IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i14p8074-d597480.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating STEM-Based Sustainability Understanding: A Cognitive Mapping Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth L. Petrun Sayers

    (RAND Corporation, Behavioral and Policy Sciences Department, Arlington, VA 22202, USA)

  • Christopher A. Craig

    (Arthur J. Bauenerfeind College of Business, Murray State University, Murray, KY 42071, USA)

  • Emily Skonicki

    (Department of Social Science & Cultural Studies, Montana State University Billings, Billings, MT 59101, USA)

  • Grace Gahlon

    (RAND Corporation, Behavioral and Policy Sciences Department, Arlington, VA 22202, USA)

  • Susan Gilbertz

    (Department of Social Science & Cultural Studies, Montana State University Billings, Billings, MT 59101, USA)

  • Song Feng

    (Geosciences Department, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR 72701, USA)

Abstract

Management education holds promise for addressing deficiencies in interuniversity science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM), as well as sustainability curricula. Accordingly, we designed, developed, implemented, and longitudinally evaluated interdisciplinary STEM-based curricula in the United States. Students in five sections of business management courses and two sections of STEM courses received a STEM-based sustainability intervention (i.e., an interdisciplinary STEM and sustainability module). To assess student outcomes following the intervention and examine the feasibility of cognitive mapping as a student learning assessment tool, we implemented a pre- and post-course modified cognitive mapping assessment in treatment and comparison courses. To interpret the results, we ran descriptives, correlations, paired sample t tests, and principal component analysis. The t tests suggest that when all coding categories are considered, those participating in curricular interventions listed significantly more sustainability terms. The principal component analysis results demonstrate that treatment courses improved variability explained by 7.23% between pre- and post-tests but declined by 8.22% for comparison courses. Overall, linkages became stronger between parent code categories for treatment courses and weaker for comparison courses. These findings add to existing research related to cognitive mapping and demonstrate the ability of the method to capture changes in student outcomes after exposure to STEM-based sustainability curriculum.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth L. Petrun Sayers & Christopher A. Craig & Emily Skonicki & Grace Gahlon & Susan Gilbertz & Song Feng, 2021. "Evaluating STEM-Based Sustainability Understanding: A Cognitive Mapping Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-23, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:8074-:d:597480
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/8074/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/14/8074/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Uzma Omer & Muhammad Shoaib Farooq & Adnan Abid, 2020. "Cognitive Learning Analytics Using Assessment Data and Concept Map: A Framework-Based Approach for Sustainability of Programming Courses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-20, August.
    2. Myria Allen, 2016. "Strategic Communication for Sustainable Organizations," CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-18005-2.
    3. Daniela Sellmann & Anne K. Liefl�nder & Franz X. Bogner, 2015. "Concept Maps in the Classroom: A New Approach to Reveal Students' Conceptual Change," The Journal of Educational Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 108(3), pages 250-257, April.
    4. Matthew D. Wood & Ann Bostrom & Todd Bridges & Igor Linkov, 2012. "Cognitive Mapping Tools: Review and Risk Management Needs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1333-1348, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Juliana Fosua Gyasi & Lanqin Zheng & Yidan Zhou, 2021. "Perusing the Past to Propel the Future: A Systematic Review of STEM Learning Activity Based on Activity Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-27, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brown, Jason D. & Ivanova, Viktoria & Mehta, Nisha & Skrodzki, Donna & Gerrits, Julie, 2013. "Social needs of aboriginal foster parents," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 35(11), pages 1886-1893.
    2. Meredith Frances Dobbie & Rebekah Ruth Brown, 2014. "A Framework for Understanding Risk Perception, Explored from the Perspective of the Water Practitioner," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 294-308, February.
    3. John Hamer Powell & Michael Hammond & Albert Chen & Navonil Mustafee, 2018. "Human Agency in Disaster Planning: A Systems Approach," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(7), pages 1422-1443, July.
    4. Susana Garrido Azevedo & Helena Carvalho & Luís M. Ferreira & João C. O. Matias, 2017. "A proposed framework to assess upstream supply chain sustainability," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(6), pages 2253-2273, December.
    5. Zhu, Xun & Pasch, Timothy J. & Bergstrom, Aaron, 2020. "Understanding the structure of risk belief systems concerning drone delivery: A network analysis," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    6. Vasja Roblek & Violeta Milenkovska & Vedran Milojica, 2016. "The impact of corporate sustainability in achieving business goals in hotel industry," Tourism and Hospitality Industry 29, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Tourism and Hospitality Management.
    7. Olukorede Adewole, 2023. "CSR–brand relationship, brand positioning, and investment risks driven towards climate change mitigation and next perspectives emerging from: “Litigation, projections, pathway, and models”," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 1-53, January.
    8. Brian P. McCullough & Jamee Pelcher & Sylvia Trendafilova, 2020. "An Exploratory Analysis of the Environmental Sustainability Performance Signaling Communications among North American Sport Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-17, March.
    9. Lea Strottner & Simone Huck-Sandhu, 2021. "Mit Herz und Verstand: Rolle der internen Kommunikation für die Etablierung neuer Nachhaltigkeitsstrategien [Implementing change through internal communication: facilitating sustainability strategi," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 197-216, December.
    10. Carolin Lehmann & Dorothea Ruziczka & Tamara Pöhlmann & Simone Huck-Sandhu, 2018. "Von Skeptikern, Sympathisanten und Zuschauern: Stakeholder-Typen und ihre Erwartungen an die Nachhaltigkeitsberichterstattung [Sceptic, sympathizer or spectator? A typology of stakeholders and thei," Sustainability Nexus Forum, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 133-144, December.
    11. Louie Rivers III & Udita Sanga & Amadou Sidibe & Alexa Wood & Rajiv Paudel & Sandra T. Marquart-Pyatt & Arika Ligmann-Zielinska & Laura Schmitt Olabisi & Eric Jing Du & Saweda Liverpool-Tasie, 2018. "Mental models of food security in rural Mali," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(1), pages 33-51, March.
    12. Franzisca Weder & Stella Lemke & Amornpan Tungarat, 2019. "(Re)storying Sustainability: The Use of Story Cubes in Narrative Inquiries to Understand Individual Perceptions of Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-15, September.
    13. Leiyan Shen & Jianwei Qian & Sandy C. Chen, 2020. "Effective Communication Strategies of Sustainable Hospitality: A Qualitative Exploration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-14, August.
    14. Ineke Malsch & Vrishali Subramanian & Elena Semenzin & Alex Zabeo & Danail Hristozov & Martin Mullins & Finbarr Murphy & Igor Linkov & Antonio Marcomini, 2017. "Comparing mental models of prospective users of the sustainable nanotechnology decision support system," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 465-483, December.
    15. Ionel Jianu & Carmen Ţurlea & Ionela Guşatu, 2015. "The Reporting and Sustainable Business Marketing," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    16. Ayedh Almutairi & John P. Wheeler & David L. Slutzky & James H. Lambert, 2019. "Integrating Stakeholder Mapping and Risk Scenarios to Improve Resilience of Cyber‐Physical‐Social Networks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(9), pages 2093-2112, September.
    17. Albert Amoakwa & George Asante & Samuel Bentil & Simon Nipah, 2024. "Climate Change Education in Basic Schools: The Educators’ Lens on Techniques and Challenges," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 8(2), pages 1012-1024, February.
    18. Masayasu Asai & Takashi Hayashi & Mitasu Yamamoto, 2019. "Mental Model Analysis of Biogas Energy Perceptions and Policy Reveals Potential Constraints in a Japanese Farm Community," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-20, January.
    19. Vasileva, Elka & Hristova – Pesheva, Juliya, 2019. "Green communications through ISO 14 000 standards series and other voluntary initiatives," MPRA Paper 106978, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Thomas J. Cova & Philip E. Dennison & Dapeng Li & Frank A. Drews & Laura K. Siebeneck & Michael K. Lindell, 2017. "Warning Triggers in Environmental Hazards: Who Should Be Warned to Do What and When?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(4), pages 601-611, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:14:p:8074-:d:597480. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.