Assessment and Improvement of Sustainability Education in Civil And

ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY EDUCATION IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING A Dissertation Presented to The Academic Faculty by Mary Katherine Watson In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology August 2013 Copyright 2013 by Mary Katherine Watson ASSESSMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF SUSTAINABILITY EDUCATION IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Approved by: Dr. Michael Rodgers, Advisor Dr. Randall Guensler School of Civil and Environmental School of Civil and Environmental Engineering Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Donna Llewellyn Dr. James Mulholland School of Industrial and Systems School of Civil and Environmental Engineering; Center for the Enhancement of Engineering Teaching and Learning Georgia Institute of Technology Georgia Institute of Technology Dr. Caroline Noyes Dr. Kari Watkins Office of Assessment School of Civil and Environmental Georgia Institute of Technology Engineering Georgia Institute of Technology Date Approved: April 30, 2013 This work is dedicated to my loving husband who has selflessly supported me in all of my personal and professional endeavors. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Foremost, I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Michael Rodgers for his support during my time at Georgia Tech. He has been an exceptional mentor who has encouraged me to develop expertise in unconventional, interdisciplinary research areas. Always a pleasure to work with, his honest and insightful advice has been indispensable. In addition to my advisor, I would also like to thank my committee members. Drs. Nelson Baker, Randall Guensler, Donna Llewellyn, James Mulholland, Caroline Noyes, and Kari Watkins have provided valuable input that has greatly improved this research project. I would especially like to thank Dr. Noyes for her countless hours of guidance in the development and analysis of assessment methods. Of course, this project would not have been possible without all of my undergraduate participants and graduate student collaborators. Special thanks to the students enrolled in Capstone Design and Civil Engineering Systems between Fall 2011 and Fall 2012. Much of this work could not have been conducted without the help of many of my colleagues, including Elise Barella, Alexandra Coso, Franklin Gbologah, Malek Hajaya, Teresa Misiti, Joshua Pelkey, Alex Samoylov, Ulas Tezel, and Tom Wall. I would also like to thank my family and friends who have encouraged me over the years. My husband, Joshua Pelkey, has brought great happiness and balance to my life. Also, I would not have succeeded without my parents, David and Ann Marie Watson, who have always modeled for me the virtues of dedication and sacrifice. Finally, my “sisters” Amanda Hobson, Carolyn Bone, and Audrey Bone have been constant sources of support and entertainment. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iv LIST OF TABLES x LIST OF FIGURES xviii NOMENCLATURE xxii SUMMARY xxvi CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1 Sustainable Development and Engineering Education 1 Engineering Education Research 3 Project Outline 6 2 Literature Review 8 Chapter Overview 8 Sustainable Development and Sustainability 8 Sustainability Science and Engineering 22 Sustainability Education 48 Summary 72 3 Research Methodology and Related Methods 73 Overview: Methodology, Methods, and Theoretical Perspective 73 Case Study Context: Civil and Environmental Engineering 75 at the Georgia Institute of Technology Project Overview 81 General Statistical Tools and Methods 82 v Curricular and Knowledge Assessment Tools 86 Methods for Assessing the Quality of Sustainability Education 120 in CEE at Georgia Tech (Goal 1) Methods for Improving the Quality of Sustainability Education 129 in CEE at Georgia Tech (Goal 2) Summary of Assessments and Participants 137 4 Analyzing Student Perceptions of Sustainability Education 139 Chapter Overview 139 Results 139 Discussion 149 Limitations 154 Summary and Conclusions 155 5 Examining the Sustainability Content of the CEE Curriculum 157 Chapter Overview 157 Results 157 Discussion 165 Limitations 170 Summary and Conclusions 171 6 Analyzing Undergraduates’ Conceptual Sustainability Knowledge 173 Chapter Overview 173 Results 173 Discussion 178 Limitations 182 Summary and Conclusions 183 vi 7 Investigating the Abilities of Undergraduates to Engage in 185 Sustainable Design Chapter Overview 185 Results 185 Discussion 200 Limitations 206 Summary and Conclusions 206 8 A Module for Teaching Sustainability ‘Around the Cycle’ 209 Chapter Overview 209 Summary of Assessment Results and Related Literature 209 Module Goals and Objectives 214 Module Components 214 Module Theoretical Basis 225 Incorporation of Curricular and Knowledge Assessment Results 228 Limitations 230 Summary and Conclusions 230 9 Impacts of Implementing a Learning-Cycle-Based Sustainability 232 Module into A CEE Capstone Design Course Chapter Overview 232 Results 232 Discussion 249 Limitations 254 Summary and Conclusions 256 vii 10 Impacts of Implementing a Learning-Cycle-Based Sustainability 258 Module into CEE Cornerstone Design Courses Chapter Overview 258 Results 259 Discussion 283 Limitations 290 Summary and Conclusions 291 11 Conclusions, Contributions, and Future Work 294 Project Conclusions 294 Contributions 298 Future Work 301 APPENDIX A: Selected CEE Course Syllabi 303 APPENDIX B: Examples of Student Consideration of Sustainable 323 Design Criteria in Capstone Design Project Reports APPENDIX C: Student Sustainability Survey 329 APPENDIX D: Student Curriculum Survey 338 APPENDIX E: Sustainability Module Evaluation Materials 344 (Capstone Design) APPENDIX F: Sustainability Module Evaluation Materials 348 (Cornerstone Design) APPENDIX G: STAUNCH® Report 355 APPENDIX H: Sustainability Module for Capstone Design Course 375 APPENDIX I: Sustainability Module for Cornerstone Design Course 404 REFERENCES 439 viii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1.1: Five research areas for Engineering Education. 5 Table 1.2: Research outline, including engineering education research areas addressed. 7 Table 2.1: Summary of sustainable development and sustainability definitions. 12 Table 2.2: Criteria for a development to comply with the three sustainability pillars 15 Table 2.3: Description of five types of capitals that are available for sustainable 19 development. Table 2.4: Twelve Principles of Green Engineering. 24 Table 2.5: Core sustainability science research questions. 26 Table 2.6: System conditions and corresponding sustainability principles outlined 27 in the Natural Step Framework. Table 2.7: Summary of the Principles of Biomimicry and the Principles of Life, 28 which describe the basis for natural sustainability. Table 2.8: Economic, environmental, and social sustainability indicators 30 Table 2.9: Participatory and natural framework methods for backcasting. 34 Table 2.10: Nine Principles of Sustainable Engineering. 37 Table 2.11: Hannover Principles for sustainable design. 38 Table 2.12: Themes and subthemes for use in UNCSD indicator scheme. 43 Table 2.13: MET Matrix for completion of an abridged LCA analysis 45 Table 2.14: Application of Eco-Indicator 99 tool to determine the eco-score 47 of a design project. Table 2.15: Methodologies for incorporating sustainability principles 51 into engineering curricula. ix Table 3.1: Courses required for both civil and environmental engineers. 76 Table 3.2: Additional courses required for civil and environmental engineers. 76 Table 3.3: Choice of inferential statistical test based on the level of measurements 84 of the independent (IV) and dependent (DV) variables. Table 3.5: STAUNCH® grading rubric. 89 Table 3.4: Key topics organized by sustainability theme. 88 Table 3.6: Benchmarks for contribution and strength metrics. 90 Table 3.7: Rubric for traditional cmap scoring approach. 95 Table 3.8: Rubric for holistic cmap scoring approach. 96 Table 3.9: Examples of concept categorization based on ten sustainability 97 categories. Table 3.10: Metrics to score cmaps using categorical method. 98 Table 3.11: Interrater reliability of cmap scoring methods. 101 Table 3.12: Correlations between traditional and holistic cmap sub-scores. 102 Table 3.13: Correlations between overall cmaps scores. 103 Table 3.14: Sample scoring rubric, including the 16 sustainable design criteria, 109 used to evaluate capstone design projects. Table 3.15: Example applications of sustainable design criteria in capstone 110 design projects. Table 3.16: Rating scale for awarding earned and potential points. 112 Table 3.17: Interpretation of earned points rating scale for selected criteria. 113 Table 3.18: Sustainable design metrics for use with the Sustainable Design Rubric. 113 Table 3.19: Summary of surveys used to explore student insights into sustainability 117 and sustainability education. x Table 3.20: Summary of 2010-2011 CEE courses analyzed using STAUNCH®. 123 Table 3.21: Model of the ANOVA table used to compare main effects and 132 interactions between pre- and post-cmap scores from two different cohorts. Table 3.22: Model of 22 McNemar contingency table used to compare pre- and 133 post-survey responses within a single cohort of students. Table 3.23: Model of 22 contingency table used to compare changes in survey 133 scores between two different cohorts. Table 3.24: Summary of assessments implemented in capstone and cornerstone 138 design courses. Table 4.1: Student interest in sustainability-related topics. 141 Table 4.2: Student

Load more