The world faces escalating crises: record-breaking temperatures, widespread fires, severe flooding, increased oceanic microplastics, and unequal resource distribution. Academia introduces courses around sustainability to meet the new demand, but software engineering education lags behind. While software systems contribute to environmental issues through high energy consumption, they also hold the potential for solutions, such as more efficient and equitable resource management. Yet, sustainability remains a low priority for many businesses, including those in the digital sector. Business as usual is no longer viable. A transformational change in software engineering education is urgently needed. We must move beyond traditional curriculum models and fully integrate sustainability into every aspect of software development. By embedding sustainability as a core competency, we can equip future engineers not only to minimise harm but also to innovate solutions that drive positive, sustainable change. Only with such a shift can software engineering education meet the demands of a world in crisis and prepare students to lead the next generation of sustainable technology. This article discusses a set of challenges and proposes a customisable education roadmap for integrating sustainability into the software engineering curricula. These challenges reflect our perspective on key considerations, stemming from regular, intensive discussions in regular workshops among the authors and the community, as well as our extensive research and teaching experience in the field.

What stories can we tell to help us rethink engineering education futures? How can we imagine what practices are possible? How can we transgress what hasn't served us, other critters, and the planet? These are questions that inspired us to develop a workshop in which we used collage-making to visualize narratives on current states and possible futures of engineering education. Grounded in Holland et al.'s (1998) theory of figured worlds and L & ouml;nngren and Berge's (2024) concept of emotional positioning, the workshop explored figured emotional worlds operating in and envisioned for engineering classrooms. In this paper, we critically examine reflections of activities from during the workshop and its outcomes to ask the overarching question, how can engineers and engineering educators interact with the figured worlds of engineering to (re)imagine our work, our futures, and ourselves? To answer this question, we consider the workshop a case through which we 1) map out the context and progression of the activity, 2) share examples of collages and their stories, and 3) offer and explore multiple dimensions of critical reflection, thematically analyzing the collages and discussing their use in how they prompted us to imagine, tell, and transgress stories about current and possible futures of engineering education worlds.

Computing educators' emotion display is regulated by various norms and conventions. These (unwritten) rules affect which emotions educators feel comfortable expressing to different extents when students can perceive such displays. We draw on emotions and norms literature to investigate higher education computing educators' perceptions of what kinds of norms they have as criteria when considering which emotions they are (not) comfortable showing when teaching. Based on the qualitative content analysis of 22 interviews with computing educators from seven countries, we present various - sometimes connected or conflicting - norms that influence emotion display. These norms comprise moral, national, societal, professional, and affiliation norms that are salient in different ways for different educators. The findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of various combinations of nested, context-dependent, and partly conflicting norms that guide educators' emotion display, an understanding of educators' work that goes beyond cognitive aspects.

The fundamentally unsustainable state of the world calls for transformations across all aspects of society, including engineering education. In this paper, we explore our roles as educational developers working to promote such change. We started an experiment asking: What might emerge if we were radically open to one another, working through our differences and disagreements about what is, could, and should be done for change in engineering education? Drawing on a plurality of methodologies and theoretical perspectives, such as bricolage, collaborative autoethnography, and diffraction, we developed an approach and engaged in a process of researching ourselves, our affective relationship, and our university context as entangled subjects and objects, learning and acting for change. The paper presents the approach and shares co-created insights, focusing in particular on tensions and how to navigate them: tensions between what is and what is needed; between different conceptions of education for change; and between people.

Understanding human perception is fundamental to computer graphics. However, computer science and engineering education have a track record of neglecting human concerns in favour of technical and scientific matters. The diverse and rapidly evolving nature of the field also means that educators need to be highly selective in what concepts and skills to include in syllabuses, potentially complicating the inclusion of perceptual topics in computer graphics courses. This study explores the treatment of perception as a topic in introductory computer graphics courses at Swedish universities, through analysis of course syllabuses and the attitudes of educators. Data from 22 syllabuses, three interviews and six responses from a survey were collected across twelve universities. While educators agree on the importance of understanding human perception in graphics creation, the results present a diverse set of approaches and attitudes toward teaching it. Approaches ranged from minimal inclusion to dedicated lectures, across varying perceptual topics, and perception was rarely mentioned in the course objectives. Overall, approaches seemed influenced mainly by student backgrounds, time, educator experiences, and challenges of addressing foundational skills. Based on these findings, some ways to better integrate perceptual aspects in existing curricula are proposed.

Research shows that the global society as organized today, with our current technological and economic system, is impossible to sustain. We are living in an era in which human activities in highly industrialized countries are responsible for overshooting several planetary boundaries, with poorer communities contributing the least to the problems but being impacted the most. At the same time, technical and economic gains fail to provide society at large with equal opportunities and improved quality of life. This article describes approaches taken in computing education to address the issue of sustainability. It presents results of a systematic review of the literature on sustainability in computing education. From a set of 572 publications extracted from six large digital libraries plus snowballing, we distilled and analyzed 89 relevant primary studies. Using an inductive and deductive thematic analysis, we study (i) conceptions of sustainability, computing, and education; (ii) implementations of sustainability in computing education; and (iii) research on sustainability in computing education. We present a framework capturing learning objectives and outcomes as well as pedagogical methods for sustainability in computing education. These results can be mapped to existing standards and curricula in future work. We find that only a few of the articles engage with the challenges as calling for drastic systemic change, along with radically new understandings of computing and education. We suggest that future work should connect to the substantial body of critical theory, such as feminist theories of science and technology. Existing research on sustainability in computing education may be considered rather immature, as the majority of articles are experience reports with limited empirical research.

In this paper, we discuss the ethical responsibilities of being a role model as an engineering teacher in higher education. We draw on virtue ethics, care ethics, ethics of freedom and role modeling theory, using Grande's framework for engineering education. We argue that the three ethical theories give different views on the ethics of role modeling as a teacher. Virtue ethics implies that the teacher should behave as virtuously as possible to encourage students to emulate character traits. Care ethics implies that the ethics of role modeling is fundamentally about care practices, emphazising relationships and values such as attentiveness and responsibility. Ethics of freedom urges the teacher to grant individuals opportunities to develop and be free from the control of others. By using role modeling and ethical theory, we aim to show how theory has an impact on both teaching practices and could underpin empirical research in engineering education.

This article provides a critical analysis of the current research terminology used to describe people with cognitive disability, intellectual impairment, neurodiversity, mental disorder, or psychological dysfunction. Medical diagnoses of the brain, nerves, mind, or psyche inform the use of these terms for describing behavior that is not deemed “normal” in humans. Cognitive disability is proposed as a more appropriate one than other similar terminologies after an analysis of diverse policy documents and academic publications.

This workshop was designed to be an open space to share and discuss possibilities to act for fundamental, perhaps radical, change in engineering education - towards an education that not only fosters technological excellence, but also contributes to fundamentally transforming society towards more sustainable ways of living.Our aim was to engage the participants in collaborative learning and co-creation activities to develop new knowledge, agency, and networks for educational change.To stimulate discussions, we first introduced two approaches for driving transformation: humor and activism.Then we introduced the “yes and”-technique which has previously been successfully applied for organizational development in higher education.Six groups with five to six participants applied this technique during the workshop.The 'yes and'-technique engaged the groups significantly and participants reported that they were surprised at how difficult it was to avoid the words “no”, “not”, and “but.We co-developed a list of action points that we can use to contribute to transforming engineering education where several action points were inspired by activism and/or humour.