Systematic Review of How Engineering Schools around the World Are Deploying the 2030 Agenda
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper is a thorough study of SDG implementation through the adaptation of programs, learning methods, collaboration and different activities of engineering schools. The paper is the review type of paper and it is using vast resources overview in order to provide best fitting publications for the topic. The contribution for the paper is significant and is mainly focused on describing the possible approaches to SDG inclusion in engineering education. The methodology used for completing the sample of publication and its analysis is sound and appropriate. The possible approaches are well described and explained. Each publication that is included in the sample is both investigated individually and used as a reference point in general analysis. Paper is well written and English is of good quality.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article presents a systematic review of the literature regarding Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and Engineering schools in Scopus and WOS databases while using the PRISMA methodology.
Comments:
- The overview of previous systematic reviews related to SDGs is far from comprehensive. Note the following recent studies on the topic. Most of them directly discuss education with regards to SDGs.
- Vazquez-Brust, et al. (2020). The governance of collaboration for sustainable development: Exploring the “black box”. Journal of Cleaner Production, 256, 120260.
- Giribabu, D. (2019) Mapping and Scoping of the World Concepts to the Sustainable Development Goals: The First Review. Sustainability: The Journal of Record, 12 (6), 310-322.
- Rashid, L. (2019) Entrepreneurship education and sustainable development goals: A literature review and a closer look at fragile states and technology-enabled approaches. Sustainability, 11 (19), 5343.
- Allen, et al. (2018). Initial progress in implementing the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): a review of evidence from countries. Sustainability Science, 13 (5), 1453-1467.
- The search query provided in Table 1 for WOS is incorrect. I assume the correct search query should be:
TS= (("Sustainable Development Goal*" OR SDG* OR "2030 Agenda") AND ((engineering AND education) OR (technological AND school*) OR (technological AND institute*) OR (polytechnic AND institute*) OR (polytechnic AND school*)))
- I tried to replicate your search results using the search queries provided. The search in SCOPUS yielded 105 results and in WOS – 52 results. Although I understand that some of the results may have appeared in the bibliography databased after the submission of the article, you should strive to provide as precise result as possible. Therefore, the paper should be updated following the most recent data available. Also consider a more comprehensive search query, which currently does not cover technology and engineering colleges. When technology colleges are included, even more results are found.
- The PRISMA methodology also includes the use of “snowballing” technique to increase the number of relevant articles. Why you did not use it?
- You mention that four researchers did the paper selection. Please provide more detail on the process. Did they work independently? Report the level of inter-rater
- A motivation and discussion is needed on how the paper types were selected for categorization in Tables 4-5.
- The results of analysis in subsection 3.5 also should be summarized in a table.
- Figure 3: 3D bars look poor and are suggested to be avoided in serious research publications. Replace with a common 2D bar plot.
- For visualization of paper distribution with respect to different concerns I suggest to use the bubble plots.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper does not offer a proper research neither on sustainability nor on education about sustainability: it is true that it offers a very good review of teaching initiatives in different parts of the world in order to introduce SDGs in the teaching of Engineering Degrees.
The work carried out by the authors is not properly a research but what each researcher does before studying a new subject. The summary of the mentioned papers is good but there is nothing new on teaching of SDGs until we reach page 16. Everything before is written in papers from another autors (correctly quoted).
The description of differente methodologies dealing with SDGs is OK but we expected a new proposal tested in a direct way with students. Something that can change the education policy on introducing SDGs in teaching.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
This is an excellent review article. The authors are very detailed in their methodology and present a clear and valuable summary of engineering educators work towards the SDGs. I commend the authors for their contribution.
A few minor changes I'd suggest:
- Move figure 1 closer to where it is first referenced
- Line 79 Change to “For ESD to be …”
- Line 153 – Hyperlink goes to wrong website, but text of hyperlink is correct (at least for me)
Nice job!
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
The authors have addressed all my comments and improved the paper. I have no further comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
Regarded as a contribution to the special issue "Developing Competencies for
Sustainability of Future Managers: What, How and Why" I understand this paper is, and should be, a review.
In the first reading I haven't got that information. As a review it is a good paper. In any case I think that review papers and research papers should not be mixed in journals, just to avoid misinterpretation.
