Quasi-experimental study demonstrates improved sustainability awareness and language proficiency in undergraduate students, highlighting the efficacy of interdisciplinary language curricula.
Preparing graduates for emerging engineering disciplines requires educational models that simultaneously cultivate domain knowledge, interdisciplinary collaboration, and effective international communication. In fields such as electromagnetic engineering, advanced materials, and intelligent manufacturing, the ability to address sustainability challenges through project-oriented problem solving has become increasingly important. This study develops and quantitatively evaluates an interdisciplinary project-based learning (PBL) framework that integrates sustainable development concepts into university English education through an authentic textile lifecycle scenario. Centered on Sustainable Development Goal 12, the proposed model engages students in investigating textile resource utilization, waste reduction, and circular economy practices while employing English as the primary medium for research, collaboration, and technical communication. A quasi-experimental pretest–posttest design involving 120 undergraduate students was implemented to compare the proposed framework with conventional instruction. After a 16-week intervention, the experimental group demonstrated statistically significant improvements in both sustainability awareness and English proficiency, with large effect sizes observed in covariance analysis. The findings indicate that embedding real-world engineering challenges into language education effectively promotes systems thinking, interdisciplinary problem-solving, and professional communication skills. Beyond textile sustainability education, the proposed framework provides a transferable pedagogical paradigm for cultivating globally oriented engineering competencies relevant to multidisciplinary fields involving advanced materials, intelligent sensing, and electromagnetic technologies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Z. G. Zhang (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: