IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i17p9693-d624749.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Introductory Energy Course to Promote Broad Energy Education for Undergraduate Engineering Students

Author

Listed:
  • Jan DeWaters

    (Institute for STEM Education, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA)

  • Susan Powers

    (Institute for a Sustainable Environment, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA)

  • Felicity Bilow

    (Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Wallace H. Coulter School of Engineering, Clarkson University, Potsdam, NY 13699, USA)

Abstract

Engineering graduates must be prepared to support our world’s need for a clean and sustainable energy future. Complex problems related to energy and sustainability require engineers to consider the broad spectrum of interrelated consequences including human and environmental health, sociopolitical, and economic factors. Teaching engineering students about energy within a societal context, simultaneous with developing technical knowledge and skills, will better prepare them to solve real-world problems. Yet few energy courses that approach energy topics from a human-centered perspective exist within engineering programs. Engineering students enrolled in energy programs often take such courses as supplemental to their course of study. This paper presents an engineering course that approaches energy education from a socio-technical perspective, emphasizing the complex interactions of energy technologies with sustainability dimensions. Course content and learning activities are structured around learning outcomes that require students to gain technical knowledge as well as an understanding of broader energy-related impacts. The course attracts students from a variety of majors and grade levels. A mixed quantitative/qualitative assessment conducted from 2019–2021 indicates successful achievement of course learning outcomes. Students demonstrated significant gains in technical content knowledge as well as the ability to critically address complex sociotechnical issues related to current and future energy systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan DeWaters & Susan Powers & Felicity Bilow, 2021. "An Introductory Energy Course to Promote Broad Energy Education for Undergraduate Engineering Students," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(17), pages 1-22, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:17:p:9693-:d:624749
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9693/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/17/9693/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Perkins & Catherine Middlecamp & David Blockstein & Jennifer Cole & Robert Knapp & Kathleen Saul & Shirley Vincent, 2014. "Energy education and the dilemma of mitigating climate change," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 4(4), pages 354-359, December.
    2. Gordon D. Hoople & Diana A. Chen & Susan M. Lord & Laura A. Gelles & Felicity Bilow & Joel Alejandro Mejia, 2020. "An Integrated Approach to Energy Education in Engineering," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-21, November.
    3. Kyle Forinash & John H. Perkins & Barbara Whitten, 2021. "Background, approaches, and resources for teaching energy in environmental studies," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 708-734, December.
    4. Garg, H.P. & Kandpal, T.C., 1994. "Energy engineering education at postgraduate level: Issues involved, course structure and its proposed adaptation," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 5(5), pages 1406-1412.
    5. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "The cultural barriers to renewable energy and energy efficiency in the United States," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 365-373.
    6. Sovacool, Benjamin K., 2009. "Rejecting renewables: The socio-technical impediments to renewable electricity in the United States," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4500-4513, November.
    7. Ann-Merete Iversen & Anni Stavnskær Pedersen & Lone Krogh & Annie Aarup Jensen, 2015. "Learning, Leading, and Letting Go of Control," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, October.
    8. Merle L. Canfield & Trisha M. Kivisalu & Carol Van Der Karr & Chelsi King & Colleen E. Phillips, 2015. "The Use of Course Grades in the Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes for General Education," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(4), pages 21582440156, December.
    9. Cheryl Desha & Karlson 'Charlie' Hargroves, 2014. "A Peaking and Tailing Approach to Education and Curriculum Renewal for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(7), pages 1-19, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Zhang, Nan & Hwang, Bon-Gang & Lu, Yujie & Ngo, Jasmine, 2022. "A Behavior theory integrated ANN analytical approach for understanding households adoption decisions of residential photovoltaic (RPV) system," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    2. Kathleen M. Saul & John H. Perkins, 2022. "A new framework for environmental education about energy transition: investment and the energy regulatory and industrial complex," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(1), pages 149-163, March.
    3. DeWaters, Jan E. & Powers, Susan E., 2011. "Energy literacy of secondary students in New York State (USA): A measure of knowledge, affect, and behavior," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1699-1710, March.
    4. Zhai, Pei & Williams, Eric D., 2012. "Analyzing consumer acceptance of photovoltaics (PV) using fuzzy logic model," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 350-357.
    5. Can Şener, Şerife Elif & Sharp, Julia L. & Anctil, Annick, 2018. "Factors impacting diverging paths of renewable energy: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 81(P2), pages 2335-2342.
    6. Vanja WESTERBERG & Jette BREDAHL JACOBSEN & Robert LIFRAN, 2012. "The Multi-faceted Nature of Preferences for Offshore Wind Farm Siting," Working Papers 12-22, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised Jul 2012.
    7. Fetanat, Abdolvahhab & Shafipour, Gholamreza & Mohtasebi, Seyedeh-Maryam, 2019. "Measuring public acceptance of climate-friendly technologies based on creativity and cognitive approaches: Practical guidelines for reforming risky energy policies in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 1248-1261.
    8. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Drupady, Ira Martina, 2011. "Examining the Small Renewable Energy Power (SREP) Program in Malaysia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(11), pages 7244-7256.
    9. Ioannidis, Romanos & Koutsoyiannis, Demetris, 2020. "A review of land use, visibility and public perception of renewable energy in the context of landscape impact," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    10. Violeta Mihaela Dincă & Mihail Busu & Zoltan Nagy-Bege, 2022. "Determinants with Impact on Romanian Consumers’ Energy-Saving Habits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-18, June.
    11. Ng, Thiam Hee & Tao, Jacqueline Yujia, 2016. "Bond financing for renewable energy in Asia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 509-517.
    12. Huang, Shih-Chieh & Lo, Shang-Lien & Lin, Yen-Ching, 2013. "Application of a fuzzy cognitive map based on a structural equation model for the identification of limitations to the development of wind power," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 851-861.
    13. Zeynep Clulow & Michele Ferguson & Peta Ashworth & David Reiner, 2021. "Political ideology and public views of the energy transition in Australia and the UK," Working Papers EPRG2106, Energy Policy Research Group, Cambridge Judge Business School, University of Cambridge.
    14. Mouter, Niek & de Geest, Auke & Doorn, Neelke, 2018. "A values-based approach to energy controversies: Value-sensitive design applied to the Groningen gas controversy in the Netherlands," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 639-648.
    15. Shahriyar Nasirov & Carlos Silva & Claudio A. Agostini, 2015. "Investors’ Perspectives on Barriers to the Deployment of Renewable Energy Sources in Chile," Energies, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-21, April.
    16. Sugimoto, Kota, 2019. "Does transmission unbundling increase wind power generation in the United States?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 307-316.
    17. Linda Nicholas-Figueroa & Rebekah Hare & Mary van Muelken & Lawrence Duffy & Catherine Middlecamp, 2017. "Iḷisaġvik Tribal College’s summer climate program: teaching STEM concepts to North Slope Alaska high school and middle-school students," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 7(3), pages 425-434, September.
    18. Zheng, Shuhong & Yang, Juan & Yu, Shiwei, 2021. "How renewable energy technological innovation promotes renewable power generation: Evidence from China's provincial panel data," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 177(C), pages 1394-1407.
    19. Maarten Wolsink, 2020. "Framing in Renewable Energy Policies: A Glossary," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-31, June.
    20. Gabriela O. Chiciudean & Rezhen Harun & Felix H. Arion & Daniel I. Chiciudean & Camelia F. Oroian & Iulia C. Muresan, 2018. "A Critical Approach on Sustainable Renewable Energy Sources in Rural Area: Evidence from North-West Region of Romania," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-15, August.

    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:17:p:9693-:d:624749. 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.