Engineering education for sustainable development : evaluation criteria for brazilian context
Izabela Simon Rampasso, Osvaldo L. G. Quelhas, Rosley Anholon, Marcio B. Pereira, Jocimar D. A. Miranda, Wenderson S. Alvarenga
ARTIGO
Inglês
Agradecimentos: This work was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) under Grants 307536/2018-1 and 305442/2018-0. This study was also supported and partially financed by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) -...
Ver mais
Agradecimentos: This work was supported by the Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) under Grants 307536/2018-1 and 305442/2018-0. This study was also supported and partially financed by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001, under process 88887.464433/2019-00
Ver menos
Considering the increasing importance of sustainability in future professionals’ education and the role played by engineers in society, this paper aims to analyze the key criteria that should be considered in models to evaluate the insertion level of sustainability into engineering education,...
Ver mais
Considering the increasing importance of sustainability in future professionals’ education and the role played by engineers in society, this paper aims to analyze the key criteria that should be considered in models to evaluate the insertion level of sustainability into engineering education, considering the Brazilian context. For this, criteria reported in the literature were collected and evaluated by engineering professors. The respondents were asked to classify the criteria as “essential”, “useful, but not essential”, or “not necessary”. Data collected were analyzed through Lawshe’s method. From 15 criteria collected from the literature, 5 were not considered essential to evaluate engineering education for sustainable development (EESD), according to data analysis: C2 (establishment of global partnerships), C4 (encouraging students to volunteer through extracurricular activities), C9 (use of active learning approaches to problem solving to teach aspects related to sustainability), C10 (use of service-learning towards the local community for educational purposes) and C15 (use of sustainability concept in university installations). It was possible to verify that most of these criteria (C2, C4, C10, and C15) were not directly related to engineering curricula, being parallel activities. Regarding C9, active learning approaches can enhance attributes important for students in the context of sustainable development, but they are not goals of EESD. This research contributes to the development of evaluation models for engineering education in the Brazilian context and its findings can also be useful for studies in other countries. No similar study was found in the literature
Ver menos
COORDENAÇÃO DE APERFEIÇOAMENTO DE PESSOAL DE NÍVEL SUPERIOR - CAPES
88887.464433/2019-00
CONSELHO NACIONAL DE DESENVOLVIMENTO CIENTÍFICO E TECNOLÓGICO - CNPQ
307536/2018-1; 305442/2018-0
Fechado
Anholon, Rosley, 1979-
Autor
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su12103947
Texto completo: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/3947
Engineering education for sustainable development : evaluation criteria for brazilian context
Izabela Simon Rampasso, Osvaldo L. G. Quelhas, Rosley Anholon, Marcio B. Pereira, Jocimar D. A. Miranda, Wenderson S. Alvarenga
Engineering education for sustainable development : evaluation criteria for brazilian context
Izabela Simon Rampasso, Osvaldo L. G. Quelhas, Rosley Anholon, Marcio B. Pereira, Jocimar D. A. Miranda, Wenderson S. Alvarenga
Fontes
|
Sustainability (Fonte avulsa) |