2023 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition

The instructional environment for this study was the Missouri University of Science and Technology. Two courses offered through the Department of Civil, Architectural, and Environmental Engineering are discussed, specifically: CArE 2601 Fundamentals of Environmental Engineering; and CArE 5605 Environmental Modeling. The pedagogical approach to delivery of both courses included blended content delivery, a flipped classroom, and modified mastery learning. The approach to instruction and technology included conceptual understanding before spreadsheet modeling to verify concepts through application. The course content focused upon the topic of “triple bottom line accounting” (also known as “full cost accounting” or “true cost accounting”). This content was presented in the context of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDGs), where the three dimensions of sustainable development include economic (i.e., prosperity), social (i.e., people), and environmental (i.e., planet) considerations. One module asked the question, “how much would you pay for a sunset?” Another module asked the question, “how would you exchange transferrable discharge permits to create a low cost solution while ensuring a baseline for environmental services?” Student mastery learning to earn a grade of “C” was assessed through rapid feedback to quizzes administered via the Learning Management System (i.e., Canvas), and a buffet of optional assessment instruments to earn a grade of “B” or “A” included detailed grading of extended homework assignments performed individually. The rationale for the approach employed in these two courses includes a recognition that the practice of environmental engineering often is viewed as “driven by regulation”. The long-term goal of threading triple bottom line accounting to teaching sustainability across multiple courses includes helping future Professional Engineers position themselves and their employers within the emerging conceptual framework of “environmental, social, and corporate governance” or ESG (i.e., for the PE in Environmental Engineering to lead the corporate role of Chief Sustainability Officer). The lessons learned through this study included: 1) integrating economics into the environmental engineering classroom provides an authentic context to understand the importance of adopting a systems-level view of the trade-offs inherent as part of the triple bottom line; 2) future work should explore replication of the results in courses offered by other faculty and at other institutions as well as more broadly disseminated results to encourage the adoption of similar approaches in other courses within environmental engineering curricula.