These summary insights are from the roundtable on the theme: Tackling the Sustainability Skills Gap: Transforming engineering education. Learn more about our roundtable series here.
Do we need to reframe what it means to be an engineer?
Engineers have an essential role to play in building a sustainable future. From taking a systems approach to wicked problems to assessing potential solutions for unintended consequences, engineering education should aim to equip all engineers with the skills, knowledge and understanding to protect and improve our lives and our planet. However, in the words of our keynote provocateur, Richard K. Miller, Professor Emeritus and President Emeritus at Olin College of Engineering, this requires “redefin[ing] engineering as a profession focused on innovation with the deliberate intention to change lives on this large scale,” and “such a change… require[s] re-thinking the entire paradigm for engineering education.”
In other words, in order to create transformational change in engineering education, we first need to reframe what it means to be an engineer. Is an engineer someone who sits at a desk with a calculator, working on a brief that has been handed to them — or are they someone who brings their own creativity and entrepreneurship to the table to identify and address complex problems?
“I believe that there is a disconnect in engineering education that devalues the importance and impact individuals can have on ethics and sustainability throughout their careers.”
Engineering Student
When we start treating engineering as a profession that envisions what has never been and then does what it takes to make it real, it becomes clear we must readdress everything from how we select engineers to what and how we teach them.
We need to bring the real-world into the classroom
To use an analogy posed by Miller, teaching engineering purely through abstract theory is like preparing musicians by teaching them about sound waves but never allowing them to pick up an instrument.
Problem-based learning should be at the heart of engineering education, helping students interrogate the motivations behind briefs and practice balancing social, environmental, technological and economic factors, as well as differing stakeholder needs. There are many global advocates of problem-based learning, including the Grand Challenge Scholars Program.
At Olin College, students are put into small teams and challenged to identify a group of people whose lives they would like to change over the course of four months. They then spend time getting to know those stakeholders before ideating ways to improve their lives. Through this process the students develop a sense of identity, agency and purpose.
While all attendees were strongly in favor of this pedagogical approach, some did flag the challenge of integrating problem-based learning at scale in engineering departments with 5,000, rather than 500, students.
Interdisciplinary approaches can replicate real-world environments
Attendees agreed that traditional departments are outdated and prevent students from learning valuable skills and perspectives. A more interdisciplinary approach to higher education would not only allow students to break out of their “bubbles” and rid faculty of unhelpful thinking patterns (such as the dichotomy between “technical” and “non-technical” skills) but would also more closely replicate real-world working conditions.
While Olin has gone as far as eliminating departments all together, promoting interdisciplinary work can be a more straightforward — and still effective — approach (the Cross-Campus Capstone Classroom at York University, Toronto, is a good example).
“Climate change and its amalgam of intricately woven challenges present the greatest opportunity for training new engineers to think holistically. Technical design may well be acquired throughout an undergraduate degree but it lacks the ethical consideration & lens that can only be brought about through intersectional sustainability.”
Engineering Student
Students are effective advocates for change
While some institutions and faculty members might be resistant to change, students know exactly what they want to gain from their engineering education and are passionate about making their voices heard. As well as being a vital source of inspiration and fresh ideas, these students can also be important advocates for change within engineering departments and beyond.
But students shouldn’t just be mouthpieces. It’s important to build genuine partnerships with young people so that their perspectives are fully integrated into any decisions, particularly those students who have been traditionally marginalised and underserved.
Action should be top-down and bottom-up
Engineering departments can’t act alone. Rapid transformation at scale in higher education is a complex but vital mission involving a number of disparate forces, from government to trustees, faculty to students. Each of these stakeholder groups have their own agenda and influences — a one-pronged approach will not be enough.
Cross-institutional collaboration is also crucial to accelerate the excellent work already underway. Attendees pointed out that there are a number of similar, parallel initiatives and approaches in universities, colleges and other engineering bodies across the world. By bringing these together to form a “coalition of the willing”, we can align our goals and efforts, and multiply our impact.
Thank you to our partner, Times Higher Education, and to everyone who attended the roundtable. We look forward to continuing the conversation as we work to create educational models and opportunities that better prepare students for a changing world.
If you’re interested in learning more about future roundtables, please click here.