Comprehensive process and tools for integrating sustainability education into engineering curricula

Comprehensive Process and Tools for Integrating Sustainability Education into Engineering Curricula Gemma Tejedor, Boris Lazzarini, Jordi Segalàs, Eva Vidal, Fermín Sànchez-Carracedo1 Abstract This chapter outlines the process and tools developed in the EDINSOST projects to incorporate sustainability competences into Engineering degree curricula and competence building of faculty. It introduces the sustainability competency map for engineering degrees, defining learning outcomes essential for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) across all disciplines. The chapter details the survey of teaching staff and the methodology for constructing an ESD presence map within a degree, providing a nuanced understanding of the integration of sustainability principles. The ESD presence map serves as a crucial assessment tool, gauging the degree to which the sustainability map's learning outcomes are embedded in a specific curriculum. Additionally, the chapter presents outcomes from a student survey, elucidating student perceptions of achieving sustainability map-learning outcomes. Successfully tested across diverse degrees, the methodologies and tools have garnered endorsement from the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya-BarcelonaTech. This institution has adopted the EDINSOST model, solidifying its commitment to systematically introduce ESD across all bachelor degree programs. Keywords Sustainability · Education for Sustainable Development · UNESCO learning objectives · EDINSOST · Competency map 1 Introduction Universities have long been recognized as pivotal actors in addressing the challenges of sustainability across various disciplines. The imperative of sustainability extends to all facets of a university's mission—research, education, and knowledge transfer—and necessitates the integration of sustainability criteria and values into their strategies, plans, and management (Miñano et al. 2019; Yañez et al. 2019). Efforts to define and implement at university level the competencies required to address sustainability challenges have been recognised as key for a transition towards more sustainable societies. Furthermore, these efforts have induced comprehensive processes, which transcend disciplinary boundaries, complementing the specific skills of each academic and professional field. In this sense, in 2015, the United Nations 2030 Agenda (UN, 2015) underscored the pivotal role of universities in advancing sustainability and embedding the 1 University Research Institute for Sustainability Science and Technology, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, Jordi Girona 1-3, 08034 Barcelona, Spain E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], ESD into curricula, as a cornerstone mission for universities, given their unique capacity to address challenges facing society regarding sustainability. Together with ESD, integrating the SDGs offers benefits to universities themselves, fostering new collaborations with external stakeholders and expanding fields of study, research, and innovation (SDSN 2017, 2020). More recently, the UNESCO General Conference endorsed a new global framework for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) known as "Education for Sustainable Development: Towards the Achievement of the SDGs (UNESCO, 2019). This framework builds upon previous initiatives, such as the United Nations Decade of ESD (2005–2014) and the Global Action Program (GAP) on ESD (2015–2019). From an academic perspective, disciplines such as Sustainability Science advocate for a distinctive approach to leveraging and applying knowledge, with the aim of comprehending the intricate interplay between nature and society from a systemic and transdisciplinary perspective (Kates et al. 2001; Vilches and Gil Pérez, 2015). This approach is in accordance with the broader vision of sustainable development, emphasizing the integration of sustainability science and the SDGs. Despite the progress achieved in recent decades, numerous studies highlight significant barriers to implementing sustainability initiatives within universities, particularly in the sphere of teaching and learning (Buckler and Creech, 2014; Wals, 2014). Consequently, the integration of ESD into curricula remains a key challenge, necessitating a departure from conventional teaching paradigms towards more transformative approaches (SDSN, 2020). This challenge is particularly pronounced in engineering education, where the integration of ESD poses unique hurdles (Miñano et al. 2019; Lazzarini and Pérez-Foguet 2018; CTI, 2017). It is recognised that incorporating ESD into university education necessitates more than the introduction of new content; it also requires a fundamental shift in teaching and learning strategies (Tejedor et al. 2019). Key aspects include fostering critical and holistic perspectives; integrating sustainability criteria into problem-solving and decision-making processes; nurturing ethics and social responsibility; promoting interdisciplinary collaboration and engaging external stakeholders in university education (Moreso and Casadesus, 2017; Tilbury, 2011; Tejedor et al. 2019). Achieving this transformation demands a coordinated effort to embed sustainability competencies systematically throughout curricula, utilizing transformative learning approaches and integrating sustainability activities across courses (De Wit and Leask 2021; CTI, 2017; Lozano and Lozano, 2014; Colby and Sullivan, 2008). The ultimate goal is for sustainability competencies to be perceived as essential components of engineering education and, by extension, university education (Sanchez-Carracedo et al. 2022) From 2016 to 2022, two Edinsost projects were conducted to integrate sustainability competencies into Spanish university degree curricula (Sánchez-Carracedo 2021). Approximately sixty researchers from eleven Spanish universities participated in these projects, which covered thirteen degrees. The EDINSOST initiatives established ESD-related learning outcomes initially for Education, Engineering, and Business Administration degrees, with potential applicability to other fields. This chapter explains in detail how to introduce sustainability competences in the Spanish higher education system, presenting the case study for engineering education at UPC. The first Edinsost Project was primarily exploratory, analyzing the integration of sustainability into higher education (Sanchez-Carracedo et al. 2018). Notably, the concept of SDGs emerged after the project's initial proposal. In contrast, the second Edinsost2-SDG project focused on intervention and involved a similar number of researchers, universities, and degrees. Edinsost2-SDG incorporated the SDGs into the developed tools (Sanchez-Carracedo et al, 2021). Initiatives like EDINSOST and EDINSOST2-SDG aim to integrate sustainability into the curricula of the Spanish university system. They have developed methodologies for introducing and assessing ESD in engineering courses. This chapter focuses on how the EDINSOST method effectively incorporates sustainability competencies into engineering programs. It begins with creating a Sustainability Competency Map for each engineering degree, structured into three learning levels. The curriculum is then analyzed using the Sustainability Presence Map to identify areas needing SDG integration reinforcement. The work presented in this chapter seeks to address how to approach a methodological process for systematically introducing sustainability into university curricula. This is supported by a thorough teacher training program and an Open Educational Resources database for educators. Regular evaluations through student surveys and semi-annual reviews ensure the curriculum remains responsive to the evolving global demands for sustainability. 1.1. Sustainability Integration Process in the Engineering Curriculum The process of integrating sustainability into engineering curriculum through the EDINSOST methodology is designed with a holistic, systematic, and adaptive approach that aims to equip students with the competencies they will need to face sustainability challenges in their future professional environments. The first step in this process (figure 1) is the development of a Sustainability Competency Map (CSM) for each engineering degree. This map is based on the competency framework defined by CRUE, adapted to include the UNESCO Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) (UN 2015), organizing the competencies into three progressive levels of learning: to know, to know how, and to demonstrate by doing. Once the CSM is established, an analysis of the presence of sustainability in the curriculum is required by means of a Sustainability Presence Map, which assesses how and to what extent these competencies are integrated into the various courses and subjects. This analysis is essential in order to identify areas where the integration of the SDGs needs to be strengthened, allowing efforts to be directed more effectively towards these gaps. To ensure that teachers are equipped to deliver this content, a teacher training program is offered along with the creation of an Open Educational Resources (OER) database. These resources are available to teachers to help them effectively incorporate sustainability into their teaching, thereby enriching the educational process and ensuring that students achieve the expected learning outcomes in sustainability. It is necessary to conduct a monitoring and evaluation of the process by means of periodic questionnaires to students, which enable the perception of learning in sustainability to be measured. This feedback is crucial for making continuous adjustments and improvements in the curriculum and teaching methodologies. Additionally, a semi-annual review and adaptation of the process should be carried out in collaboration with academic coordinators and the learning community. This iterative approach ensures that sustainability competencies are effectively and coherently integrated throughout the curriculum, thus proactively responding to the challenges and demands of a constantly changing global environment. Figure 1 Process for introducing Sustainability competences in Higher Education. The Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech (UPC) has carried out a pilot project using EDINSOST tools to integrate sustainability into its degree curricula, through an innovative approach that involves students, teachers and managers in a collaborative and reflective process. Through this pilot project, UPC is demonstrating a strong commitment to sustainability education, with the aim of preparing students to face global challenges with a solid foundation of sustainability knowledge and skills. The pilot represents an important step towards the full integration of these competencies in all its academic programmes. The pilot project also benefited from a bottom-up and top-down approach, facilitating the active participation of the university community and ensuring the institutional support necessary for the sustainability of the programme. 2 Methodology 2.1. Sustainability Competency Map (SCM) for Engineering Curricula Initially, the EDINSOST2-SDG project team designed a common Sustainability Competency Map (SCM) applicable to all engineering degrees. The process for designing and validating this SCM is detailed in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021). The SCM for engineering employs a matrix structure based on the four sustainability competencies defined by the Conference of Rectors of Spanish Universities (CRUE, 2012). ● C1: Critical contextualization of knowledge by establishing interrelations with social, economic, environmental, local and/or global problems; ● C2: Sustainable use of resources and prevention of negative impacts on the natural and social environment; ● C3: Participation in community processes that promote sustainability; ● C4: Application of ethical principles related to the values of sustainability in personal and professional behavior; Each competency is further developed into one or more competency units, defined primarily using the three sustainability dimensions (environmental, social, and economic) along with a holistic dimension. Where feasible, the holistic dimension alone was used to simplify the map. Thus, competencies C1, C3, and C4 each have a single, holistically defined competency unit, whereas competency C2 is broken down into four units, one for each dimension. Each competency unit is articulated in terms of learning outcomes, using the simplified Miller pyramid (Miller, 1990) taxonomy, which comprises three levels: know, know-how, and ‘demonstrate + do’ (the original pyramid has four levels, separating 'demonstrate' and 'do'). This simplified taxonomy reduces the number of SCM cells and learning outcomes, facilitating integration into degree curricula. The initial SCM described in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021) includes 53 learning outcomes. Figure 2 presents an outline of this map. Figure 2 Diagram of the initial engineering SCM. Each cell of the map may contain one or more learning outcomes. To align the engineering SCM with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a table was developed linking the SCM learning outcomes to SDG targets (UN, 2015) and UNESCO learning objectives (UNESCO, 2018). The creation and validation of this table are detailed in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021). Given the complexity of distributing 53 learning outcomes across sustainability-related subjects, the EDINSOST2-SDG team simplified the SCM by reducing the number of outcomes. The goal was for each cell in the simplified map to correspond to a single learning outcome wherever possible. This simplification and validation process is outlined in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2022), resulting in an SCM with 29 learning outcomes. Tables linking these outcomes to UNESCO learning objectives and UN SDG targets are provided in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2022). 2.1.1. Algorithm for Creating an SCM for a Specific Engineering Degree The simplified engineering SCM encompasses the Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) learning outcomes common to all engineering degrees, incorporating SDGs through their relationship with UNESCO objectives and UN targets. In order to create an SCM for a specific engineering discipline (e.g., IT, civil engineering), additional ESD-specific learning outcomes must be added. The methodology for this process involves: 1. Starting from the common engineering SCM, which contains the learning outcomes common to all engineering degrees; 2. Analyzing UN targets and UNESCO objectives relevant to the specific discipline; 3. Identifying existing learning outcomes that cover these targets and objectives; 4. Updating the relationship table if relevant outcomes exist 5. Defining new learning outcomes if necessary and updating the relationship table accordingly; This process should be performed with the aim of adding as few new learning outcomes as possible, with each new outcome potentially covering multiple UN targets or UNESCO objectives. 2.2. Sustainability Presence Map The sustainability presence map for a degree details the extent to which each SCM learning outcome is integrated into the curriculum. This map is constructed on the basis of semi-structured interviews with professors responsible for ESD-related courses. Professors complete a questionnaire beforehand, which interviewers use to guide the interview. Interviewers must be well-versed in the degree’s SCM in order to carefully and accurately complete the sustainability presence map. Consistency in completing this map ensures uniform criteria across all subjects, independent of individual professors' experience and knowledge.This consistency is supported by the fact that the sustainable presence map is completed by a single person (or a small group working in a coordinated way), thus ensuring that the same criteria are followed in all the themes of the itinerary. The professor questionnaire, a simplified version of that presented in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2021), was modified to fit the simplified engineering SCM. The simplification methodology is detailed in Sánchez-Carracedo et al. (2022). 2.3. Student Questionnaire Sustainability Once the SCM is embedded in a degree curriculum and the presence map has been established, it is essential to validate that students are achieving the SCM learning outcomes. In accordance with this aim, the EDINSOST projects developed a questionnaire to assess students' perceptions of their learning outcomes acquisition. The questionnaire design began with the simplified engineering SCM, ensuring each learning outcome was addressed. The process included: 1. Drafting questions aligned with the simplified SCM learning outcomes by a subgroup of three engineering group researchers belonging to the project. 2. Individually review of the questionnaire by the remaining engineering group researchers (1st validation group), who suggested relevance-based revisions (in particular, the relevance of each question on the basis of its relation to the simplified engineering SCM). 3. A group meeting to discuss and refine the different contributions and suggestions and generate a new version of the questionnaire. 4. A second validation conducted by researchers from education and business administration and management groups (2nd validation group), who individually reviewed, made suggestions and proposed further revisions. The entire EDINSOST team then analyzed these proposals to produce the final version of the questionnaire. 2.4. Faculty Capacity Building Course A “training the trainers” workshop was held by the research team of the EDINSOST projects, based on the previous results and tools designed throughout the project. The target group of the workshop consisting of lecturers in the field of Engineering and Architecture who recognize their responsibility to contribute to the training of people and professionals committed to the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda through their teaching practice, and wish to integrate sustainability into the planning and design of the subjects they teach. The workshop was designed by the experts belonging to the EDINSOST projects, subsequently first piloted by the research team of the project, and then readjusted and finally run in different contexts and universities. The workshop was designed to be applied in three fields of knowledge: Engineering, Teachers Education, Business and Economics, involving the training of more than 250 faculty. This chapter presents the case studies and results for the Engineering Education field (see Table 1). Table 1 Case studies carried out in the different universities. University Country Format Date Number of trainees Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) ES Virtual 2021 - Feb 23 University of the Basque Country (EHU/UPV) ES Virtual 2022 - Jun 19 Universidad Politécnica de Madrid/Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UPM/UCM) ES Face-to-face 2021 - Apr 30 Universidad Politécnica de Madrid/Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UPM/UCM) ES Face-to-face 2022 - Mar 30 University of Porto (FEUP) PT Face-to face2022 – Jun 22 Sokoine University of Agriculture (SUA) TZ Face-to-face 2022 - Oct 12 State University of Zanzibar (SUZA) TZ Face-to-face 2022 – Oct 16 Universidad de Cádiz (UCA) ES Virtual 2023 - Jan 29 Total 152 2.5. Sustainability competence at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech (UPC) A pilot has been carried out by the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech (UPC), using EDINSOST tools to integrate sustainability into its degree curricula. In the first phase of the pilot, eight degrees from different UPC schools were selected to test and implement new sustainability competencies. Each degree was led by its academic coordinator, who played a key role in adapting and evaluating the curricula. The EDINSOST Sustainability Presence Map tool was used to identify and visualise the integration of sustainability competences into existing courses, allowing academics to better adapt and plan the necessary changes. To ensure in-depth understanding and effective implementation, EDINSOST training courses were developed to train teachers in sustainability-specific content and appropriate pedagogical methods. Teachers were also surveyed in order to acquire direct feedback on their current teaching and to identify areas for improvement. An essential part of the pilot was the implementation of the sustainability guide for final projects (Bachelor's and Master's), initiated in the EDINSOST project, which will serve as a final learning and assessment tool for students. This guide includes questions designed to make students reflect on the environmental, social and economic impacts of their projects, and incorporates gender equity aspects to foster an inclusive and comprehensive approach. 3 Results 3.1. Engineering SCM Simplified As detailed in Section 2, the EDINSOST2-SDG team simplified the engineering SCM to make it easier to handle for professors and management teams unfamiliar with ESD. The simplified engineering SCM consists of only 29 learning outcomes, compared to 53 in the original one. An outline of the simplified engineering SCM with the final definition of the competency units and the coding of the learning outcomes as provided in (Sánchez-Carracedo et al., 2022), as well as the precise definition of each learning outcomes. 3.2. Presence Map The design of the professors’ questionnaire was based on the engineering SCM, with the purpose of determining which learning outcomes are developed in each subject and to what extent the teacher considers that they are developed in the subject (García-Gallofré and Segalàs 2021). The questions are answered using a four-point Likert scale with the following meaning: ● Nothing: the learning outcome is not developed in the subject; ● A little: the learning outcome is developed superficially or partially; ● Enough: the learning outcome is developed more than superficially but not in depth; ● A lot: the learning outcome is developed in depth. The questionnaire consists of 18 questions (compared to the 29 learning outcomes of the SCM). This reduction in the number of questions compared to the number of learning outcomes makes it easier for professors to answer the questionnaire. In each question, keywords are highlighted to facilitate understanding. The questions included in the questionnaire are presented in Tables 4–7 and grouped into four categories: ● Critical contextualization of the concept of sustainability; ● Sustainable use of resources and prevention of impacts (environmental, social and economic); ● Participation in integrative processes of reflection and decision making; ● Application of ethical and deontological principles. These categories correspond to the CRUE competencies in sustainability (CRUE, 2012), although in the questionnaire, they are referred to as categories to facilitate understanding for professors unfamiliar with competency-based learning. In the last category, the questionnaire specifies that the following ethical principles related to sustainability values are considered: equality; justice; the precautionary principle; prevention of damage; responsibility to present and future generations; protection and restoration of a healthy environment; and social, economic and environmental human rights (this text is not included in Table 5). Two different tools are used in the workshop, the first of which is the Sustainability Competency Map for Engineering education (Sánchez-Carracedo et al., 2022). The second tool is the Learning activity worksheet (Table 7), which enables trainees to design in detail a learning activity that includes both specific competences of the subject in which the activity will be applied, as well as the sustainability competences and learning outcomes of the ESCM. Table 7 Learning activity worksheet. Categorization information Name of group members University and center Degree Learning Objectives from the Sustainability Map, to be worked on (Include complete number and text) Related SDGs Competency unit (s) (Include complete number and text) Competency(ies) from the map (Include complete number and text) Name of the activity (include title, two lines maximum) Objectives of the activity (including the desired final result, measured by specific indicators). Specific Objectives for the subject described in the teaching guide + Sustainability Objectives (related to the Learning Objectives of the sustainability map to be worked on) Degree competencies that are worked on the activity Characteristics of the sessions: ● Number ● Duration ● Type (theory, problems, lab, others). Description of the activity (including a textual description consisting of a 100-200 word summary of the work required from the students. The tasks to be completed, as requested in detail in the subsequent sections, should NOT be copied but summarized). This description must provide a clear idea of the work to be completed by the student and how it will be conducted. Subjects for which the activity is proposed ● Degree: ● Subject/course: ● Total number of participants: ● Work methodology (individual / collaborative): Description of the activity/tasks to be done and time estimation This section distinguishes between those tasks that are done ONLY the FIRST TIME the activity is prepared and those that are carried out EVERY TIME the activity is done. A well-designed activity is reusable, and as such it requires LITTLE EXTRA teacher time (outside the classroom) EVERY TIME it is done. It may, however, require more time the FIRST TIME it is designed. The time needed to perform EACH TASK should be estimated precisely, both in and outside the classroom, by the teacher and the student. The time spent on it should be as detailed and accurate as possible. Teachers’ work/tasks outside the classroom EXCLUSIVELY TO PREPARE the activity THE FIRST TIME it is done (do not consider tasks that are carried out each time the activity is done, nor tasks that are carried out INSIDE class because they are done every time). Indicate the time spent on EACH task. Teachers’ work/tasks in and outside the classroom to CARRY OUT the activity every time (but not to prepare it the first time, when it is planned). Indicate the time spent on EACH task. Students’ work/tasks in the classroom Indicate the time spent on EACH task. Students’ work/tasks outside the classroom (before and after). Indicate the time spent on EACH task. Necessary material to carry out the activity (documentation, material, instruments, etc.) The material may consist of books, notes, objects, instruments, etc. Material needed for the student (detail precisely). Material needed for the teacher (detail precisely). The conditions necessary to develop the activity by the center, the teacher and the students (role of the teacher, type of classrooms, number of students per group, equipment, etc.). Evaluation This section is for reflecting on how to evaluate the activity. It is necessary to define the instruments and criteria to be used in order to evaluate each indicator, and the evaluating agent for each indicator. Indicators showing that the student has achieved the objectives of the activity What will be evaluated? Evaluation tools Which tool will be used to evaluate each indicator? ● Exams ● Tests ● Practices ● Problems ● Assignments ● Oral presentations ● Other Identify which instrument will be used to evaluate each indicator (several factors -or indicatorscan be evaluated in the activity, and each indicator can be evaluated differently). Evaluation tools How is the correction criteria for each indicator established? ● Rubric ● Descriptive text ● Other Which agent will perform the evaluation of each indicator? ● The student himor herself ● Peer evaluation ● The teacher Additional comments 3.4.2. Course assessment The course's effectiveness was evaluated through a comprehensive questionnaire administered to the 152 participants after they completed the training. According to the main results of the questionnaire, the impact on teaching was shown to be very high, since 95% of trainees confirm that after attending the workshop they felt prepared to include activities related to sustainable development in the subjects they teach. This high level of preparedness reflects the workshop's success in meeting its educational objectives and ensuring that participants felt confident in applying what they had learned. Figure 4 illustrates how participants rated their preparedness to introduce sustainability into their teaching practices post-training. Figure 4 Capacity to introduce sustainability in teaching practice after the training (sample 68%), based on rating the question: After attending this course, I will include activities related to sustainable development in the subjects I teach. In terms of tools, the effectiveness of the 'Learning Activity Worksheet' was assessed among participants (70% sample) based on their rating of the question: "The Learning Activity Worksheet helped me to achieve the course objectives". The worksheet was generally considered to be helpful and assisted trainees to achieve the course objectives. Only in one university did a few participants (less than 5% of the responses) disagree. Overall, the workshop received strong endorsement from the trainees, with more than 95% stating they would recommend the workshop to their colleagues, on the understanding that they only recommend activities they like. This high recommendation rate suggests that the workshop was well-received and considered highly beneficial by the majority of participants. By systematically evaluating the course through these various lenses, the assessment highlighted the workshop's strengths and provided a roadmap for further improvements. 3.5. Development of the UPC pilot plan using EDINSOST project tools Since 2021, the pilot plan carried out at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC) has achieved several significant results in the integration of sustainability and social engagement competences in its academic programmes, using the tools developed by the EDINSOST projects. Some of these results are presented below: 1. Inclusion of Sustainability in Study Plans: Following the guidelines of Royal Decree 822/2021, the inclusion of sustainability as a transversal competence in the curricula of various Bachelor's and Master's degrees has been implemented. This involves adapting the curriculum to ensure that all students acquire knowledge and skills related to sustainability before graduation. 2. Development of Learning Resources: A database of specific learning resources (OER) has been created to facilitate the acquisition of sustainability competencies. These resources include teaching materials, implementation guides, and assessment tools designed to be integrated into different courses. 3. Faculty Training: Specific training is being conducted for teachers, focused on integrating sustainability into their own teaching modules. The training includes face-to-face or online workshops and collaborative work sessions, with the aim of making it easier for educators to incorporate sustainability concepts into their subjects. 4. Impact on Final Degree and Master's Projects: The analysis of sustainability and ethical implications has been integrated into final degree and master's projects (TFG/TFM). This has been supported by a specific Guide for incorporating sustainability analysis and ethical implications in the TFG/TFM, to ensure that students' final projects address critical aspects of sustainability and social responsibility, as well as a guide, a rubric and specific training for faculty on how to evaluate them. 5. Collaboration and Dissemination: The results of this pilot plan were presented at the Transatlantic Symposium on Sustainable Development: North American and European Perspectives on Sustainability in Higher Education (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, United States, 02.10.2023 – 04.10.2023). 4 Conclusions The comprehensive process and tools developed through the EDINSOST projects have proven effective in integrating Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) into engineering degree curricula. This chapter has detailed the meticulous and systematic process used to create and validate the Sustainability Competency Map (SCM) specific to each engineering degree, structured into three progressive learning levels. The implementation of the Sustainability Presence Map (SPM) has enabled for the assessment of how well sustainability competencies are integrated into the curriculum across various degrees. This analysis has been crucial in identifying areas that need reinforcement in terms of Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) integration, thereby facilitating a more effective distribution of efforts to address these gaps. The faculty training program and the creation of an Open Educational Resources (OER) database have been fundamental in equipping teachers with the tools needed to incorporate sustainability into their teaching. This training has not only enriched the educational process but has also ensured that students achieve the expected learning outcomes in sustainability. The results of the training have been highly positive, with 95% of participants feeling prepared to include sustainability-related activities in their courses and recommending the workshop to their colleagues. These results underscore the effectiveness of the workshop and its perceived value within the educational community. Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the process through periodic student questionnaires allows for ongoing adjustments and improvements in the curriculum and teaching methodologies. This iterative approach contributes to the effective and coherent integration of sustainability competences across the curriculum. The pilot project implemented at the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya - BarcelonaTech (UPC) has demonstrated a strong and effective commitment to sustainability education. Nevertheless, the active participation of administrators, teachers, and students in a collaborative and reflective process are crucial for the successful implementation of processes such as this. The adoption of tools such as the Sustainability Competency Map and the Sustainability Guide for final projects has provided a solid structure for sustainability assessment and learning. The process has established an effective and replicable model for integrating sustainability into engineering education. The developed methodologies and tools have not only been well received but have also proven to be practical and applicable, ensuring that students are well-prepared to contribute to sustainability in their future careers. Recommendations for continuous improvement ensure that this model will continue to evolve in order to meet emerging needs in engineering education. The process and tools presented in this chapter are primarily designed for application within the Spanish higher education system. This focus stems from the utilization of the four sustainability competences defined by the Rectors Committee of Spanish Universities (CRUE) as the foundation for the Sustainability Competence Map (SCM). Consequently, adaptations may be necessary for implementation within the context of other higher education systems, particularly those with distinct accreditation agency requirements. Furthermore, the chapter has specifically explored the application of these tools within the field of engineering education. While the core process remains relevant, adaptations and refinements will likely be required for successful implementation in other disciplines. Future research endeavors will prioritize the adaptation of the tools to a broader range of knowledge fields and educational contexts. Acknowledgements The hard work of the entire EDINSOST and EDINSOS2-ODS project team over more than 6 years has made this chapter possible. References Buckler C, Creech H (2014) Shaping the Future We Want: UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005–2014), Final Report; UNESCO: Paris, France. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000230302 Colby A, Sullivan WM (2008) Ethics Teaching in Undergraduate Engineering Education. J. Eng. Educ., 97:327–338. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00982.x CRUE (2012). Directrices para la Introducción de la Sostenibilidad en el Curriculum. [Guidelines for Introducing Sustainability into the Curriculum]. Madrid, Spain: Grupo de Trabajo de Calidad Ambiental y Desarrollo Sostenible de la Conferencia de Rectores de las Universidades Españolas. https://www.crue.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Directrices_Sosteniblidad_Crue2012.pdf CTI (2017) Comission des Titres d’Ingénieur. Restitution des FOCUS d’Audit 2016–2017 [French Engineering Education Accreditation Commission: Feedback on 2016-2017 Audit Focus Areas]; Comission des Titres d’Ingénieur: Paris, France. https://www.cti-commission.fr/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/FOCUS_R2017_Restitution_201702.pdf De Wit H, Leask B (2017) Reimagining the Curriculum for the 21st Century. In Higher Education in the World 6. Towards a Socially Responsible University: Balancing the Global with the Local; Global University Network for Innovation, GUNI: Girona, Spain pp 222–235. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248150 Garcia-Gallofré V, Segalàs Coral J (2021) Assessing SDGs ‘learning objectives in Engineering Education. Case study Engineering in Industrial Design and Product Development at UPC Barcelona Tech. In Blended Learning in Engineering Education: Challenging, Enlightening-and Lasting? proceedings of the European Society for Engineering Education (SEFI) 49th Annual Conference, 13–16 September 2021 pp 217–225. Kates RW, Clark WC, Corell R, Hall J.M, Jaeger CC, Lowe I, McCarthy JJ, Schellnhuber HJ, Bolin B, Dickson NM, et al. (2001) Environment and development. Sustainability science. Science 292:641–642. 10.1126/science.1059386 Lazzarini B, Pérez-Foguet A (2018) Profiling research of the engineering academics who successfully promote education in Sustainable Human Development. J. Clean. Prod., 172:4239-4253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.234 Lozano FJ, Lozano R (2014) Developing the curriculum for a new Bachelor’s degree in engineering for sustainable development. J. Clean. Prod., 64:136–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.08.022 Michalewicz Z, Michalewicz M (2008) Puzzle-Based Learning: An Introduction to Critical Thinking, Mathematics, and Problem Solving. Hybrid Publishers. ISBN: 9781876462635. Miller, G.E. 1990 The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance. Acad Med. 65(9 Suppl): S63-7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-199009000-00045 Moreso JJ, Casadesús M (2017) Preparing the Global Citizenry, Implications for the Curriculum. In Higher Education in the World 6. Towards a Socially Responsible University: Balancing the Global with the Local; Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI): Girona, Spain pp 181–193. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000248150 Miñano R, Uribe D, Moreno-Romero A, Yáñez S (2019) Embedding Sustainability Competences into Engineering Education. The Case of Informatics Engineering and Industrial Engineering Degree Programs at Spanish Universities. Sustainability, 11:5832. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11205832 Sánchez-Carracedo F, Segalàs J, Vidal E, Martín C, Climent J, López D, Cabré J (2018) Improving engineering educators’ sustainability competencies by using competency maps: The EDINSOST project. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 34:1527–1537. Sánchez-Carracedo F, Segalàs J, Bueno G, Busquets P, Climent J, Galofré V.G, Lazzarini B, López D, Martín C, Miñano R, Sáez De Cámara E, Sureda B, Tejedor G, Vidal E (2021) Tools for Embedding and Assessing Sustainable Development Goals in Engineering Education. Sustainability, 13:12154. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112154 Sánchez-Carracedo F, Segalàs J, Busquets P, Camacho S, Climent J, Lazzarini B, Martín C, Miñano R, Sáez De Cámara E, Sureda B, Tejedor G, Vidal E (2022) Using Competency Maps for Embedding and Assessing Sustainability in Engineering Degrees. Trends in Higher Education 1(1):58-81. https://doi.org/10.3390/higheredu1010006 SDSN Australia/Pacific (2017) Getting Started with the SDGs in Universities: A Guide for Universities, Higher Education Institutions, and the Academic Sector. Australia, New Zealand and Pacific Edition. Sustainable Development Solutions Network—Australia/Pacific, Melbourne. http://ap-unsdsn.org/wp-content/uploads/University-SDG-Guide_web.pdf SDSN (2020) Accelerating Education for the SDGs in Universities: A Guide for Universities, Colleges, and Tertiary and Higher Education Institutions. New York: Sustainable Development Solutions Network. https://www.unsdsn.org/accelerating-education-for-the-sdgs-in-univerisities Tejedor G, Segalàs J, Barrón Á, Fernández-Morilla M, Fuertes M.T, Ruiz-Morales J, Gutiérrez I, García-González E, Aramburuzabala P, Hernández À. (2019) Didactic Strategies to Promote Competencies in Sustainability. Sustainability 11:2086. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11072086 Tejedor G, Segalas J, Cebrián G. (2019) Correction to: Action research workshop for transdisciplinary sustainability science. Sustainability science 14:859. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-018-00654-9 Tilbury D (2011) Higher education for sustainability: A global overview of commitment and progress. In Higher Education in the World 4. Higher Education’s Commitment to Sustainability from Understanding to Action; Global University Network for Innovation (GUNI): Girona, Spain pp 18–28. Yáñez S, Uruburu Á, Moreno A, Lumbreras J (2019) The sustainability report as an essential tool for the holistic and strategic vision of higher education institutions. J. Clean. Prod. 207:57–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.09.171 UN (2015) Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. https://undocs.org/en/ A/RES/70/1 UNESCO (2018) Education for sustainable development goals: Learning objectives. UNESCO publishing. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000247444 UNESCO (2019) Framework for the Implementation of Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) beyond 2019. In Proceedings of the 40th UNESCO General Conference, Paris, France, November 2019 12–27. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/notice?id=p::usmarcdef_0000370215 Vilches A, Gil Pérez D (2015) Ciencia de La Sostenibilidad: ¿Una Nueva Disciplina o Un Nuevo Enfoque Para Todas Las Disciplinas? [Sustainability Science: A New Discipline or a New Approach for All Disciplines?] Rev. Iberoam. Educ. 69:39–60. https://doi.org/10.35362/rie691152 Wals, A.E. Sustainability in higher education in the context of the UN DESD: A review of learning and institutionalization processes. J. Clean. Prod. 2014, 62, 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.06.007