical issues related to current and future energy systems.