Impact of ESG integration in STEM and non-STEM master’s programmes: evidence from Kazakhstan

Т. Я. Эрназаров, Y. Kunyazov, Alexey Titkov, Madina K. Karimbergenova, Ansagan Beisembina

Frontiers in Education, 2026

Full text Open access: Gold Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.3389/feduc.2026.1886249
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

This study examines the integration of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) concepts in selected master's-level programmes in Kazakhstan, with a focus on differences between STEM and non-STEM disciplines and their relationship to student competency development. In the context of science education and global learning, ESG-related competencies can be understood as an important component of global competence, enabling students to engage with complex sustainability challenges. The study adopts a comparative mixed-methods design, combining curriculum analysis with student survey data. A structured ESG Integration Index was developed to assess the extent and depth of ESG-related content across programmes, while self-reported competencies were measured across five dimensions. The sample includes 90 master's students from STEM and non-STEM programmes. The findings indicate that ESG integration is present across all analysed programmes but varies significantly in structure and depth. Non-STEM programmes demonstrate more explicit and multidimensional integration, particularly in social and governance domains, whereas STEM programmes focus more narrowly on environmental and technical aspects. At the same time, students in STEM programmes report higher levels of self-perceived ESG competencies across all dimensions. No statistically significant relationship was found between curriculum-level ESG integration and competency development. These results suggest that ESG integration in higher education may not operate as a linear process (curriculum to competencies), but rather as a mediated system in which learning outcomes depend on pedagogical practices, disciplinary contexts, and student engagement. In the context of science education, this highlights the importance of approaches that support critical reflection, interdisciplinary thinking, and application-oriented learning. Overall, the study provides exploratory empirical evidence on ESG integration in an underexplored Central Asian context and contributes to understanding the complex relationship between curriculum design and sustainability-related competency development.