Abstract
Sustainable development (SD) competences feature prominently in the 2012 Malaysian Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) manual. The manual outlines 12 outcomes that undergraduate engineering students of Malaysian universities are expected to develop upon completion of their studies. These 12 outcomes, specifically those in relation to SD competences, are open for interpretation, in accordance to the vision, mission and educational philosophies of the respective universities and undergraduate engineering programmes. This paper highlights a Malaysian private engineering university’s endeavours to include SD competences within its undergraduate engineering programmes. The paper first focuses on the extent to which SD is featured within the institution’s programme educational outcomes and common modules. This was explored through qualitative means, namely manifest and latent content analysis. This is followed by a survey, to explore the present pedagogical practices within the undergraduate engineering programme to ascertain the extent to which it conforms to philosophies of education for sustainable development. Also highlighted are student stakeholders’ views on approaches best suited to teach sustainable development within the undergraduate engineering programme. The paper then discusses findings of a thematic analysis of open-ended survey responses on students’ needs that should be considered to help develop the desired sustainability learning experience in the university. A total of 12 categories were identified as a result of this thematic analysis, of which eight of these categories encompassed the common engineering modules i.e. (i) Practical versus Theoretical, (ii) Real sustainable development issues and situations, (iii) Sustainable development learning activities and assessment, (iv) The need for heightened exposure and awareness to sustainable development post-graduation, (v) Teaching and learning of sustainable development via knowledge of current technological trends, (vi) Sustainable development awareness through exposure within the engineering industry, (vii) Sustainable development content within current learning modules and (viii) Approach to teaching sustainable development. The remaining four categories identified were for the common non-engineering modules, namely (i) Communication and sustainable development, (ii) Approach to teaching sustainable development for non-engineering modules, (iii) Bringing real life sustainable development issues and situations into non-engineering modules and (iv) Relating engineering aspects with human and societal aspects. The paper ends with a discussion of the implications of these findings for the development of a holistic engineering education for sustainable development framework.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Abdullah A et al (2005) A Malaysian outcome-based engineering education model. Int J Eng Technol 2(1):14–21
Ab Rahman MN et al (2009) Assessment of engineering students perception after industrial training placement. Eur J Social Sci 8(3):420–431. http://www.eurojournals.com/ejss_8_3_06.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2010
Arsat M, Holgaard JE, de Graaff E (2011) Three dimensions of characterizing courses for sustainability in engineering education: models, approaches and orientations. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international congress on engineering education, Lisbon
Azami Zaharim M et al (2009) A gap study between employers’ perception and expectation of engineering graduates in Malaysia. WSEAS Trans Adv Eng Educ 6(11):409–419
Azami Zaharim et al (2010) Practical framework of employability skills for engineering graduate in Malaysia. In: Proceedings of IEEE EDUCON education engineering 2010-The future of global learning engineering education, pp 921–927. April 14–16, Madrid, Spain
Azmahani AAA, Sharipah NSS, Khairiyah MY, Amirmudin U, Jamaludin MY (2012) Developing a structural model of assessing students’ knowledge-attitudes towards sustainability. Procedia Social Behav Sci 56:513–522 (Proceedings of the International Conference on Teaching and Learning in Higher Education (ICTLHE))
Engineering Accreditation Council (EAC) (2012) Engineering programme accreditation manual 2012. http://www.eac.org.my/web/document/EAC%20Manual%202012.pdf. Accessed 14 Aug 2012
Fraenkel JR, Wallen NE (2000) How to design and evaluate research in education, 4th edn. McGraw Hill, Boston
Hamid MKA et al (2005) Crafting effective engineering problems for problem based learning: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia experiences. In: Proceedings of regional conference of engineering education, Johor, 12–13 Dec
Imel S (1998) Transformative learning in adulthood, ERIC Digest No.200. www.ericdigests.org/1999-2/adulthood.htm. Accessed 23 May 2009
Johari M et al (2002) A new engineering education model for Malaysia. Int J Eng Educ 18(1):8–16
McEwen L, Strachan G, Lynch K (2011) ‘Shock and awe’ or ‘reflection and change’: stakeholder perceptions of transformative learning in higher education. Learn Teach High Educ 5:34–55
Rohani JM (2005) Assessing the effectiveness of problem based learning (PBL) using quality function deployment (QFD): students perspective. In: Proceedings of regional conference of engineering education, Johor, 12–13 Dec
Omar MZ et al (2009) Measuring the outcomes from industrial training program. Eur J Social Sci 8(4):581–588. http://www.eurojournals.com/ejss_8_4_06.pdf. Accessed 28 Mar 2010
Sharipah NSS, Azmahani AA, Khairiyah MY (2012) Perception on sustainable development among new first year engineering undergraduates. Procedia Social Behav Sci 56:530–536 (Proceedings of international conference on teaching and learning in higher education (ICTLHE))
Taylor EW (1998) The theory and practice of transformative learning: a critical review, information series no. 374. Columbus: Eric Clearinghouse on adult, career, and vocational education, Center on Education and Training for Employment, College of Education, Ohio State University
Tilbury D (2011) ESD: an expert review of processes and learning. Paris: UNESCO. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0019/001914/191442e.pdf. Retrieved 30 Apr 2013
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Sivapalan, S., Subramaniam, G., Clifford, M.J. (2015). Institutional Practices Versus Student Needs and Its Implications for the Development of a Holistic Engineering Education for Sustainable Development (EESD) Framework. In: Leal Filho, W. (eds) Transformative Approaches to Sustainable Development at Universities. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08837-2_28
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08837-2_28
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-08836-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-08837-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)