sustainability

Article
Mapping Course Sustainability by Embedding the
SDGs Inventory into the University Curriculum:
A Case Study from National University of
Kaohsiung in Taiwan
Ya-Ching Chang 1 and Hsing-Lung Lien 2, *
1 Imagination for Future School, Center for Teaching and Learning Development, National University of
Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung 811, Taiwan; yaching2@go.nuk.edu.tw
2 Imagination for Future School, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, National University of
Kaohsiung, Kaohsiung 811, Taiwan
* Correspondence: lien.sam@go.nuk.edu.tw




Received: 28 March 2020; Accepted: 20 May 2020; Published: 22 May 2020


Abstract: A course inventory module, based on the Curriculum Framework for the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) published by the Commonwealth Secretariat, has been embedded into
the online curriculum system at the National University of Kaohsiung (NUK) since 2018. The primary
aim of this study is to explore the sustainability status of the course offerings and to understand
the interdisciplinary capacity in pursuing the SDGs at NUK. At the university level, a total of
1200–1300 courses (approximately 57% of courses) were reported to be related to SDGs, where the
curriculum of NUK mainly emphasized SDGs 3, 4, 8, 9 and 16. However, our study indicates that
many SDGs are still not focused in the curriculum of all colleges. Two patterns of the SDGs-related
course framework were observed at the college level: One is the college course offerings linked to a
wide variety of SDG content; while the second pattern is the college course offerings linked only to
specific SDG content, mainly dependent on the subject areas of colleges. Our study suggests that
the number of SDGs covered by a course reflects the diversity of the sustainability topics covered
in the course. The metric gives an indication of the areas covered and, thus, also points to blind
spots (i.e., insufficiencies). Moreover, it can also give an indication of the diversity within colleges,
which could suggest future paths for transdisciplinary development. An understanding of the
baseline status of sustainability in the university curriculum provides opportunities for universities
to plan their strategies for sustainability and prioritize the allocation of resources accordingly.

Keywords: sustainable development goals; SDGs; higher education; curriculum; course inventory;
institutional research; faculty engagement; sustainability

1. Introduction
In 2015, the United Nations approved the 17 sustainable development goals (SDGs) as the new
working framework for sustainable development, which is based on five pillars: people, prosperity,
peace, partnership and the planet, in order to end poverty, protect our environment, and ensure
prosperity for all [1]. The 17 SDGs highlight a global vision for sustainability, in which higher
education institutions (HEIs) should play an important role [2–7]. HEIs are uniquely placed to link
the local and global societies, educating young and future leaders and having a strong influence
on decision-makers in many societies. Many leaders in all sectors of society, from government to
private sectors, have graduated from HEIs. For example, all elected Presidents of Taiwan, to date,
have been graduates of National Taiwan University [8]. According to the latest statistics released by

Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274; doi:10.3390/su12104274 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 2 of 21

the Taiwanese Ministry of the Interior (2020), 46% of Taiwan’s population aged 15 and above hold a
technical college or university degree [9]. Therefore, if university graduates value the importance of
sustainable development and are aware of SDGs, the transformation of society towards sustainability
is more likely to happen.
Transitions are to be understood as a complex and long-term ambition to shift from analyzing and
understanding problems towards identifying pathways and solutions for desirable environmental
and societal change [10]. Sustainability transitions are long-term, multi-dimensional and fundamental
transformation processes, through which established socio-technical systems shift to more sustainable
modes of production and consumption [11,12]. In the case of higher education, a paradigm shift
in education should be undertaken, in order to educate students in all degree programs to be SDG
Literate [13]. Leal Filho pointed out that some key areas, including sustainability in the curriculum,
sustainability on campuses, sustainability literacy, sustainability research, sustainability governance
and sustainability reporting and thematic integration need to be accelerated in a higher education
context [13]. As an example of the function SDGs can play in HEIs, Deleye et al. analyzed the
Flemish higher education system using a multi-level perspective (MLP) on sustainability transitions,
indicating that there are 16 opportunities for the further integration of sustainability into higher
education [14]. Among them, SDGs can be seen multitools for a communication instrument and
implementing sustainability education through competences can be an effective way to structurally
embed sustainability in curricula [14].
HEIs are central players in the achievement of SDGs. Indeed, education has been identified
as a standalone goal in the SDGs (SDG 4: quality education). Based on the analysis of 40 UN
flagship reports published between 2006–2015, it has been demonstrated that SDG 4 links with all
other SDGs, except for SDG 14 (life below water) [15]. However, the vision offered by HEIs is too
narrow and unable to capture the essence and full meaning of sustainable human development [16].
Universities have their comfort zone, where academics and departments may tend to rely on silo
approaches in teaching and research activities [4,16]. It has been demonstrated that the major obstacles
to implementing SDGs in universities include a lack of support from administration and management
operation, a lack of interest in or concern with sustainability issues and a lack of structural units
such as committees [17]. Lozano also reported that there are barriers that prevent universities from
incorporating sustainable development into their institutional systems [18]. The resistances to change
include a lack of information, psychological and emotional reactions towards change, unwillingness to
co-operate to make changes, procrastination and power struggle issues [18]. To help universities to
engage with the SDGs, the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) has recommended
that universities can contribute to the SDGs through four aspects;, namely, education, research,
governance and operations and external leadership [19]. Besides the traditional missions of HEIs,
the third mission of HEIs—emphasizing knowledge and technology transfer, further education and
social engagement—has attracted attention [20]. As the third mission of HEIs, the engagement
of pursuing the SDGs for HEIs which link up with external stakeholders and society should be
considered an opportunity [21]. It helps to transform the curriculum by combining the content of
courses with SDGs, creates funding streams to support research programs, and facilitates collaboration
with society [13,18,19,21]. As such, the integration of SDGs and the concepts and principles of
sustainable development into the curriculum of higher education is certain to be one of the dimensions
of sustainability at universities.
The course inventory consists of courses that have been approved by the university. For each
course, the basic information should be provided, including the course title, course instructors,
course credits and course description (e.g., the syllabus). A study conducted by Penn’s Integrating
Sustainability Across the Curriculum (ISAC) program demonstrated that course inventories increase
both student and faculty awareness of sustainability course offerings [22]. As pointed out in their study,
the promotion of a course inventory fosters dialogue among students and underscores the inherently
interdisciplinary aspects of sustainability across Penn’s diverse course offerings [22]. According to the
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 3 of 21

Sustainability Tracking, Assessment, and Rating System (STARS) developed by the Association for
the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE), an inventory of academic offerings
conducted by HEIs provides an important foundation for advancing a sustainability curriculum [23].
It provides a baseline for understanding the current offerings and can help institutes to identify both
strengths and opportunities for growth [23]. STARS has categorized sustainability courses into two
types: sustainability-focused and sustainability-inclusive courses.
On the other hand, numerous studies have applied SDGs as indicators to evaluate the degree of
integration of sustainability in the curriculum, from university to department level (see, e.g., [24–26]).
For instance, Lovren et al. analyzed the outcomes defined in the curricula of subjects within their
three faculties using the UNESCO learning objectives related to selected SDGs as a criteria at the
University of Belgrade [24]; while a university-wide study was conducted by Albareda-Tiana et al. at
the International University of Catalonia to explore the curricular implementation of topics linked
to the SDGs using the degree reports of the university [25]. Surveys of the curriculum for course
mapping with SDGs were found to be able to help staff and students to understand the SDGs in the
university [27]. Universities who provide the annual sustainability reports are often required to report
their sustainability curriculum as a basic component [28]. NUK has already established an online
course inventory system which teachers can access to upload an individual course syllabus to the
public since 2006 [29]. On the basis of this foundation, we have further embedded an SDGs course
inventory module into the current online curriculum system, in order to explore the relationship
between the curriculum and SDGs since 2018. Similar approaches have been applied in different HEIs.
For example, Nottingham Trent University (NTU) has developed a university-wide system to integrate
the SDGs into their core curriculum since 2016 [30]. The system entitled, “Curriculum Refresh” has
been used to assess the sustainability content of the more than 640 courses at NTU. All courses at NTU
are encouraged to explore how their disciplines can achieve the SDGs and how they can collaborate for
the SDGs [30]. Though the use of SDGs as global indicators has been criticized as being too broad
and confusing [21,31], our strategy is to embed the curriculum framework of SDGs into our course
inventory system to assess the sustainability content of the course offerings and, through the process,
to promote awareness about SDGs around the university. As a result, we collected data from the SDGs
course inventory embedded online curriculum system for three consecutive semesters (from the fall
semester of 2018 to that of 2019).

2. The Context: Transforming National University of Kaohsiung towards Sustainability

The National University of Kaohsiung (NUK) is the newest comprehensive national university in
Taiwan, established in 2000. With approximately 5500 students and 250 full-time faculty members,
the university is comprised of five colleges, a general education center, 21 departments, 23 master
programs and 3 Ph.D. programs [32]. The five colleges include law, humanities and social sciences,
management, science and engineering; a detailed academic organization structure can be found in
Table 1. The academic year of NUK is a two-semester system. Approximately 1200–1400 courses are
offered each semester. As the university was established in the current millennium, NUK strives to
embrace sustainability as one of the university’s core values. Therefore, NUK was the first Taiwanese
university to sign the Talloires Declaration in 2004.
The first stage (2004–2015) of the sustainability transitions at NUK was focused on the “hardware”
infrastructure [33]. NUK established a water recycling system which recovers up to 85% of wastewater
for reuse inside the campus. The campus buildings accredited as green buildings were all constructed
based on the green building labeling system regulations in Taiwan. In addition, a solar panel system
was installed on the roof of the buildings in 2005 and a 1.2-MW total solar photovoltaic system was
further completed in 2018. It can be seen that the efforts of NUK during this first stage are part of the
“sustainability on campuses” idea.
In the second stage (2016–present), NUK realized that the SDGs can serve as a “common language”
which bridges NUK to higher education communities around the world. Therefore, NUK started
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 4 of 21

its transition to “software” infrastructure and proposed an SDGs-Inside policy as guidance for the
university’s long-term development plan in 2018 [33]. The SDGs-Inside policy of NUK, approved
by the University Council (the highest authority of the university), is to commit the university
to embed sustainability across all aspects and, therefore, support and promote the SDGs through
our research, education and operations [33]. To strengthen the connection with its external partners,
NUK became one of the founding members of The Alliance for sustainable development goals (A·SDGs)
established by Taiwan Institute for Sustainable Energy (TAISE) in 2018. The Alliance, including
11 governmental agencies, 12 universities, 44 corporations, five think-tank research institutions and
11 non-governmental organizations, is the largest Taiwanese SDG platform serving to foster Taiwan’s
sustainable development [34]. As part of the university’s social responsibility, NUK has published
an annual sustainability report since 2018 and collaborated with TAISE through the Alliance to offer
corporate social responsibility (CSR) lectures, training courses for SDGs in higher education and a
cross-sectoral SDG forum. In regional collaborations, Sunway University of Malaysia, Srinakharinwirot
University of Thailand, and NUK have established an annual Universities for SDG Forum to exchange
scientific materials and joint research since 2019 [35].
NUK participated, for the first time ever, in university ranks that are based on the outcomes of
implementation of SDGs conducted by the Times Higher Education (THE) [36]. The THE University
Impact Rankings opens a new horizon: that the evaluation of a university’s performance no longer
relies on achievements in academia. The bigger trend is to look at their impact at a broader level,
including society, environment and partnerships. The motivation of the authors to initiate this research
on the SDGs course inventory—to understand the baseline status of the university curriculum as an
aspect of sustainability of NUK—was conceived due to the processes inspired by the THE University
Impact Rankings, capturing the impact of universities on society based on institutional successes in
delivering the SDGs [36].
In this study, we investigate the curriculum framework associated with SDGs at NUK at the
department, college and university levels. The objectives of the research are aimed at: (1) establishing
a baseline status of sustainability in the overall curriculum of NUK through the distribution of
SDGs-related courses at different levels, (2) understanding the interdisciplinary capacity of the faculty
members in pursuing the SDGs and (3) offering evidence-based practice for departments to reform
their curriculum by integrating SDGs. The SDGs course inventory provides opportunities to gain
insights into the whole structure of the curriculum framework, such that a university may plan its
strategy for sustainability accordingly.

3. Methods
This research was undertaken as a case study, where the research framework of the study indicating
the following steps is shown in Figure 1.

1. Data collection—Using the NUK online syllabus system embedded with a SDGs course inventory
module to collect sustainability data of courses;
2. Data analysis—Investigating the current curriculum framework associated with SDGs at NUK at
the department, college and university level and virtualizing the results for in-depth interpretation;
3. Dimension analyzed—Based on the objectives, analyses were conducted in three dimensions:
First, to understand the distribution of SDGs-related courses at different levels. Second, to
determine the most relevant SDGs respect to different colleges. Third, the interdisciplinarity
analysis measured by the diversity of SDGs. Finally, the potential outcomes that may apply to
those wishing to take a similar approach are recommended.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 5 of 21
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 20

Figure
Figure 1.
1. Research
Researchframework
frameworkofof
the study.
the study.

3.1.
3.1.Data
DataCollection
Collection
Differentmethodologies
Different methodologies for creating
creating aa sustainability
sustainabilitycourse
courseinventory
inventory have
havebeenbeendeveloped
developed in in
bothqualitative
both qualitativeandandquantitative
quantitativeresearch,
research,such
such asas aa survey
survey of academic
academic faculty
facultyandandkeyword
keywordsearch search of
of course
course catalogue
catalogue [23–26].
[23–26]. As mentioned
As mentioned above, above,
AASHE AASHE recommends
recommends reporting
reporting sustainability
sustainability courses
courses (i.e., sustainability-focused and sustainability-inclusive courses),
(i.e., sustainability-focused and sustainability-inclusive courses), justified by the course justified by the course
title,title,
course
course description
description and an indication
and an indication of qualification
of qualification [24]. We[24].usedWeourused
onlineoursyllabus
online syllabus system
system embedded
embedded
with a SDGs with a SDGs
inventory inventory
module module
to collect to collect sustainability
sustainability course data. Thecourse data. of
content Thethecontent of the
SDGs inventory
SDGs inventory is based on the Curriculum Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals
is based on the Curriculum Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals published by the
published by the Commonwealth Secretariat [37]. The competencies provided by Commonwealth
Commonwealth Secretariat [37]. The competencies provided by Commonwealth Secretariat are
Secretariat are specified in three categories, namely, knowledge, skills and values [37]. A systematic
specified in three categories, namely, knowledge, skills and values [37]. A systematic matrix model
matrix model with indicative core competencies can be readily used for programing. Thus, the
with indicative core competencies can be readily used for programing. Thus, the inventory system
inventory system consists of two levels. The first level is the 17 SDGs level; while the second level is
consists of two levels. The first level is the 17 SDGs level; while the second level is the competency
the competency level, where teachers can select the SDGs which are relevant to their courses and,
level,
then,where teachers
indicate can select the
the competencies SDGs which
(according to the are relevantFramework)
Curriculum to their courses to fitand, then, indicate
the course learning the
competencies
objectives. It is required that all teachers complete the online syllabus before the beginning of aIt is
(according to the Curriculum Framework) to fit the course learning objectives.
required
semesterthatand,all teachers
thus, complete
they are aware ofthetheonline syllabus before
SDGs inventory modulethe beginning
while preparing of the
a semester and, thus,
online syllabus
they are aware of the SDGs inventory module while preparing the online
of their courses. Teachers are encouraged to determine whether the course content of their courses syllabus of their courses.
Teachers
covers thearetopics
encouraged to determine
or keywords whether
of relevant SDGsthe usingcourse content of
information their
from thecourses
course covers the topics or
title, description
keywords of relevant
and syllabus. Then, theSDGs usinggo
teachers information
through thefrom SDGs the course title,
inventory description
system to assignand SDGs syllabus.
which are Then,
the teachers
relevant to go through
their theWe
courses. SDGs inventory
believe that thesystem
coursetoinventory
assign SDGs whichofare
is capable relevant to
facilitating thetheir courses.
teachers
Weto believe
better understand
that the coursehow inventory
their teaching materials
is capable are associated
of facilitating the with SDGs
teachers to and
betterpromoting
understand theirhow
awareness
their teachingof materials
SDGs, as are
the associated
structuralized withinventory
SDGs and system itself already
promoting implies anofeducational
their awareness SDGs, as the
function of the
structuralized concept of
inventory SDGs itself
system for teachers.
alreadyAn example
implies of the online function
an educational system isof given in Figureof2.SDGs
the concept
for teachers. An example of the online system is given in Figure 2.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 6 of 21
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 20

Figure 2. Form
Figure Form (originally
(originallyininChinese)
Chinese)designed in in
designed thethe
online curriculum
online system
curriculum embedded
system with awith a
embedded
sustainable development
sustainable developmentgoals
goals(SDGs)
(SDGs)inventory module
inventory module[29].
[29].
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 7 of 21

3.2. Data Analysis

Data including three consecutive semesters was collected from the fall semester of 2018 to the
fall semester of 2019. The numbers of full-time faculty members and adjunct faculty members were
approximately 225 and 120, respectively. We encouraged all teachers to participate in the SDGs
inventory and there were 229, 220 and 289 teachers responding to the inventory within these three
semesters, respectively. The number of courses analyzed in this study were 1292 in the fall semester
of 2018, 1202 in the spring semester of 2019 and 1235 in the fall semester of 2019. The percentage of
courses identified to be related to SDGs was 55% in the fall semester of 2018, 51% in the spring semester
of 2019 and 65% in the fall semester of 2019. Table 1, which summarizes the total course offerings and
courses related to SDGs from each department among the five colleges and General Education Center,
provides critical information to understand the distribution of SDGs-related courses at different levels
and to determine the most relevant SDGs with respect to different colleges. Detailed inventory results
for the fall semester of 2018 are given in Table S1. It should be noted that the SDGs-related courses
may cover more than one SDG per course in the inventory, but users are recommended to assign no
more than three SDGs in their courses (based on the instructions of our inventory system).
To better elucidate our data, a virtualization treatment of data was further applied to examine
the interdisciplinarity analysis measured by diversity of SDGs. In order to achieve this, we used the
results of Table S1, which include the data of subtotal for each college and total for the whole university,
to calculate the weighting of each SDG with respect to all SDGs in terms of numbers for colleges and
whole university. The weighting reflects the focus of the specific SDG across the colleges and university
among the 17 SDGs.
For each unit, the weighting of a specific SDG is given by:
 
The total number o f a speci f ic SDG X f rom SDGs−related course o f f erings in a unit
SDG X = The total number o f ALL SDGs f rom SDGs−related course o f f erings in a unit × 100%. (1)

Equation (1) represents the ratio of the total number of a specific SDG to that of all SDGs from
SDGs-related course offerings in each unit, which refers to either the college or university level.
For example, the total number of SDG 1 (no poverty) and that of all SDGs collected from the General
Education Center course offerings were 22 and 318, respectively (Table S1). Thus, the weighting of
SDG 1-related courses offered by the General Education Center was 6.9%. Table S2 summarizes each
specific SDG weighting in all SDGs-related courses among the different colleges at NUK.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 8 of 21

Table 1. Number of total course offerings and the number of courses related to sustainable development goals (SDGs) from each department.

Academic Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Fall 2019

Department
Division Courses Related Courses Related Courses Related
Total COURSES Total Courses Total Courses
to SDGs to SDGs to SDGs
Common Compulsory Curriculum 173 57 170 52 170 63
Humanities 30 20 33 19 33 24
Natural Sciences 25 18 24 13 24 16
Social Science 36 21 27 19 36 29
General Education
Center General Microcredit courses 10 7 6 6 18 14
Core Curriculum 41 24 40 30 34 29
Electives by Interest 3 2 2 2 2 2
Sub-Total 318 149 302 141 317 177
Common Learnings 11 5 1 1 11 7
Dept. of Crafts and Creative Design 8 5 10 5 18 8
Dept. of Kinesiology, Health and
55 44 52 37 51 42
Leisure Studies
College of
Dept. of Athletic Performance 40 10 42 16 42 18
Humanities and
Social Sciences Dept. of Western Languages and
39 15 36 11 34 22
Literature
Dept. of East Asian Languages and
60 37 50 26 52 31
Literature
Dept. of Creative Design and
46 28 40 22 25 17
Architecture
Dept. of Architecture 15 5 17 6 27 14
Sub-Total 274 149 248 124 260 159
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 9 of 21

Table 1. Cont.

Academic Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Fall 2019

Department
Division Courses Related Courses Related Courses Related
Total COURSES Total Courses Total Courses
to SDGs to SDGs to SDGs
Dept. of Law 55 34 60 39 58 49
Dept. of Government and Law 61 5 52 2 57 7
College of Law
Dept. of Economic and Financial Law 55 39 45 31 48 35
Sub-Total 171 78 157 72 163 91
Common Learnings 3 1 3 1 3 2
Dept. of Asia Pacific Industrial and
47 21 39 19 36 28
Business Management

College of Dept. of Finance 33 20 31 25 32 21

Management International Master of Business
11 4 10 8 10 10
Administration
Dept. of Information Management 37 18 33 22 41 35
Dept. of Applied Economics 32 23 27 15 28 20
Sub-Total 163 87 143 90 150 116
Common Learnings 5 2 4 3 2 2
Dept. of Applied Chemistry 36 19 34 17 32 22
Dept. of Applied Physics 36 23 31 19 34 20
College of Science Dept. of Applied Mathematics 34 27 36 11 35 18
Dept. of Life Sciences 45 31 37 22 43 39
Institute of Statistics 12 5 10 3 10 4
Sub-Total 168 107 152 75 156 105
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 10 of 21

Table 1. Cont.

Academic Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Fall 2019

Department
Division Courses Related Courses Related Courses Related
Total COURSES Total Courses Total Courses
to SDGs to SDGs to SDGs
Dept. of Civil and Environmental
38 31 42 27 48 42
Engineering
Dept. of Chemical and Materials
35 22 35 14 31 27
College of Engineering
Engineering Dept. of Computer Science and
47 31 48 34 34 25
Information Engineering
Dept. of Electrical Engineering 78 54 75 37 76 63
Sub-Total 198 138 200 112 189 157
Total 1292 708 1202 614 1235 805
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 20

Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 11 of 21

4. Results

4.1.4. Results Level

University
4.1.
As University
shown in Level
Figure 3, it is evident that SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 4 (quality
education), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 9 (industry, innovation and
As shown in Figure 3, it is evident that SDG 3 (good health and well-being), SDG 4 (quality
infrastructure) and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) were the relatively significant
education), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure)
Goals related to the course offerings at NUK; especially SDGs 4, 8 and 9. For instance, with a total of
and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions) were the relatively significant Goals related to
1292 courses, 708 courses were indicated to link SDGs in the fall semester of 2018. Among them, SDG
the course offerings at NUK; especially SDGs 4, 8 and 9. For instance, with a total of 1292 courses,
4 (quality education; 34.1%), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth; 33.0%) and SDG 9 (industry,
708 courses were indicated to link SDGs in the fall semester of 2018. Among them, SDG 4 (quality
innovation and infrastructure; 28.9%) were prioritized to be the most relevant. A relatively stable
education; 34.1%), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth; 33.0%) and SDG 9 (industry, innovation
pattern of the curriculum structure for SDGs-related courses can be observed throughout the three
and infrastructure; 28.9%) were prioritized to be the most relevant. A relatively stable pattern of
semesters. The course inventory mapping provides a convenient university-wide overview of the
the curriculum structure for SDGs-related courses can be observed throughout the three semesters.
profiles and prioritizations of each HEI. Though the comparison of sustainability course inventory
The course inventory mapping provides a convenient university-wide overview of the profiles and
results with different self-reporting HEIs is difficult, it is worth pointing out that SDG 3 (good health
prioritizations of each HEI. Though the comparison of sustainability course inventory results with
and well-being), SDG 5 (gender equality), SDG 13 (climate action) and SDG 16 (peace, justice and
different self-reporting HEIs is difficult, it is worth pointing out that SDG 3 (good health and well-being),
strong institutions) were found to be the major SDGs covered by the sustainability courses at the
SDG 5 (gender equality), SDG 13 (climate action) and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions)
University of Toronto [24]. From a practical point of view, considering the behavioral change of
were found to be the major SDGs covered by the sustainability courses at the University of Toronto [24].
individuals is a key to trigger the sustainability in higher education, Sonetti et al. recommended four
From a practical point of view, considering the behavioral change of individuals is a key to trigger
practicable SDGs, namely, SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals), SDG 12
the sustainability in higher education, Sonetti et al. recommended four practicable SDGs, namely,
(responsible consumption and production) and SDG 13 (climate action) for implementation in HEIs
SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and
[4].
production) and SDG 13 (climate action) for implementation in HEIs [4].

Figure
Figure 3. Distribution
3. Distribution of SDGs-related
of SDGs-related courses
courses in the
in the whole
whole university
university within
within three
three consecutive
consecutive
semesters. Numbers are the total courses corresponded to each specific SDG (denoted as S). S).
semesters. Numbers are the total courses corresponded to each specific SDG (denoted as

4.2. College Level

4.2. College Level
At the college level, as shown in Figure 4, both the College of Humanities and Social Sciences
At the college level, as shown in Figure 4, both the College of Humanities and Social Sciences
and the General Education Center indicated that SDG 4 (quality education) was the one fitted to the
and the General Education Center indicated that SDG 4 (quality education) was the one fitted to the
most of SDGs-related courses. The courses offered by the College of Engineering and the College of
most of SDGs-related courses. The courses offered by the College of Engineering and the College of
Management were more related to SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure) and SDG 8 (decent
Management were more related to SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure) and SDG 8
work and economic growth), respectively. The College of Law emphasized SDG 16 (peace, justice
(decent work and economic growth), respectively. The College of Law emphasized SDG 16 (peace,
and strong institutions). Even though a relatively lesser amount of data was received, the College of
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 20
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 12 of 21
justice and strong institutions). Even though a relatively lesser amount of data was received, the
College of Science was similar to the College of Engineering, also focusing on SDG 9 (industry,
Science was similar to the College of Engineering, also focusing on SDG 9 (industry, innovation and
innovation and infrastructure). Table 2 summarizes the three most related-SDGs with respect to
infrastructure). Table 2 summarizes the three most related-SDGs with respect to different colleges for
different colleges for the three semesters at NUK, from which more detailed information can be
the three semesters at NUK, from which more detailed information can be observed. For example,
observed. For example, SDG 8 and SDG 9 were the major Goals for the College of Management, the
SDG 8 and SDG 9 were the major Goals for the College of Management, the College of Science and the
College of Science and the College of Engineering, while SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities)
College of Engineering, while SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities) was also a key attribute in
was also a key attribute in the College of Engineering. It can be seen that the colleges with expertise
the College of Engineering. It can be seen that the colleges with expertise in particular subject areas
in particular subject areas related to specific SDGs had a strong tendency to offer more courses with
related to specific SDGs had a strong tendency to offer more courses with a primary or explicit focus on
a primary or explicit focus on specific SDGs. This is consistent with the study of Brugmann et al.
specific SDGs. This is consistent with the study of Brugmann et al. where SDG 9 (industry, innovation
where SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure) was shown to be a major focus of
and infrastructure) was shown to be a major focus of sustainability courses for the Faculty of Applied
sustainability courses for the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering at the University of Toronto
Science and Engineering at the University of Toronto [26]. However, the 3rd most relevant SDG was
[26]. However, the 3rd most relevant SDG was different in the College of Humanities and Social
different in the College of Humanities and Social Sciences and the College of Law depending on
Sciences and the College of Law depending on semester, suggesting that either courses had changed
semester, suggesting that either courses had changed from one semester to another or that teachers had
from one semester to another or that teachers had altered their selection of SDGs while filling out the
altered their selection of SDGs while filling out the inventory form. The benefit of the course inventory
inventory form. The benefit of the course inventory is to provide a metric to track changes in the
is to provide a metric to track changes in the amount of focus on sustainability in the curriculum across
amount of focus on sustainability in the curriculum across the university [26,38].
the university [26,38].

Figure 4. Distribution of SDGs-related courses in the different colleges. Numbers are the total courses
Figure 4. Distribution of SDGs-related courses in the different colleges. Numbers are the total courses
corresponding to each specific SDG (denoted as S). Data presented is from the fall semester of 2018.
corresponding to each specific SDG (denoted as S). Data presented is from the fall semester of 2018.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 13 of 21

Table 2. Three most relevant SDGs with respect to different colleges for the three semesters at the National University of Kaohsiung (NUK).

Fall 2018 Spring 2019 Fall 2019

Academic Division The 1st The 2nd The 3rd The 1st The 2nd The 3rd The 1st The 2nd The 3rd
Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant Relevant
SDG SDG SDG SDG SDG SDG SDG SDG SDG
General Education Center 4 5 3 4 3 5 4 3 5
College of Humanities and
4 3 8 3 4 5 4 3 11
Social Sciences
College of Law 16 10 8 16 4 5 16 10 1
College of Management 8 9 4 8 4 9 8 9 4
College of Science 9 8 4 9 4 8 9 8 4
College of Engineering 9 8 11 9 8 11 9 8 11
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 14 of 21

4.3. Department Level

At a department level, certain SDGs by subject areas were clearly aligned with specific departments
in our university. As listed in Table 3, all 17 SDGs were used to map the course sustainability and
find the first and second most relevant departments in the fall semester of 2019. Again, similar to the
findings we observed at the college level, the relationships between the particular subject areas of the
department and the attribute of a specific SDG becomes more apparent. For example, SDG 6 (clean
water and sanitation) is highly related to the expertise of the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering. Among the total of 48 courses offered, it was reported that 16 courses had sustainability
content related to SDG 6 (Table 3). Analogously, SDG 14 (life below water) and SDG 15 (life on land)
were strongly tied to the Department of Life Science.

Table 3. Departments offering the most abundant SDGs-related courses with respect to each specific SDG.

The First Most Relevant

SDGs The Second Most Relevant Department
Department
SDG 1 No Poverty Life Science (9/43) General Education (9/317)
SDG 2 Zero Hunger Life Science (11/43) General Education (4/317)
Kinesiology, Health and Leisure
SDG 3 Good Health and Well-Being General Education (32/317)
Studies (32/51)
SDG 4 Quality Education General Education (40/317) East Asian Languages and Literature (27/52)
SDG 5 Gender Equality General Education (68/317) Western Languages and Literature (10/34)
SDG 6 Clean Water and Sanitation Civil & Environ. Eng. (16/48) Applied Chemistry (8/32)
SDG 7 Affordable and Clean Energy Electrical Eng. (13/76) Applied Chemistry (8/32)
Decent Work and Economic Asia Pacific Industrial and Business
SDG 8 Electrical Eng. (32/76)
Growth Management (20/36); Finance (20/32)
Industry, Innovation and Computer Science and Information
SDG 9 Electrical Eng. (47/76)
Infrastructure Engineering (21/34)
SDG
Reduced Inequalities General Education (28/317) Law (13/58)
10
SDG Sustainable Cities and
Civil & Environ. Eng. (27/48) General Education (17/317)
11 Communities
SDG Asia Pacific Industrial and
Responsible Consumption Law (8/58)
12 Business Management (10/36)
SDG
Climate Action Civil & Environ. Eng. (7/48) Applied Chemistry (5/36)
13
SDG
Life Below Water Life Science (18/35) Civil & Environ. Eng. (7/348)
14
SDG
Life On Land Life Science (19/35) Civil & Environ. Eng. (9/48)
15
SDG
Peace and Justice Law (40/58) Economic & Financial Law (28/48)
16
SDG
Partnerships for the Goals Law (10/58) General Education (10/317)
17
Note: Numbers in parentheses represents the total number of courses with the specific SDG vs the total number of
courses offered by the department. Data presented are from the fall semester of 2019.

Even though the most relevant department offered the highest SDGs-related courses with
respect to a specific SDG, the weighting of the specific SDGs-related courses was scattered widely
across the university. For the most relevant department shown in Table 3, the Department of Law
showed the highest percentage of SDGs-related courses linked with SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong
institutions; 69.0%), while the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering exhibited the
highest percentage of SDGs-related courses linked with SDG 13 (climate action; 14.5%). However,
SDG 13 of all SDGs-related courses accounted for the lowest percentage among all the SDGs. It is
no surprise to observe these results; yet, we learn that, even if a department provides the largest
number of courses related to a specific SDG in the university, it does not ensure that the department is
well-prepared for that particular SDG, if the curriculum is still based on a traditional silo disciplinary
structure. As a quantitative study, it is capable of unveiling the emerging issue that has not yet been
noted. One typical example is the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, which offers
the largest number of courses (7 out of 48) related to SDG 13 (climate action). However, the courses
are far behind the need, regardless of quantities and quality; thus, enrichment of the course content,
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 15 of 21

with more focus on SDGs to enhance the quality, is required. In fact, a further in-depth qualitative
study, such as an interview with stakeholders, is needed. As mentioned above, sustainable transitions
require the essential transformation of the curriculum framework towards sustainability [12,14]. Thus,
the transformation of Civil and Environmental Engineering towards Sustainable Engineering is strongly
recommended to fulfill the needs of future generations, when the significance and impact of global
climate change are taken into consideration.

4.4. The Diversity of SDGs in SDGs-related Courses

The radar chart shown in Figure 4 points out which SDGs are the major elements in different
colleges. Figure 5, on the other hand, depicts the “diversity” of various SDGs in our university, at the
college level, in the fall semester of 2018. The spectrum chart illustrated in Figure 5 consists of the 119
data points listed in Table S2, which were calculated by Equation (1) using the raw data in Table S1.
A five-level color scale bar for each specific SDG was constructed for Figure 5. For example, in the case
of SDG 1 (no poverty), the highest and lowest percentages were contributed by the College of Law
(6.61%) and College of Engineering (2.45%), respectively (Table S2). Thus, the five-level color scale bar
was equally divided by 5 from 6.61% to 2.45%, where a darker color indicates a higher percentage
of SDGs. As shown in Figure 5, each SDG has its own color, designated by the official SDG color
code, with a specific scale bar. Therefore, the focus of a specific SDG among the colleges can easily be
identified column-wise,
Sustainability 2020, 12, x FOR while the diversity of SDGs for each college can be revealed row-wise.
PEER REVIEW 15 of 20

Figure5.5.Spectrum
Figure Spectrumchart
chart of
of the
the SDG diversity of
SDG diversity ofall
allSDGs-related
SDGs-relatedcourses
coursesinin the
the college
college level.
level.

Differing
DifferingfromfromFigure
Figure5,5,weweinterpreted
interpreted ourour SDGSDGdata
dataininaadifferent
differentperspective,
perspective, in in order
order to gain
to gain
insight into the whole university, by using a single color bar. The same data
insight into the whole university, by using a single color bar. The same data applied in Figure 5 wasapplied in Figure 5 was
used
used forforvisualization,
visualization, asas shown
shown in inFigure
Figure6,6,where
where wewe selected
selected thethe highest
highest andand
lowestlowest percentage
percentage of
of all
all SDGs
SDGsfrom fromall all119
119data
datapoints
pointsshown
shownininTableTableS2S2totocreate
createthethe 5-level
5-level scale
scale bar.
bar. In In other
other words,
words,
there
thereis is
only
onlyoneonescale
scalebar
barutilized
utilized inin Figure wherethe
Figure 6, where therange
rangeofofthe
thescale
scale bar
bar is is from
from 31.5%
31.5% to 0.60%
to 0.60%
andandis is equallydivided
equally dividedby by5.5.The
The darkest
darkest color
color isis SDG
SDG99(industry,
(industry,innovation
innovation and
and infrastructure)
infrastructure) forfor
thethe CollegeofofEngineering,
College Engineering,indicating
indicating the highest
highest percentage
percentageofofall allSDGs
SDGs(31.5%);
(31.5%); while
while thethe
lightest
lightest
color
color was wasSDG SDG 6 (clean
6 (clean water
water andand sanitation)
sanitation) for College
for the the College of Humanities
of Humanities and Social
and Social SciencesSciences
(0.60%).
(0.60%). As shown in Figure 6, it is clear that the curriculum of our university
As shown in Figure 6, it is clear that the curriculum of our university mainly emphasizes SDG 4 (quality mainly emphasizes
SDG 4 (quality
education), SDG 8education),
(decent work SDGand 8 (decent
economic work and economic
growth), growth), SDG
SDG 9 (industry, 9 (industry,
innovation innovation
and infrastructure)
andandSDG infrastructure) and SDG
16 (peace, justice and16 (peace,
strong justice and More
institutions). strongimportant,
institutions). More6 important,
Figure reveals where Figure
we6are
reveals where we are insufficient, rather than just our existing strengths.
insufficient, rather than just our existing strengths. The spectrum indicates the many SDGs are The spectrum indicates thestill
many SDGs are still lacking in all colleges, including SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG
lacking in all colleges, including SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 6 (clean water and
6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 12 (responsible
sanitation), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 12 (responsible consumption and production),
consumption and production), SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 14 (life below water), SDG 15 (life on
SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 14 (life below water), SDG 15 (life on land) and SDG 17 (partnerships
land) and SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals); even though we have specific departments engaging
for the goals); even though we have specific departments engaging those SDGs. This suggests that
those SDGs. This suggests that SDGs-related courses are far from sufficient at NUK.
SDGs-related courses are far from sufficient at NUK.
 reveals where we are insufficient, rather than just our existing strengths. The spectrum indicates the
many SDGs are still lacking in all colleges, including SDG 1 (no poverty), SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG
6 (clean water and sanitation), SDG 7 (affordable and clean energy), SDG 12 (responsible
consumption and production), SDG 13 (climate action), SDG 14 (life below water), SDG 15 (life on
land) and2020,
Sustainability SDG12,174274
(partnerships for the goals); even though we have specific departments engaging
16 of 21
those SDGs. This suggests that SDGs-related courses are far from sufficient at NUK.

Figure 6. Spectrum chart of the SDG diversity for all the SDGs-related courses in the university level.
Figure 6. Spectrum chart of the SDG diversity for all the SDGs-related courses in the university level.
5. Discussion
5. Discussion
Similar to many other HEIs having challenges with integrating sustainability into their institutional
Similar to many other HEIs having challenges with integrating sustainability into their
systems [17,18], we observed faculty members lacking awareness and concern for sustainability are an
institutional systems [17,18], we observed faculty members lacking awareness and concern for
obstacle to sustainability transitions at NUK. Thus, an attempt was made to promote their awareness
sustainability are an obstacle to sustainability transitions at NUK. Thus, an attempt was made to
of SDGs by implementing a SDG course inventory system by the academic administration of NUK.
promote their awareness of SDGs by implementing a SDG course inventory system by the academic
In this work, we present the results of the SDG course inventory system, which helps to understand
administration of NUK. In this work, we present the results of the SDG course inventory system,
the baseline
which status
helps of sustainability
to understand through
the baseline the distribution
status of SDGs-related
of sustainability through the courses at different
distribution levels
of SDGs-
inrelated
the overall university
courses curriculum.
at different levels inFrom the baseline
the overall status,
university it was found
curriculum. thatthe
From thebaseline
averagestatus,
numberit of
SDGs
was found that the average number of SDGs linked to a course was about 2.65 throughout the whole the
linked to a course was about 2.65 throughout the whole university. The course offerings of
College of Law
university. Theshowed the highest
course offerings number
of the College ofofSDGs
Law per course
showed the(3.25, onnumber
highest average); while per
of SDGs those offered
course
by(3.25,
the College of Engineering
on average); while those showed
offered bythethelowest
Collegenumber of SDGs showed
of Engineering per course
the (2.28). According
lowest number of to
the study conducted by Brugmann et al., the number of SDGs covered by a course
SDGs per course (2.28). According to the study conducted by Brugmann et al., the number of SDGs was considered
to be indicative of the degree of sustainability focus in the course while they investigated the use of
their sustainability course inventories at the University of Toronto [26]. Our study suggests that the
number of SDGs covered by a course reflects the diversity of the sustainability topics covered in the
course. As shown in Figures 5 and 6, the method used here does give an indication of the areas covered
and, thus, also points to blind spots with insufficient coverage of SDGs. Moreover, it can also give
an indication of the diversity within colleges, which could suggest future paths for transdisciplinary
development and capacity-building at the university level.
As sustainability is highly inter- and trans-disciplinary [39,40], the collaboration of faculty
members from different disciplines is essential for sustainability transitions in the university where
we observed the difficulty of faculty members to find partners for collaborating with SDGs into
teaching and research at NUK. This obstacle has also been reported as we mentioned previously when
integrating sustainability into higher education [17,21]. The SDG course inventory can, therefore,
serve as a fast scanning system to identify the hot spots and blind spots, reflecting the strengths
and weaknesses with respect to specific SDGs for each unit. The hot spots shown in Figure 5
provide the academic administration with useful information to better understand the interdisciplinary
capacity of faculty members in pursuing SDGs and to identify internal collaboration opportunities
in the university. For example, both the College of Law and the College of Management showed a
strong emphasis on SDG 1 (no poverty; dark red in SDG 1 column in Figure 5). Thus, there is an
opportunity for both colleges to use SDG 1 (no poverty) as a platform to collaborate in developing new
interdisciplinary programs based on their advantages. Further, a synergy effect may be developed
through cross-disciplinary collaboration, which is no longer limited to a specific SDG, leading to the
overall transformation of the curriculum. Indeed, education for sustainable development requires
the participation of interdisciplinarity and collaboration with various non-academic sectors [41,42].
Previous studies have revealed that university students generally do not know the SDGs, as they
require a wide variety of both specific and transversal competences in courses [43]. Consequently,
better integration of topics related to the SDGs in teaching programs is essential to creating SDG
literacy [13].
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 17 of 21

As shown in Figure 5, the university level is the overall status of the SDG distribution, which can
be referred to as the “average state”. In general, the college level shows that each college has its
own strengths and weakness associated with various SDGs, depending on its expertise. Figure 5 also
reveals that the course structure pattern of the General Education Center, in terms of sustainability
content, exhibits similarity to that of the whole university. Only SDG 2 (zero hunger), SDG 8 (decent
work and economic growth), SDG 9 (industry, innovation and infrastructure) and SDG 12 (responsible
consumption and production) were lesser than those of the university, in terms of percentage of
corresponding SDGs-related course ratio (Equation (1)). Surprisingly, the College of Science showed
a spectrum covering more SDGs than we expected. Only SDG 5 (gender equality), SDG 10 (reduce
inequality), SDG 11 (sustainable cities and communities), SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions)
and SDG 17 (partnerships for the goals) were lesser than those of the university. According to the
results at college level, it may be further categorized by two patterns: The first pattern is the college
course offerings linked to a wide variety of SDGs; while the second pattern is the college course
offerings linked only to a specific SDG related to the subject areas of the college. The results suggest
that the General Education Center and the College of Science, which are more likely to fit into the
first pattern, offer more diversified courses which cover more SDGs at the college level. On the other
hand, the remaining four colleges belong to the second pattern. They show a relatively narrow SDGs
spectrum, indicating that their curriculum framework is mainly focused on specific SDGs.
The above-mentioned discussion leads us to raise the following question “Is there any so-called
“best” pattern of curriculum framework existing for the university when SDGs are taken into
consideration?” As mentioned before, the college course offerings related to SDGs may have two
patterns. Ideally, if universities have abundant resources, they may choose the first pattern to provide
sufficient and nearly equal amounts of courses with respect to all SDGs. On the other hand, there is
another strategy: for the university to use the second pattern based on colleges with solid academics.
However, with this strategy, it is inevitable to find lacking SDGs which need to be complemented.
Clearly, no single HEI can offer high-quality and in-depth education in all areas. At national and
regional levels, it is therefore important to ensure co-ordination between HEIs, such that their different
profiles complement each other.
Studies conducted by Zamora-Polo et al. pointed out that both specific and transversal competences
are required for educating students to understand SDGs [43]. They suggested that transversal
competences related to SDGs or sustainability should be permeated into all subjects, from basic courses
to more specific courses in universities [43]. The immersion of transversal competences into courses
may help to complement the needs of the second pattern (i.e., the course offerings emphasize specific
SDGs in particular subject areas), even though the transversal competences alone are not be able to
ensure that a country or region actually have access to research and professional competence covering
all of the SDGs. Furthermore, our opinion is that the general education may play a role to support the
needs of providing transversal competences into the courses, in order to compensate for the lack of
holistic understanding and systems thinking. In the case of NUK, however, the courses offered by the
General Education Center show a similar SDGs pattern to those offered by the university, which does
not complement the needs of university. We believe that the General Education Center of NUK should
reform its curriculum framework to fulfill the SDGs-Inside policy of NUK. Under limited resources, we
suggest that the university may choose the strategy where professionally oriented colleges complement
general education to achieve the maximum SDG coverage to which the courses are linked.
At the department level, this study offers evidence-based practice for departments to reform
their curriculum by integrating SDGs. From the SDG course inventory, departments may review
their curriculum structure regularly and allocate resources into their target SDGs. It is likely that the
current curriculum framework of a given department is based on the guidance of traditional discipline
structures, which are mainly professionally oriented in the syllabus design. To accelerate the reform
of the curriculum, support from a top-down university policy of sustainability, resource support for
teachers to redesign courses, and an enhancement of the awareness of teachers are needed.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 18 of 21

6. Limitations of the Study

The case study was based on the university-wide data of SDGs-related courses collected from the
SDGs course inventory system at NUK. A quantitative analysis was conducted to interpret the results.
However, certain limitations can be found in the study. Though many case studies have reported the use
of SDGs as indicators to evaluate curricula with respect to the degree of sustainability [24–27], there are
difficulties in comparing the sustainability course inventory results with different self-reporting HEIs.
More homogenization is needed among countries or regions. Furthermore, to initiate curriculum
reform at both university and department levels, quantitative analysis of the course inventory alone,
serving as a fast scanning system to identify the weaknesses and strengths of the units with respect to
the degree of sustainability in their curriculum, is not sufficient to complete the task. It must be coupled
with in-depth qualitative studies of the courses offered, such that the department may redesign the
curriculum to reflect how the reformed curriculum relates both to the department and to societal
needs. Nevertheless, our virtualization method, which maps course sustainability by the SDG diversity,
is applicable to all universities who wish to find their hot spots and blind spots for various SDGs,
as long as they can collect university-wide data using SDGs as indicators in their course inventory.

7. Conclusions
The online curriculum system embedded with the SDGs course inventory module provides
significant benefits to NUK. First, to facilitate the better understanding of faculty members in how
their teaching materials are associated with SDGs and to promote their awareness of SDGs. Second,
to instruct students with respect to the relationship between their learning content and the SDGs.
Finally, to help universities gain a baseline status of sustainability in their curriculum, such that they
may plan their strategy for sustainability and prioritize the allocation of resources accordingly. The
specific findings are concluded below:

• Our study suggests that the number of SDGs covered by a course reflects the diversity of the
sustainability topics covered in the course. This metric gives an indication of the areas covered
and, thus, also point to blind spots. Moreover, it can also give an indication of the diversity within
colleges, which could suggest future paths for transdisciplinary development;
• It is evident that the curriculum of our university mainly emphasizes SDG 3 (good health and
well-being), SDG 4 (quality education), SDG 8 (decent work and economic growth), SDG 9
(industry, innovation and infrastructure) and SDG 16 (peace, justice and strong institutions).
However, our study indicated that many SDGs are still not focused in all colleges;
• The SDGs course inventory offers the academic administration useful information, in order
to better understand the interdisciplinary capacity and internal collaboration opportunities in
the university;
• SDGs can serve as a platform to develop innovative and interdisciplinary programs through the
collaboration of various colleges, where their faculty members may engage with the same SDGs
through different approaches;
• Certain SDGs are clearly aligned with the expertise of specific departments in our university.
However, we found that, even if a department provides the largest number of courses related to a
specific SDG in the university, it does not necessarily ensure that the department is well-prepared
for that particular SDG. In-depth qualitative studies, such as an interview with stakeholders,
are needed. This study offers evidence-based practice for departments to reform their curricula by
integrating SDGs;
• General education may play an important role in supporting the needs of providing transversal
competences into courses, in order to compensate for the lack of holistic understanding and
systems thinking when sustainability is integrated into the overall university curriculum.
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 19 of 21

Supplementary Materials: The following are available online at http://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/10/4274/s1,

Table S1: SDGs-related course inventory results for the fall semester of 2018; Table S2: The raw data for the
preparation of Figures 5 and 6.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.; methodology, Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.; software,
Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.; validation, Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.; formal analysis, Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.; investigation, Y.-C.C.
and H.-L.L.; resources, Y.-C.C.; data curation, Y.-C.C.; writing—original draft preparation, Y.-C.C. and H.-L.L.;
writing—review and editing, H.-L.L.; visualization, H.-L.L.; supervision, H.-L.L.; project administration, H.-L.L.;
funding acquisition, H.-L.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: The authors would like to thank the Ministry of Education (MOE), Taiwan, for the support through the
Higher Education Sprout Project.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. United Nations. Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Resolution
Adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015. Available online: http://www.un.org/ga/search/
view_doc.asp?symbol=A/RES/70/1&Lang=E (accessed on 26 March 2020).
2. Owens, T.L. Higher Education in the Sustainable Development Goals Framework. Eur. J. Educ. 2017, 52,
414–420. [CrossRef]
3. Boni, A.; Lopez-Fogues, A.; Walker, M. Higher Education and the Post-2015 Agenda: A Contribution from
the Human Development Approach. J. Glob. Ethics 2016, 12, 17–28. [CrossRef]
4. Sonetti, G.; Brown, M.; Naboni, E. About the triggering of UN sustainable development goals and regenerative
sustainability in higher education. Sustainability 2019, 11, 254. [CrossRef]
5. Crespo, B.; Míguez-Álvarez, C.; Arce, M.E.; Cuevas, M.; Míguez, J.L. The sustainable development goals:
An experience on higher education. Sustainability 2017, 9, 1353. [CrossRef]
6. Leal Filho, W.; Vargas, V.R.; Salvia, A.L.; Brandli, L.L.; Pallant, E.; Klavins, M.; Ray, S.; Moggi, S.; Maruna, M.;
Conticelli, E.; et al. The role of higher education institutions in sustainability initiatives at the local level.
J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 233, 1004–1015. [CrossRef]
7. Zamora-Polo, F.; Sánchez-Martín, J. Teaching for a better world. Sustainability and sustainable development
goals in the construction of a change-maker university. Sustainability 2019, 11, 4224. [CrossRef]
8. Presidents & Vice Presidents Since 1947. Available online: https://english.president.gov.tw/Page/81 (accessed
on 22 April 2020).
9. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of China (Taiwan). Available online: https://www.taiwan.gov.tw/
content_9.php (accessed on 22 April 2020).
10. Hölscher, K.; Wittmayer, J.M.; Loorbach, D. Transition versus Transformation: What’s the Difference? Environ.
Innov. Soc. Transit. 2018, 27, 1–3. [CrossRef]
11. Smith, A.; Voß, J.-P.; Grin, J. Innovation studies and sustainability transitions: The allure of the multi-level
perspective and its challenges. Res. Policy 2010, 39, 435–448. [CrossRef]
12. Markard, J.; Raven, R.; Truffer, B. Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects.
Res. Policy 2012, 41, 955–967. [CrossRef]
13. Leal Filho, W. Viewpoint: Accelerating the Implementation of the SDGs. Int. J. Sustain. High. Edu. 2020, 21,
507–511. [CrossRef]
14. Deleye, M.; Van Poeck, K.; Block, T. Lock-ins and opportunities for sustainability transition: A multi-level
analysis of the flemish higher education system. Int. J. Sustain. High. Edu. 2019, 20, 1109–1124. [CrossRef]
15. Vladimirovaa, K.; Le Blanc, D. How Well are the Links Between Education and Other Sustainable Development
Goals Covered in UN Flagship Reports? A Contribution to the Study of the Science-Policy Interface on Education in
the UN System; DESA Working Paper; UN Secretariat: New York, NY, USA, 2015; p. 146.
16. Lozano, R.; Lukman, R.; Lozano, F.J.; Huisingh, D.; Lambrechts, W. Declarations for sustainability in higher
education: Becoming better leaders through addressing the university system. J. Clean. Prod. 2013, 48, 10–19.
[CrossRef]
17. Leal Filho, W.; Wu, Y.-C.J.; Brandli, L.L.; Avila, L.V.; Azeiteiro, U.M.; Caeiro, S.; Madruga, L.R.; da, R.G.
Identifying and overcoming obstacles to the implementation of sustainable development at universities.
J. Integr. Environ. Sci. 2017, 14, 93–108. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 20 of 21

18. Lozano, R. Incorporation and institutionalization of SD into universities: Breaking through barriers to change.
J. Clean. Prod. 2006, 14, 787–796. [CrossRef]
19. SDSN Australia/Pacific. 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, Australia, 2017.
20. Berghaeuser, H.; Hoelscher, M. Reinventing the third mission of higher education in Germany: Political
frameworks and universities’ reactions. Tert. Educ. Manag. 2019, 26, 1–20. [CrossRef]
21. Leal Filho, W.; Shiel, C.; Paço, A.; Mifsud, M.; Ávila, L.V.; Brandli, L.L.; Molthan-Hill, P.; Pace, P.;
Azeiteiro, U.M.; Vargas, V.R.; et al. Sustainable development goals and sustainability teaching at universities:
Falling behind or getting ahead of the pack? J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 285–294. [CrossRef]
22. Dmochowski, J.E.; Garofalo, D.; Fisher, S.; Greene, A.; Gambogi, D. Integrating sustainability across the
university curriculum. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2016, 17, 652–670. [CrossRef]
23. STARS (2019) STARS Technical Manual AC 01 Academic Courses v.2.2. AASHE, Philadephia, PA, USA.
Available online: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Q97iPiX1_tvq5cjgQ3qfCch99L-0-Gt1/view. (accessed on
22 April 2020).
24. Orlovic Lovren, V.; Maruna, M.; Stanarevic, S. Reflections on the Learning Objectives for Sustainable
Development in the Higher Education Curricula—Three Cases from the University of Belgrade. Int. J.
Sustain. High. Edu. 2020, 21, 15–335. [CrossRef]
25. Albareda-Tiana, S.; Vidal-Raméntol, S.; Fernández-Morilla, M. Implementing the sustainable development
goals at university level. Int. J. Sustain. High. Educ. 2018, 19, 473–497. [CrossRef]
26. Brugmann, R.; Côté, N.; Postma, N.; Shaw, E.A.; Pal, D.; Robinson, J.B. Expanding student engagement in
sustainability: Using SDG-and CEL-focused inventories to transform curriculum at the university of Toronto.
Sustainability 2019, 11, 530. [CrossRef]
27. Gough, G.; Longhurst, J. Monitoring Progress towards implementing sustainability and representing the UN
sustainable development goals (SDGs) in the curriculum at UWE Bristol. In Implementing Sustainability in the
Curriculum of Universities; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 279–289.
28. Kosta, K. Sustainability curriculum in UK university sustainability reports. In Implementing Sustainability in
the Curriculum of Universities; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 79–97.
29. The Online Syllabus System of NUK (Chinese Version). Available online: https://course.nuk.edu.tw/
QueryCourse/QueryCourse.asp (accessed on 22 April 2020).
30. Willats, J.; Erlandsson, L.; Molthan-Hill, P.; Dharmasasmita, A.; Simmons, E. A university wide approach to
embedding the sustainable development goals in the curriculum—A case study from the nottingham trent
university’s green academy. In Implementing Sustainability in the Curriculum of Universities; World Sustainability
Series; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 63–78.
31. Janoušková, S.; Hák, T.; Moldan, B. Global SDGs assessments: Helping or confusing indicators? Sustainability
2018, 10, 1540. [CrossRef]
32. NUK Sustainability Report (2019). Available online: http://sdg.nuk.edu.tw/defaultEn.aspx (accessed on
20 March 2020).
33. The SDG University of Taiwan: National University of Kaohsiung (NUK) Initiative for SDGs. Available
online: http://sdg.nuk.edu.tw/defaultEn.aspx (accessed on 26 March 2020).
34. Taiwan Institute for Sustainable Energy (TAISE). The Alliance for Sustainable Development Goals Founding
Ceremony Leading Taiwan to a New Sustainable Future. Available online: https://www.taiseen.org.tw/news-
view.php?ID=72 (accessed on 22 April 2020).
35. Universities for SDG Forum at NUK. Available online: http://nukforum2019.mystrikingly.com/ (accessed on
22 April 2020).
36. Times Higher Education (THE) Impact Rankings. Available online: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/
rankings/impact/2020/overall#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/undefined (accessed on
22 April 2020).
37. Osman, A.; Ladhani, S.; Findlater, E.; McKay, V. Curriculum Framework for the Sustainable Development Goals;
The Commonwealth Secretariat: London, UK, 2017.
38. White, G.B.; Koester, R.J. STARS and GRI: Tools for campus greening strategies and prioritizations. Sustain. J.
Rec. 2012, 5, 100–106. [CrossRef]
Sustainability 2020, 12, 4274 21 of 21

39. Klein, J.T. Sustainability and collaboration: Crossdisciplinary and cross-sector horizons. Sustainability 2020,
12, 1515. [CrossRef]
40. Ely, A.; Marin, A.; Charli-Joseph, L.; Abrol, D.; Apgar, M.; Atela, J.; Ayre, B.; Byrne, R.; Choudhary, B.K.;
Chengo, V.; et al. Structured collaboration across a transformative knowledge network—Learning across
disciplines, cultures and contexts? Sustainability 2020, 12, 2499. [CrossRef]
41. Annan-Diab, F.; Molinari, C. Interdisciplinarity: Practical approach to advancing education for sustainability
and for the Sustainable Development Goals. Int. J. Manag. Educ. 2017, 15, 73–83. [CrossRef]
42. Leal Filho, W.; Raath, S.; Lazzarini, B.; Vargas, V.R.; de Souza, L.; Anholon, R.; Quelhas, O.L.G.; Haddad, R.;
Klavins, M.; Orlovic, V.L. The role of transformation in learning and education for sustainability. J. Clean.
Prod. 2018, 199, 286–295. [CrossRef]
43. Zamora-Polo, F.; Sánchez-Martín, J.; Corrales Serrano, M.; Espejo-Antúnez, L. What do university students
know about sustainable development goals? A realistic approach to the reception of this UN program
amongst the youth population. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3533. [CrossRef]

© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).