Contributions sought for the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit

Background 

Engineering has the power to shape the world we live in. But as societies become increasingly diverse, technical expertise alone is not enough. Future engineers must design solutions that are accessible, equitable and inclusive, ensuring innovation benefits everyone. Embedding inclusive design thinking into engineering education helps graduates work responsibly, creatively and fairly.  

Many engineering educators did not receive formal training in fostering inclusive mindsets, or on how to embed inclusion into engineering practice, yet they are expected to prepare students for complex, real-world challenges. Without a focus on equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), engineering solutions risk unintentionally disadvantaging certain groups. Diverse perspectives, on the other hand, lead to stronger, more ethical, and adaptable outcomes.  

The Inclusive Engineering Toolkit is being developed to address this need, curating valuable and practical resources and tools, that help educators embed inclusive principles in their teaching and equip students to become ethical, collaborative, and globally aware engineers.  

Its development is guided by an Expert Working Group comprised of academic, industry, and professional organisation experts. 

 

Register your interest 

Please register your interest in developing a resource by completing this form  by 11th July 2026. 

If you have already registered an interest and we are expecting your submission, the deadline to submit first drafts is  8th August 2026.  Submit your Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Contribution here. Co-authors should complete this form. 

If you would like to become a reviewer for the toolkit (with structured review cycles running from late July to September 2026, and light input into October where needed), please complete this form (and tick ”Inclusive Engineering Toolkit”). We will take a flexible and iterative approach where possible. Where submissions are received earlier and reviewer capacity allows, review activity may begin ahead of the formal window to support workload distribution across the summer period.

 

The Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Working Group seeks contributors to develop resources for inclusion in the toolkit 

These resources will fit into three categories: 

  • Knowledge articles: Knowledge articles help build understanding of inclusion in engineering education and practice. These resources focus on what equity, diversity and inclusion is, why it matters, and how it relates to engineering contexts, professional practice, and outcomes. They may include: conceptual explanations of inclusion in engineering; discussions of why inclusion matters for engineering practice and outcomes; perspectives and lived experience grounded in practice or education; and introductory frameworks and concepts that support understanding (e.g., diversity, equity, accessibility, participation). In short, knowledge articles focus on how inclusion is understood in engineering contexts and why it matters in engineering practice and outcomes.  These resources help build a shared understanding of inclusion as a foundation for improving engineering practice, decision-making, and outcomes. 

 

  • Guidance articles: Guidance articles support educators in applying inclusive approaches in engineering teaching and learning. These resources focus on how to embed, teach, assess, or facilitate inclusion in practice. They may include practical approaches to inclusive teaching and facilitation; guidance on embedding inclusion in curricula, modules, or programmes; approaches to assessing and evaluating inclusive practice and teamwork; and strategies for creating inclusive learning environments and participation. In short, guidance articles focus on “how to do it.” These resources support educators in translating inclusive practice into teaching approaches that improve learning experiences, teamwork, and engineering outcomes.

 

  • Teaching activities:  Teaching activities provide ready-to-use or adaptable materials that embed inclusion directly into engineering learning environments. These resources focus on what educators can use in teaching to support inclusive learning and practice. They may include: case studies of inclusive or exclusionary engineering practice in real-world contexts,  classroom activities, exercises, and project or assessment briefs, simulations, interactive tools, or gamified learning approaches, and teamwork and collaboration activities that support inclusive participation and practice. These resources should be directly usable or easily adaptable in teaching contexts, supporting students to engage with inclusive engineering practice in action. In short, teaching activities focus on “what to use in teaching and learning.”  These resources help shape how students learn to apply inclusive approaches, contributing to more inclusive engineering outcomes in practice.

 

Design expectations for all contributions 

To ensure accessibility and inclusivity in practice, contributors should also consider:

  • Diverse classroom contexts, including large cohorts and limited-resource environments
  • Accessibility for different learner needs
  • Practical usability in real teaching environments without specialist infrastructure
  • How inclusion is embedded in design, structure and interaction (not only reflective content)
  • Clear connection to practice, systems, or real-world outcomes

 

We recommend allowing around 15–20 minutes to review the Call for Contributions guidance and relevant brief(s) before preparing your submission. This will help ensure your contribution aligns with the toolkit aims and requirements.

 

Read more about the specific content we are looking for (click on the arrows to expand the sections):

Submit a knowledge article

Submit a Knowledge Article 

The Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Working Group invites contributions that build understanding of inclusion in engineering education and practice. 

These articles should help explain how inclusion is understood in engineering contexts, why it matters, and how it influences engineering practice, professional behaviour, decision-making, and outcomes. 

We welcome articles that explore: 

1. Inclusion in engineering contexts 

  • How inclusion is understood in engineering education and practice, and how it influences design, decision-making, systems, teamwork, and professional environments. 
  • For example: explanations of inclusive engineering practice in design teams or accessibility considerations in engineering solutions. 

2. Why inclusion matters for engineering 

  • How inclusion and exclusion affect engineering outcomes, including products, systems, services, and solutions. 
  • For example: reflections on how diverse teams improve engineering decision-making or reduce design risk. 

3. Evidence-informed perspectives and lived experience 

  • Evidence-informed reflections from students, educators, or practitioners, including lived experience of inclusion or exclusion in engineering contexts. 
  • For example: practitioner or student reflections on barriers to participation or inclusive team experiences. 
  • Contributions in this area should be reflective or explanatory in nature, and grounded in evidence, practice, or experience, with clear relevance to teaching, learning, or engineering contexts. 

4. Concepts and frameworks that support understanding 

  • Introductory explanations of inclusion-related concepts and tools (e.g. diversity, equity, accessibility, participation frameworks). 
  • For example: diversity wheels or other inclusion frameworks applied to engineering contexts.

 

These articles will help build a shared foundation for understanding how inclusion operates in engineering practice and its role in shaping engineering decisions, systems, and outcomes.

Step 1: Read the guidance for submitting a knowledge article

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Research Guidance #3: Overview Guidance #4: Purpose Guidance #5: Format Guidance #6: References and resources

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Research:

Knowledge resources help build understanding of inclusion in engineering education and practice.

These resources focus on how inclusion appears in engineering contexts, why it matters, and how it influences engineering practice, decision-making, systems, and outcomes.

They should provide accessible, standalone explanations suitable for engineering educators and students new to inclusive engineering.

They may include:

  • conceptual explanations of inclusion as it appears in engineering contexts and practice
  • discussion of why inclusion matters for engineering practice, decision-making, systems, and outcomes
  • evidence-informed reflections from students, educators, or practitioners
  • introductory frameworks and concepts (e.g. diversity, equity, accessibility, participation) applied in engineering contexts

These resources should provide a baseline understanding and signpost further reading where appropriate.

They should be approximately 500-1000 words (although they can be more in depth if necessary) and reference relevant online open-source resources.

Overview:

Knowledge resources should be able to stand alone while also contributing to a coherent body of toolkit content that collectively builds understanding of inclusive engineering practice.

Purpose:

Each resource should explain inclusion in a way that is clear, accessible, and relevant to engineering education and practice, supporting understanding of how inclusion influences engineering thinking, behaviour, decision-making, systems, and outcomes.

Format:

Knowledge resources should include:

  • Premise
  • Main body (structured with headings as appropriate)
  • Conclusion (optional)
  • References (Harvard style) 
  • Further resources (open and accessible where possible)

 

References and resources:

Where additional explanation could be given, it might point to other resources, and where information is presented from another source, it needs to be properly referenced using Harvard referencing.

 

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist

  • Is the resource clear, accessible, and understandable to someone new to inclusive engineering?  
  • Does it explain how inclusion appears in engineering contexts and why it matters in engineering practice, systems, and outcomes? 
  • Is the content logically structured and well explained?  
  • Are claims supported with appropriate references?  
  • Are additional open resources or reading suggestions included?  
  • Does it contribute to a coherent set of toolkit knowledge resources?  
  • Are sources cited using Harvard referencing?
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3: Submitting your knowledge article

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026 
  • Knowledge articles should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 

 

Submit a guidance article

Submit a Guidance Article 

The Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Working Group invites contributions that support educators in applying inclusive approaches in engineering teaching and learning. 

These articles should focus on the practical application (“how”) of inclusive engineering principles in educational settings. 

We welcome articles that support: 

1. Teaching and facilitating inclusion 

  • Practical approaches to introducing and discussing inclusion in engineering education. 
  • For example: guidance on running inclusive classroom discussions or explaining inclusion concepts to students. 

2. Embedding inclusion in curricula and learning design 

  • Approaches for integrating inclusion across modules, programmes, and learning outcomes. 
  • For example: mapping inclusion-related learning outcomes to engineering curricula or professional standards. 

3. Progression and development of inclusive learning 

  • Ways inclusion can be supported across different stages of study and levels of learning. 
  • For example: scaffolding inclusive teamwork skills from early to later-year engineering modules. 

4. Assessment and evaluation approaches 

  • Examples of assessment approaches, criteria, or frameworks that support inclusive teamwork, participation, and professional skills development.  
  • References to AHEP4 
  • References to QAA Inclusive Higher Education Framework.
  • For example: rubrics for assessing teamwork, participation, or inclusive behaviours in group projects. 

5. Creating inclusive learning environments 

  • Practical strategies and tools that support equitable participation, accessibility, and inclusive classroom or project-based learning. 
  • For example: techniques to support balanced participation in group work or psychologically safe learning environments. 

 

These articles will translate inclusive engineering principles into practical approaches that support teaching practice and learning design.

 

Step 1: Read the guidance for submitting a guidance article

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Research Guidance #3: Overview Guidance #4: Purpose Guidance #5: Format Guidance #6: References and resources

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Research:

Guidance resources support educators in applying inclusive approaches in engineering teaching and learning. 

These resources focus on the practical application of inclusion in teaching, learning design, assessment, and curriculum development. 

They help translate inclusive engineering principles into actionable approaches. 

They may include: 

  • approaches to inclusive teaching and facilitation  
  • embedding inclusion in curricula and learning design  
  • assessment approaches for inclusive teamwork and participation  
  • strategies for creating inclusive learning environments  

They should be approximately 500-1000 words (although they can be more in depth if necessary) and reference relevant online open-source resources. 

Overview:

Guidance resources should stand alone while also forming part of a coherent set of tools supporting inclusive engineering education practice.

Purpose:

Each resource should provide practical, structured guidance that helps educators embed inclusion into teaching, learning, and assessment in engineering contexts. 

Format:

Guidance resources should include: 

  • Premise  
  • Structured sections with headings  
  • Practical guidance and examples  
  • References (Harvard style)  
  • Further resources (open and accessible where possible)  

References and resources:

Where additional explanation could be given, it might point to other resources, and where information is presented from another source, it needs to be properly referenced using Harvard referencing.

 

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist 

  • Is the guidance practical, clear, and easy to apply?  
  • Does it explain how to embed inclusion in teaching or curriculum practice?  
  • Is the content logically structured and usable by educators new to inclusive engineering?  
  • Are references appropriately cited?  
  • Does it provide actionable approaches or frameworks?  
  • Are sources cited using Harvard referencing?
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3: Submitting your guidance article

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026  
  • Guidance articles should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 
  • To ensure that everyone can use and adapt the Toolkit resources in a way that best fits their teaching or purpose, this work will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Under this licence users are free to share and adapt this material, under terms that they must give appropriate credit and attribution to the original material and indicate if any changes are made.
  • Submit your guidance article here
Submit a teaching activity

Submit a Teaching Activity 

The Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Working Group invites contributions that embed inclusion directly into engineering teaching and learning activities. 

These resources should be ready-to-use or easily adaptable in teaching environments. 

We welcome contributions including: 

1. Inclusive engineering case studies 

  • Real-world or applied engineering scenarios that illustrate inclusion, exclusion, or their impact on engineering outcomes and decision-making. 
  • For example: engineering team case studies showing the impact of inclusive or non-inclusive design processes. 

 2. Teaching and learning activities 

  • Classroom exercises, project briefs, or learning activities that embed inclusive practice within engineering learning. 
  • For example: group design tasks that require equitable role allocation or inclusive problem-solving approaches. 

 3. Applied learning tools and simulations 

  • Interactive or structured learning activities such as simulations, digital tools, or gamified approaches that support understanding of inclusion in engineering contexts. 
  • For example: simulation-based activities exploring the impact of design decisions on different user groups. 

 4. Teamwork and collaboration activities 

  • Activities that support inclusive participation, equitable collaboration, and reflective team practice in engineering learning environments. These may include structured approaches or tools that support how students participate, collaborate, and share responsibility within teams. 
  • For example: structured peer feedback or team role rotation exercises to support inclusive participation. 

 5. Psychological safety and inclusive teamwork resources 

  • Tools or structured activities that support safe, equitable, and inclusive team environments. 
  • For example: reflective exercises on team dynamics or tools to support inclusive group behaviour. 

 

These resources will support educators in embedding inclusive engineering practice directly into learning experiences that shape student collaboration and engineering outcomes. 

 

Select the relevant teaching resource type and view the specific guidance. Follow the step-by-step instructions provided for that resource type to complete your submission.

 

 

Section A

Step 1: Guidance for Submitting an Inclusive Engineering Case Study

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Research Guidance #3: Overview Guidance #3: Purpose Guidance #4: ContentGuidance #5: Activities, resources & referencingGuidance #5: Format

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Research

Case studies are teaching resources that present realistic engineering scenarios where inclusion or exclusion affects engineering practice, decisions, and outcomes. 

Before submitting, you should review case studies from existing engineering education toolkits (e.g. Ethics and Sustainability Toolkits) to ensure consistency in tone, structure, and pedagogical approach. 

Case studies should be grounded in engineering contexts and should enable learners to explore how inclusive or non-inclusive practices influence engineering systems, teams, or solutions. 

They should be designed for educators to use directly in teaching and may include prompts, discussion questions, or structured learning activities. 

Case studies will vary in length depending on scope and resource, but many are around 1500-2000 words. They should reference relevant online open-source resources.

Please see the current research on good practice in writing case studies, which you may find helpful as you write, as well as our article about a recipe for writing a case study. This ‘recipe’ can guide you as you write to include or develop other aspects of the case. Both articles are from our Engineering Ethics Toolkit, but the guidance given can be adapted for Inclusive Engineering cases.

Overview

Case studies should present a coherent narrative centred on an engineering context where inclusion is relevant. 

They should: 

  • Describe a realistic engineering scenario  
  • Include multiple stakeholders or perspectives where appropriate  
  • Present a clear inclusion-related challenge, decision point, or tension  
  • Support discussion, reflection, or analysis in teaching contexts  

Case studies should function as standalone teaching resources but also contribute to a broader collection of related materials. 

Purpose

Case studies should help learners understand how inclusion influences engineering practice, decision-making, teamwork, and outcomes. 

They should enable educators to support discussion of real-world engineering challenges through an inclusion lens. 

Case studies may also be designed to support structured pedagogical use, including role play, decision pathways, and assessment integration where appropriate. 

Content

Content should be clear, structured, and narrative-led. 

Case studies may include: 

  • Engineering context and background  
  • Key stakeholders and roles  
  • Description of the inclusion-related issue or challenge  
  • Decision points or consequences  
  • Teaching prompts or reflection questions 
  • Structured role-play scenarios where learners take on engineering stakeholder roles
  • Branching or episodic case structures where decisions influence subsequent outcomes
  • Optional pedagogical guidance for classroom delivery and adaptation
  • Optional assessment guidance (e.g. rubric or evaluation matrix) linked to case use 

Activities, resources & referencing

Case studies should include: 

  • Discussion questions  
  • Classroom or group activities  
  • Suggested teaching approaches  
  • Links to relevant open-source resources 
  • All sources must be appropriately referenced using Harvard referencing.

Format

Case studies should include: 

  • Teaching notes (context, aims, suggested use)  
  • Narrative of the case  
  • Discussion questions or activities  
  • Optional extension or reflection section  
  • References and resources 

Step 1B: Before you submit, review this checklist 

Before submitting, please check: 

  •  Does the case present a clear and realistic engineering context?  
  •  Is inclusion (or exclusion) clearly relevant to the engineering scenario?  
  • Does the case involve decision-making, trade-offs, or engineering practice?  
  • Are multiple perspectives (e.g. stakeholders, users, engineers) included where appropriate?  
  • Is the narrative structured so it can be used directly in teaching?  
  • Are there clear discussion prompts or learning activities included?  
  • Is the case suitable for an engineering education setting (not generic commentary)?  
  • Are sources cited using Harvard referencing?
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 1C: Submitting your case study 

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026  
  • Case studies should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 
  • To ensure that everyone can use and adapt the Toolkit resources in a way that best fits their teaching or purpose, this work will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Under this licence users are free to share and adapt this material, under terms that they must give appropriate credit and attribution to the original material and indicate if any changes are made. 
  • Submit your case study here.

 

 

 

Section B

Step 1: Guidance for Submitting Teaching and Learning Activities

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Purpose and outcomes Guidance #3: Research Guidance #4: Purpose Guidance #5: Presentation & clarity Guidance #6: Resources, guidance & referencingGuidance #7: Format

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Purpose & outcomes:

Teaching and learning activities are practical resources that help educators embed inclusive engineering principles directly into teaching. 

They should support learners in engaging with inclusion through structured tasks, exercises, or project-based learning. 

Research:

Before submitting, you should review teaching activities from our other toolkits (e.g Sustainability Toolkit) to ensure consistency in structure, clarity, and pedagogical intent. 

Activities should be practical, clearly explained, and suitable for direct classroom or project use. 

Activities should be adaptable for delivery in varied teaching environments including large cohorts, limited-resource classrooms, and mixed-ability groups. 

Purpose:

Activities should help educators implement inclusive engineering learning in practice. 

They should support: 

  • Active learning  
  • Group or individual engagement  
  • Reflection on inclusion in engineering contexts  

Presentation & clarity:

Activities should be clearly structured so that educators can implement them with minimal adaptation. 

They should include clear instructions for delivery and expected learner engagement. 

Resources, guidance & referencing:

Where relevant, activities should include: 

  • Supporting materials  
  • Instructions for delivery  
  • Suggested variations for different teaching contexts  
  • References to relevant resources 
  • All references should use Harvard referencing. 

Format:

Activities should include: 

  • Overview (aim, context, intended learning outcomes)  
  • Description of activity steps  
  • Required materials (if applicable)  
  • Facilitation guidance  
  • Optional assessment or reflection prompts  
  • References and resources  

 

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist: 

Before submitting, please check:

  • Is the activity clearly linked to inclusive engineering learning outcomes?  
  • Are instructions clear enough for an educator to run the activity without additional explanation?  
  • Does the activity include a clear structure (steps, timing, or sequence)?  
  • Does it support active learning (individual, group, or project-based)?  
  • Is inclusion meaningfully embedded (not incidental or implied only)?  
  • Are reflection or discussion prompts included where relevant?  
  • Can the activity be adapted for different teaching contexts or levels?  
  • Are supporting materials and references included where appropriate?
  • Are sources cited using Harvard referencing?
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3: Submitting your teaching and learning activity  

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026  
  • Teaching activities should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 
  • To ensure that everyone can use and adapt the Toolkit resources in a way that best fits their teaching or purpose, this work will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Under this licence users are free to share and adapt this material, under terms that they must give appropriate credit and attribution to the original material and indicate if any changes are made 
  • Submit your teaching and learning activity here.

 

 

Section C

Step 1: Guidance for Submitting Applied Tools and Simulations

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Purpose and outcomesGuidance #3: ResearchGuidance #4: PurposeGuidance #5: Presentation & clarity Guidance #6: Resources & guidanceGuidance #7: Format

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Purpose and outcomes:

Applied tools and simulations are interactive or structured resources that allow learners to explore inclusion in engineering systems, decisions, or environments. 

They should support experiential learning and active engagement with inclusion concepts.

Research:

Tools should be reviewed for usability in educational contexts and should align with established engineering education practices. 

They should be accessible to educators without requiring specialist technical expertise unless clearly supported. 

Purpose: 

Tools should help learners understand how engineering decisions and systems can have inclusive or exclusionary impacts. 

They should support exploration of real-world engineering scenarios or simplified models of complex systems.

Presentation & clarity:

Tools should be clearly explained, including: 

  • How they are used  
  • What learners do  
  • What outcomes are expected  
  • How educators integrate them into teaching  

Resources & guidance:

Where relevant, include: 

  • User instructions  
  • Supporting materials or datasets  
  • Technical or pedagogical guidance  
  • References to related resources 

Format:

Tools should include: 

  • Overview and purpose  
  • Description of tool or simulation  
  • Instructions for use  
  • Required materials or setup  
  • Teaching integration guidance  
  • Optional reflection or assessment prompts  
  • References and resources  

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist 

Before submitting, please check: 

  • Does the tool clearly support learning about inclusion in engineering practice or teamwork?  
  • Are the learning purpose and outcomes clearly stated?  
  • Does it model engineering decision-making, systems, or user impact?  
  • Are reflection or discussion prompts included?  
  • Are instructions clear, step-by-step, and suitable for educators?  
  • Is it clear how it is used in a teaching context (including timing and setup)?  
  • Can it be used or adapted without specialist technical support?  
  • Are any required materials, software, or setup clearly stated?  
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3: Submitting your applied tool / simulation 

  • This section defines how tools must be delivered and accessed to ensure usability in real teaching environments. 
  • Resources should be submitted as Word, PowerPoint, Excel, PDF, or clearly documented file formats  
  •  If digital, resources must be accessible via an existing external link (no new hosting required)  
  • Submissions should not require new infrastructure, platform development, or hosted systems  
  • Hosted platforms, subdomains, or custom-built web tools are not in scope for this phase  
  • Tools must be accessible via an existing external institutional site, personal site, GitHub Pages, or other hosted location) 
  • If a tool is downloadable, it must be fully self-contained and run without additional installation, setup or external dependencies unless explicitly documented. 
  • Any required setup must be clearly explained in the submission document with step-by-step instructions. 
  • Tools should be designed so they can be accessed and used by educators without requiring new infrastructure, hosting or platform development. 
  • Where tools are hosted externally, they must be stable at the time of submission (no experimental or placeholder deployments). 

 Applied learning tools and simulations may be submitted as either: 

  • A downloadable tool package (recommended format: .zip containing HTML/CSS/JS files or equivalent browser-based resource), or 
  • A single-file browser tool (.html), or 
  • An external link to a hosted tool (e.g. institutional website, personal site, GitHub Pages, or equivalent) 

If you are submitting supporting documentation, it should be submitted separately as part of the submission and may include teaching guidance, instructions, reflection prompts, or assessment notes. These may be provided in .doc, .docx, .pdf, .pptx, or .xlsx format 

  • Any images should be submitted in .jpeg, .jpg, or .png format
  • Tools must run directly in a browser or from the provided package without requiring installation, additional software, or hidden dependencies unless explicitly documented

Additional information:

 

 

Section D

Step 1: Guidance for Submitting Teamwork and Collaboration Activities

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Purpose & outcomesGuidance #3: ResearchGuidance #4: PurposeGuidance #5: Presentation & clarityGuidance #6: Resources, guidance & referencingGuidance #7: Format

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Purpose & outcomes 

These activities support inclusive participation, collaboration, and equitable teamwork in engineering education. 

They should help learners understand how team dynamics affect engineering outcomes and collaboration.

Research:

Activities should be informed by established approaches to teamwork and collaborative learning in engineering education. 

They should align with inclusive teaching principles and support structured group engagement. 

Purpose:

Activities should help learners develop inclusive teamwork skills and awareness of collaboration dynamics. 

They should support reflection on participation, roles, and team behaviour. 

Presentation & clarity:

Activities should be clearly structured and include: 

  • Team setup or structure  
  • Instructions for participants  
  • Guidance for educators or facilitators  
  • Reflection or feedback elements  

Resources, guidance & referencing:

Where appropriate, include: 

  • Facilitation guidance  
  • Supporting tools or templates  
  • References or frameworks  (use Harvard style referencing)

Format:

Activities should include: 

  • Overview  
  • Activity description  
  • Team structure or roles  
  • Facilitation guidance  
  • Reflection prompts  
  • References and resources  

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist 

Before submitting, please check: 

  • Does the activity explicitly support inclusive teamwork or collaboration?  
  • Are roles, structure, or participation methods clearly defined?  
  • Does it support equitable participation among students?  
  • Are instructions clear enough for classroom implementation?  
  • Does it include opportunities for reflection on group dynamics or behaviour?  
  • Is the link to engineering teamwork or professional practice clear?  
  • Can the activity be adapted for different group sizes or contexts?  
  • Are facilitation notes included for educators where needed? 
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3: Submitting your resource 

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026  
  • Teamwork and collaboration activities should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 
  • To ensure that everyone can use and adapt the Toolkit resources in a way that best fits their teaching or purpose, this work will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Under this licence users are free to share and adapt this material, under terms that they must give appropriate credit and attribution to the original material and indicate if any changes are made
  • Submit your teamwork and collaboration activity here.

     

 

 

Section E

Step 1: Guidance for Submitting Psychological Safety and Inclusive Teamwork Tools

Guidance #1: Cross-cutting expectations (apply to all resource types)Guidance #2: Purpose & outcomesGuidance #3: ResearchGuidance #4: PurposeGuidance #5: Presentation & clarityGuidance #6: Resources, guidance & referencingGuidance #7: Format

Cross-cutting expectations:

All resources should: 

  • Be usable in diverse teaching contexts, including large or overcrowded classrooms. 
  • Be accessible to learners with different needs  
  • Be adaptable for low-resource environments (limited software, devices, or classroom infrastructure) 
  • Clearly connect inclusion to engineering practice, systems, products, or decision-making outcomes 
  • Embed inclusion in the design of the activity or resource, not only as a reflective add-on 

Purpose & outcomes:

These resources support the creation of safe, equitable, and inclusive team environments in engineering education. 

They should help learners and educators reflect on team dynamics and participation.

Research:

Tools should be grounded in established approaches to psychological safety, teamwork, and inclusive practice. 

They should be suitable for educational contexts. 

Purpose:

Tools should help support inclusive participation and awareness of group dynamics in engineering learning environments. 

Presentation & clarity:

Tools should be clearly explained so they can be implemented in classroom or project settings. 

Resources, guidance & referencing:

Where relevant, include: 

  • Instructions for use  
  • Reflection prompts  
  • Supporting frameworks or references (use Harvard referencing style)

Format:

Tools should include: 

  • Overview  
  • Description of tool or approach  
  • How it is used in teaching  
  • Reflection or discussion prompts  
  • References and resources 

Step 2: Before you submit, review this checklist

Before submitting please check:

  • Does the tool support safe, equitable, and inclusive team environments?  
  • Is the purpose of the tool clearly explained? 
  • Is it practical and usable in a teaching or project setting?  
  • Does it include clear instructions for implementation?  
  • Does it support reflection on team behaviour, participation, or dynamics?  
  • Is the relevance to engineering teamwork or learning clearly stated?  
  • Are prompts or frameworks included to guide discussion or reflection?  
  • Are supporting references or sources included where appropriate? 
  • Before you submit your contribution, have you registered as a contributor? If not, please register your interest here.

 

Step 3:  Submitting your resource 

  • Deadline: 8th August 2026  
  • Psychological safety and inclusive teamwork tools should be submitted in Word file format (.doc or .docx). Any corresponding images should be submitted in either .jpeg, .jpg or .png format. 
  • To ensure that everyone can use and adapt the Toolkit resources in a way that best fits their teaching or purpose, this work will be licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Under this licence users are free to share and adapt this material, under terms that they must give appropriate credit and attribution to the original material and indicate if any changes are made.
  • Submit your psychological safety and inclusive teamwork tool here.

 

Already have an existing resource?

We welcome suggestions of existing resources that support inclusive engineering education, practice and outcomes.
If you would like to suggest links to pages or online resources that we can add to the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Resource Library, please submit this through the resource suggestion route by emailing Crystal Nwagboso.
If you would like your existing resource to be considered as a featured contribution within the toolkit, please review the Call for Contributions briefs and submit it through the relevant contribution route.

 

Deadlines

Please register your interest in developing a resource by completing this form  by 11th July 2026. 

If you have already registered an interest and we are expecting your submission, the deadline to submit first drafts is  8th August 2026.  Submit your Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Contribution here. Co-authors should complete this form. 

If you would like to become a reviewer for the toolkit (with structured review cycles running from late July to September 2026, and light input into October where needed), please complete this form (and tick ”Inclusive Engineering Toolkit”). We will take a flexible and iterative approach where possible. Where submissions are received earlier and reviewer capacity allows, review activity may begin ahead of the formal window to support workload distribution across the summer period.

 

 

Additional information 

In undertaking this work, contributors will become part of the growing community of educators who are helping to ensure that tomorrow’s engineering professionals have the inclusive engineering knowledge and skills that they need to provide a better future for us all. Contributors will be fully credited for their work on any relevant Toolkit materials, and will be acknowledged as authors should the resources be published in any form. Developing these resources will provide the chance to work with a dynamic, diverse and passionate group of people leading the way in expanding engineering teaching resources, and may help in professional development, such as preparing for promotion or fellowship. We are unable to offer payment for contributions at this time. However, if you would otherwise be interested in developing a resource but would not currently be able to commit the required time, please let us know by emailing Crystal Nwagboso and we would be happy to keep in touch with you about opportunities in a future phase of the project.

As the Toolkit develops, further updates on additional resources and activities will be shared with the community.

 

Learn more about the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit 

Those interested in contributing to future phases of the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit should fill out this form and we will be in touch. 

Learn more about the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit, here. 

Learn more about the members of the Inclusive Engineering Toolkit Expert Working Group, here. 

 

Any views, thoughts, and opinions expressed herein are solely that of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, policies, or position of the Engineering Professors’ Council or the Toolkit sponsors and supporters.  

Topics

Diversity & inclusionInclusive EngineeringInclusive Engineering ToolkitNeurodiversityTeaching & learning
Subscribe
Notify of
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Related articles
A robotic hand reaching towards a glowing circle on a pastel abstract background, hinting at advanced technology.

Guest blog: Helping our robotic friends deal with living in a complex world

The importance of engineers understanding complex systems in the field of intelligent robotics.

Toolkits
#Guest blog #Teaching & learning #Artificial Intelligence #Complex Systems Toolkit #Complex Systems

Blog: Intercultural and interdisciplinary student-led solutions for sustainability challenges

Reflections on the outcomes of a sustainability hackathon. 

Toolkits
#Sustainability #Sustainability toolkit #Teaching & learning
Header image with logos from EPC, Quanser, Harper Adams University, and MathWorks

Have you registered? ACE-Box and agentic engineering workflows: CPD-certificated webinar

Register now for the Complex Systems Toolkit ACE-Box and agentic engineering workflows: CPD-certificated webinar.

Toolkits
#Artificial Intelligence #Professional deveopment #Teaching & learning #EPC Events #Complex Systems #Complex Systems Toolkit

Spotlight on complex systems: Teaching complex systems in advanced manufacturing

A systems approach to digital manufacturing.

Toolkits
#Teaching & learning #Complex Systems Toolkit #Complex Systems
Let us know what you think of our website