Who is this article for?: This article should be read by educators at all levels of higher education looking to embed and integrate ESD into curriculum, module, and / or programme design.
This experiential activity aims to incorporate sustainability reflections into students’ group work. It uses a selection of materials with different properties to engage participants in building a wind turbine prototype based on a contextualised negotiation of multiple facets of sustainability.
Taking a disciplinary standpoint, participants first assume one of four engineering roles to identify specific sustainability priorities based on their role’s responsibilities and expertise. Next, they represent the perspective of their assigned role in an interdisciplinary group to optimise sustainability in the design of a wind turbine.
Throughout the activity, students are given targeted and short theoretical input on a selection of transversal skills that facilitate the integration of sustainability in group work: systems thinking, negotiation skills and perspective taking.
This activity guide provides the outline and material to assist the facilitator to prepare, and the slides and handouts for teaching the activity in approximately 75min. It can be facilitated with tangible objects (e.g. LEGO) as well as online. We invite you to adapt this activity to your context and tangibles availability.
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.
This month marked a milestone for the engineering education community, as the EPC and E-DAP launched their practical, step-by-step Deaf Awareness Toolkit* to a wider audience for the first time.
Designed for engineers at all career stages, the toolkit offers practical training to build inclusive skills, implement meaningful measures, and encourage open participation, ultimately improving engineering outcomes through greater accessibility and communication.
Breaking new ground in Engineering inclusion
Hosted by EPC CEO Johnny Rich, the toolkit’s accompanying webinar ‘Being heard: How everyone benefits from deaf awareness’ (available to watch here)brought together over 50 attendees from more than 29 institutions. It marked the first time the UK engineering community has come together in this way to explore how deaf awareness can unlock stronger communication, collaboration and innovation across the sector.
The panel featured voices from RNID, the EPC, E-DAP and professionals with lived experience, offering engineers practical, experience-led guidance grounded in real-world insight—not just theory.
Closed captions: a simple shift, a big impact
One key takeaway is that closed captions do more than support communication. They encourage presenters to structure content more clearly, making complex ideas easier to follow. This is especially important in engineering, where technical information needs to be communicated accurately across classrooms, meetings, and fast paced R&D environments.
Lucia Capogna (E-DAP) showed just how simple this can be in practice, giving a live demonstration of how to activate captions in PowerPoint. It is a small shift that can make a big difference, and it is easier to implement than many people realise.
Key messages from the panel
Frankie Garforth (RNID) Frankie addressed widespread misconceptions around deafness, hearing loss and tinnitus, reminding us that over 18 million people in the UK are affected. “You’ll know people living with this,” she said. “It’s good to support them.” She highlighted how deaf-aware technologies like closed captions can significantly improve communication – often in ways people don’t realise until they experience it first hand.
Dr. Sarah Jayne Hitt (EPC) Sarah Jayne emphasised that some of the most impactful accessibility technologies are already freely available. Many were showcased earlier in the webinar, and others can be explored via the EPC website. These tools, she explained, complement the learning that happens through real human connection – like her own journey learning ASL from a school teacher and later embedding deaf awareness in everyday university life.
Ellie Haywood (E-DAP) Ellie shared how she took personal responsibility to embed deaf awareness into her workplace a few years ago. Her goal: to make accessibility part of the default way her team operated, so no one would need to ask for special measures. The impact was immediate – improving team efficiency and communication well beyond the deaf community. This inclusive approach proved particularly effective in high-tech R&D projects.
Pilot and student feedback
E-DAP piloted the Deaf Awareness Toolkit with nearly 500 first-year students across civil, mechanical and other engineering disciplines. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive, particularly among non-native English speakers, who reported being better able to follow lectures and understand the content.
One simple innovation, using a blank PowerPoint slide during Q&A, made a big difference in helping students catch questions that might otherwise be lost in the noise of a busy classroom.
Survey responses showed nearly two-thirds of students felt neutral to strongly positive about captions and wanted to see them used more widely.
Resources and tools available now
The Deaf Awareness Toolkit is designed to help educators and engineers improve everyday communication and inclusion. It includes:
Beyond communication: safety, inclusion and culture
Deaf awareness goes beyond communication. In engineering environments, visual alarms and clear auditory cues support safety. Inclusive meeting behaviours, accessible research environments, and awareness of hearing health can all contribute to a more inclusive and effective working culture. Clear communication isn’t just a benefit for deaf individuals, it supports better outcomes for everyone.
The vision: One Million Engineers
This is just the beginning. Our goal is to engage one million engineers with accessibility.
With the EPC platform reaching 7,500 engineering academics across 82 institutions, and 179,000 students enrolled in those institutions, we are taking our first steps towards that vision.
Accessibility isn’t an optional extra. It’s a core part of engineering education and inclusion that we want to instil in future engineers.
What’s next
E-DAP and the EPC are now working together to embed deaf awareness more deeply into engineering practice and culture. Future activities will include:
Awareness campaigns across the engineering sector.
Continued toolkit development and events focused on neurodiversity, ethics and inclusion.
E-DAP is an active ally to the Deaf and deaf communities. We do not speak for them, but work in partnership with experts, advocates, and individuals with lived experience to improve awareness and inclusion in engineering and education.
We collaborate with the community to learn and co-create. Our goal is to support engineering innovation by enabling better communication for everyone, and to implement inclusion in engineering through technology, tools, learning, and partnerships that embed inclusive practices and create lasting change.
A Note on Language
Language matters. Whether someone identifies as Deaf, deaf, has hearing loss or tinnitus, they are all individuals, and respectful language helps create more inclusive spaces. If you’re unsure how to phrase something, ask. It’s always better to check than assume. Helpful guidance on terminology is available from the RNID.
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.
Overview
The Engineering Deaf Awareness Project (E-DAP) is a pioneering initiative dedicated to making deaf awareness a standard in engineering. E-DAP is a movement for meaningful, measurable change in the number of people who proactively use accessibility tech in their daily lives, supporting everyone around them. By embedding accessibility into the fabric of engineering, E-DAP is breaking down barriers, changing perceptions and creating a future where engineering truly works to make everyone’s lives more effective
Imagine a world where talented individuals and dynamic growth oriented companies are turbo charged by removing barriers in communication and understanding. In engineering—a field where communication is critical to innovation, being proactive and embedding accessibility at the norm is critical. At E-DAP, we believe technology for accessibility is the foundation for accessibility and increased performance and ground-breaking ideas. By fostering technology for accessibility and increased performance, we’re not just improving workplaces—we’re demonstrating how inclusivity fuels economic growth, creativity, collaboration and benefits everyone.
The EPC has published E-DAP resources in a toolkit in solidarity with the Project’s aims.
Mission and Strategic Aims
E-DAP’s mission is to embed deaf awareness into the core of engineering practices, ensuring that the profession is accessible and for all . Our strategic aims include:
Awareness: Educate engineering professionals and students about the challenges faced by the deaf community.
Inclusion: Develop and promote resources and training to support deaf individuals in engineering environments.
Action: Support and drive change across academia and businesses
Innovation: Leverage emerging technologies to create solutions that bridge communication gaps.
Challenges
The engineering sector has historically faced challenges in creating inclusive environments for deaf individuals, including:
Lack of Awareness: Limited understanding of the unique needs of deaf professionals and students.
Resource Gaps: Scarcity of tailored training materials and support systems.
Technological Barriers: Underutilisation of technology to facilitate effective communication.
Initiatives and Activities
To address these challenges, E-DAP is implementing several key initiatives:
Hackathons: Organise collaborative events at Google’s ADC, bringing together students, engineers, and professionals to develop technological solutions that enhance communication and accessibility.
Webinars: Conducted a series of online seminars aimed at reaching over 1,000 participants, providing insights into deaf awareness and practical strategies for inclusion.
Social Media Campaigns: Leverage LinkedInto disseminate resources, share success stories, and engage the broader community in discussions on inclusivity.
Partnerships: Collaborate with organisations such as the Engineering Professors Council, Google, and the Royal National Institute for Deaf People (RNID) to amplify impact and resource availability.
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.
PowerPoint Subtitles Guidelines
1. Benefits of subtitles
Improve accessibility for deaf people
Improve understanding for foreign students/non-native speakers
Improve communication with native and non-native speakers, reducing the issues when one of the parties has a strong accent
2. Main steps
STEP 1: Activate the subtitles (See section 3)
STEP 2: Customise your settings (See section 4)
2.1. Select the language to be used 2.2. Select the subtitles position 2.3. Customise subtitles appearance (background, text size and colour)
STEP 3: Create your slide to leave room for the subtitles in line with your settings (avoid overlapping)
Note 1: You need to be connected to the internet for the subtitles to work.
Note 2: You need to change your security settings to authorise PowerPoint to access the microphone.
Note 3: You do not have to customise your settings for each presentation unless you wish to change something.
3. How do you activate the subtitles?
Open PowerPoint and on the main task bar select “Slide show” and tick “Always Use Subtitles” on the ribbon:
4. Subtitles settings
When activated, you can customise the subtitles:
Subtitles position
“Below slide” and “Above slide”
If one of the following options is selected
● Below slide
● Above slide
you do not have to worry about the subtitle background overlapping with slide content. However, the overall dimension of the projected slide will be reduced, so please check that it is still ok.
The examples below show the difference between “Bottom (Overlaid)” and “Below slide”.
Bottom (Overlaid)
Below slide
“Bottom (Overlaid)” and “Top (Overlaid)”
Important: If you select one of the following options
● Bottom (Overlaid)
● Top (Overlaid)
you will need to prepare your slides to leave room for the subtitles in line with your settings, and change the subtitle settings to improve visibility (see “Subtitles” > “More settings”).
The example below uses “Bottom (Overlaid)” and default settings for text and background.
On the above example we can see that the subtitles overlap with both the logo and the contents of the slide, making the visibility poor. In addition, the size of the subtitles text appears to be quite small.
The following example shows how the settings may provide better visibility of the subtitles and the contents of the slide.
More settings: Text size and colour, background colour and transparency
1) Change the settings to use a “Large Text” or “Extra Large Text” and colours that improve visibility (e.g. yellow on solid black)
2) If you cannot rework the master slides and move the logo, select a solid background to provide more visibility to the subtitles. (Although you will make the logo less visible, this should give a better experience to the people attending the presentation.)
Subtitles background colour
How can the slide background influence the colour of the subtitles background and text colour?
• What colour is the slide background?
If the slide background is white or a light colour, you should consider using a dark colour as subtitle background to create the right level of contrast and improve the visibility of the subtitles. Similarly, if the slide background is black or another dark colour, you should consider using a light colour as subtitle background.
The subtitles text colour should in turn be in contrast with the subtitles background colour.
• Where is the logo? Are the subtitles overlapping with the logo? Can you re-work the master slides and move it?
If you cannot move the logo, you may want to consider this:
The subtitle background is not a solid colour by default, but has a certain degree of transparency. This may still be ok if there are no other objects (like a logo) under the subtitles background. Otherwise, you may need to update this setting to have a solid colour as background.
5. Guidance scope and feedback
Thank you for reading this guide and for your interest in E-DAP. We hope that this guide will help you to implement deaf awareness practises.
If you’d like to be involved in any further E-DAP led events, training materials or to join the E-DAP mailing list, please complete the form via the link below or scan the QR code.
Your feedback is important to us, as it allows us to improve our events and materials for others. Please provide your feedback on this guideline and on the subtitles usage by completing the following form:
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.
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.
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.
Activity: Assessment. This example demonstrates how the questions provided in Assessing ethics: Rubric can be used to assess the competencies stipulated at each level.
Authors: Dr. Natalie Wint (UCL); Dr. William Bennett (Swansea University).
This example demonstrates how the questions provided in the accompanying rubric can be used to assess the competencies stipulated at each level. Although we have focused on ‘Water Wars’ here, the suggested assessment questions have been designed in such a way that they can be used in conjunction with the case studies available within the toolkit, or with another case study that has been created (by yourself or elsewhere) to outline an ethical dilemma.
Year 1
Personal values: What is your initial position on the issue? Do you see anything wrong with how DSS are using water? Why, or why not?
Students should provide a stance, but more importantly their stance should be justified. In this instance this may involve reference to common moral values such as environmental sustainability, risk associated with power issues and questions of ownership.
Professional responsibilities: What ethical principles and codes of conduct are relevant to this situation?
Students should refer to relevant principles (e.g. from the Joint Statement of Ethical Principles). For example, in this case some of the relevant principles may include (but not be limited to) “protect, and where possible improve, the quality of built and natural environment”, “maximise the public good and minimise both actual and potential adverse effects for their own and succeeding generations” and “take due account of the limited availability of natural resources”.
Ethical principles and codes of conduct can be used to guide our actions during an ethical dilemma. How does the guidance provided in this case align/differ with your personal views? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)
Students’ answers will depend upon those given to the previous questions but should include some discussion of similarities and differences between their own initial thoughts and principles/codes of conducts, and allude to the tensions involved in ethical dilemmas and the impact on decision making.
What are the moral values involved in this case and why does it constitute an ethical dilemma? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)
Students should be able to identify relevant moral values and explain that an ethical dilemma constitutes a problem in which two or more moral values or norms cannot be fully realised at the same time.
There are two (or a limited number of) options for action and whatever they choose they will commit a moral wrong. The crucial feature of a moral dilemma is not the number of actions that are available but the fact that all possible actions are morally unsatisfactory.
What role should an engineer play in influencing the outcome? What are the implications of not being involved? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)
Engineers are responsible for the design of technological advancements which necessitate data storage. Although this brings many benefits, engineers need to consider the adverse impact of technological advancement such as increased water use. Students may therefore want to consider the wider implications of data storage on the environment and how these can be mitigated.
Year 2
Formulate a moral problem statement which clearly states the problem, its moral nature and who needs to act. (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)
An example could be: “Should the civil engineer working for DSS remain loyal to the company and defend them against accusations of causing environmental hazards, or defend their water rights and say that they will not change their behaviour”. It should be clear what the problem is, the moral values at play and who needs to act.
Stakeholder mapping: Who are all the stakeholders in the scenario? What are their positions, perspective and moral values?
Below is a non-exhaustive list of some of the relevant stakeholders and values that may come up.
Stakeholder
Perspectives/interests
Moralvalues
DataStorageSolutions (DSS)
Increasing production in a profitable way; meeting legal requirements; good reputationtomaintain/grow customer base.
Representviewsofthose concerned about biodiversity. May be interested in opening ofgreenbattery plant.
Human welfare; environmental sustainability;justice.
LocalCouncil
Represent views of all stakeholders and would needtoconsidereconomic benefits of DSS (tax and employment), the need of theuniversityandhospital, as well as the needs of local farmers and environmentalists. May beinterestedinopeningof green battery plant.
This may depend on their beliefs as an individual, their employment status and their use of services such as the hospital and university. Typically interested in low taxes/responsible spending of public money. May be interested in opening of green batteryplant.
Reliable storage. They mayalsobeinterestedin being part of an ethical supply chain.
Trust; privacy; accountability;autonomy.
Non-humanstakeholders
Environmental sustainability.
What are some of the possible courses of action in the situation. What responsibilities do you have to the various stakeholders involved? What are some of the advantages and disadvantages associated with each? (Reworded from case study.)
Students should provide a stance but may recognise the tensions involved. For example, at a micro level, tensions between loyalty to the profession and loyalty to the company/personal financial stability. Responsibilities to fellow employees may include the degree to which you risk their jobs by being honest. They may also feel that they should protect environmental and natural resources.
At a macro level, they may consider the need for engineers to inform decisions regarding issues that engineering and technology raise for society (e.g. increased water being needed for data storage) and listen to the aspirations and concerns of others, and challenging statements or policies that cause them professional concern.
What are the relevant facts in this scenario and what other information would you like to help inform your ethical decision making? (This is a question we had created in addition to those provided within the case study to meet the requirements stipulated in the accompanying rubric.)
Students should identify which facts within the case study are relevant in terms of making an ethical decision. In this case, some of the relevant facts may include:
Water use permissible by law (“the data centre always uses the maximum amount legally allotted to it.”)
This centre manages data which is vital for the local community, including the safe running of schools and hospitals, and that its operation requires sufficient water for cooling.
In more arid months, the nearby river almost runs dry, resulting in large volumes of fish dying.
Water levels in farmers’ wells have dropped, making irrigation much more expensive and challenging.
A new green battery plant is planned to open nearby that will create more data demand and has the potential to further increase DSS’ water use.
Obtaining water from other sources will be costly to DSS and may not be practically possible, let alone commercially viable.
Studentsshouldbeawarethatincompleteinformationhindersdecisionmakingduring ethical dilemmas, and that in some cases, further information will be needed to help inform decisions. In this case, some of the questions may pertain to:
Exactly how much water is being used and the legal rights.
Relationship between farmer and DSS/contractual obligations.
How costly irrigation is to the farmers (economic impact), as well as the knock-on impact to their business and supply chain.
How many people DSS employ and how important they are for local economy.
Detail regarding biodiversity loss and its wider impact.
How likely it is that the green battery plant will open and whether DSS is the only eligible supplier.
How much the green battery plant contract is worth to DSS.
How much water the green battery plant will use in the case that DSS get the contract.
Whether DSS is the only option for hospital and university.
What will happen if the services DSS provide to the hospital and university stop or becomes unreliable.
Year 2/Year 3
(At Year 2, students could provide options; at Year 3 they would evaluate and form a judgement.)
Make use of ethical frameworks and/or professional codes to evaluate the options for DSS both short term and long term. How do the uncertainty and assumptions involved in this case impact decision making?
Students should list plausible options. They can then analyse them with respect to different ethical frameworks (whilst we don’t necessary make use of normative ethical theories, analysis according to consequences, intention or action may be a useful approach to this). Below we have included a non-exhaustive list of options with ideas in terms of analysis.
Option
Consequences
Intention
Action
Keepusing water
May lead to expansion and profit of DSS and thus tax revenue/employment and supply.
Reputational damage of DSS may increase. Individual employee piece of mind may be at risk.
Farmers still don’t have water and biodiversity still suffers which may have further impact long term.
Intentionbehindaction notconsistentwith that expected by an engineer, other than with respect to legality
Actionfollowslegalnormsbut not social norms such as good will and concern for others.
Keep using the water but limit furtherwork
May limit expansion and profit of DSS and thus tax revenue/employment and supply.
Farmers still don’t have water and biodiversity still suffers and may have further impact long term. This could still result in reputation damage.
Intentionbehindaction partially consistent with that expected by an engineer.
Actionfollowslegalnormsbut only partially follow social norms such as good will and concern for others.
Makeuseof other sources of water
Data storage continues.
Potential for reputation to increase.
Potential increase in cost of water resulting in less profit potentially less tax revenue/employment.
Farmers have water and biodiversity may improve.
Alternativewatersourcesmaybeassociated with the same issues or worse.
Intention behind action seems consistent with that expected by an engineer. However, this is dependent upon
whether they chose to source sustainablewaterwithlessimpact on biodiversity etc.
Thismaybedependenton the degree to which DSS proactively source sustainable water.
Reduce worklevels or shut down
Impact on profit and thus tax revenue/employment and supply chain. Farmers have water and biodiversity may improve.
May cause operational issues for those whose data is stored.
Seems consistent with those expected of engineer. Raises questions more generally about viability and feasibility of datastorage.
Action doesn’t follow social norms of responsibility to employeesandshareholders.
Investigate othercooling methods which don’t require as much water/don’t take on extra work untilanother method identified.
May benefit whole sector.
May cause interim loss of service.
This follows expectations of the engineeringprofession in terms of evidence-baseddecisionmaking and consideration for impact of engineering in society.
It follows social norms in termsofresponsibledecision making.
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.
At the Engineering Professors Council (EPC), we believe that inclusivity should be embedded into the heart of engineering education. One of the key areas where this is essential is supporting individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. We are proud to be a supporter of the the Engineering Deaf Awareness Project (E-DAP), a pioneering initiative established by Dr. Emma Taylor, focused on making Deaf Awareness a standard practice within engineering, both in academia and industry.
Why This Matters in Engineering Education and Workplace Settings.
A recent study by the University of Manchester and University of Nottingham, published in the International Journal of Audiology revealed that deafness and hearing loss affects 18 million people in the UK—around one-third of adults. Despite its prevalence, many educational institutions and industries, including engineering, face challenges in making environments fully accessible to deaf or hard of hearing individuals. The E-DAP project highlights a crucial issue: without deaf awareness, talented engineering students and professionals face significant barriers that limit their ability to contribute fully in all aspects of their daily personal, academic and professional lives.
Gaining Momentum
The E-DAP has gained significant momentum through increased collaboration and has expanded its reach, engaging a wider audience in conversations about accessibility in engineering. This growth culminated in a recent visit to Google’s Accessibility Discovery Centre (ADC) in London, where next generation Engineering Leaders Scholarship (ELS) awardees from the Royal Academy of Engineering joined forces with a diverse community to explore how technology can drive meaningful change.
Hackathon Innovating for Deaf Awareness at Google’s Accessibility Discovery Centre (ADC)
At the ADC, the team toured the latest tech and heard a keynote presentation by award-winning EDI lead Maria Grazia Zedda, followed by a hackathon focused on developing new ideas for accessible tech in engineering.
The hackathon hosted by Ellie Hayward (leading in implementing deaf awareness in start-up environments) and judged by Royal Academy of Engineering Visiting Professor Dr. Emma Taylor, brought together the best next generation engineering minds to tackle real-life deaf accessibility challenges. Working in pairs, they focused on how they could develop technologies to break down barriers and develop integrated technology support for deaf individuals, in both academic and professional environments. The hackathon participants came from diverse engineering disciplines (biomedical, aerospace, software, manufacturing, mechanical, structural and spacecraft) and included;
The team was supported by Stella Fowler and Professor Sarah Hitt of the Engineering Professors Council. Stella is also an Honorary Research Fellow at UCL and Sarah is Professor of Liberal Studies at NMITE, which focuses on a real-world, holistic and contextual approach to engineering.
The team also benefited from valuable advice and sustained support provided by RNID, a Google ADC partner, whose expertise supported the accessibility focus of the hackathon. For further insights on fostering inclusive environments, RNID’s guidelines on accessible meetings are an essential resource.
The hackathon sparked a wide range of innovative ideas, inspired by the ADC visit and Maria’s keynote speech, and these will be further refined in a future hackathon later this year.
Voice isolation technology for hearing aids
Projected real time captioning onto a wearable device
Real-time sign language translation that integrates with existing meeting tools
An AI assistant and digital hub for best use of accessibility settings
Looking Forward
In the coming months, the E-DAP will collaborate on a series of outputs including hackathons, a webinar and the development of a manifesto for change outlining key recommendations for integrating deaf awareness into education and industry. It’s evident that the momentum of the E-DAP will continue to build, with a strong focus on two key areas;
Increased focus on enabling deaf awareness to ensure better engineering life long education delivery for all using current tech: By integrating the latest accessibility technologies, the project aims to create more inclusive learning environments, ensuring those who are deaf or have hearing loss have equal opportunities to participate and thrive in engineering education and industry across all modes of learning, from apprenticeships to workplace based learning.
Developing future concepts and tools through direct, engineering-led design hackathon activities and more: These events and collaborations will empower engineers to innovate and develop cutting-edge solutions, focusing on real-world applications that address accessibility challenges.
A Shared Vision for Change
At the EPC, we recognise inclusivity benefits everyone. By supporting the E-DAP, we aim to create an environment where all can thrive and contribute to the future of engineering. Together, we can ensure that deaf awareness is not just an initiative but a standard practice in our field. We look forward to bringing more updates to the EPC community over the coming months.
Dr Emma A Taylor, founder of the Engineering Deaf Awareness Project (E-DAP), Royal Academy of Engineering Visiting Professor, Cranfield University, and Professor Sarah Jayne Hitt, PhD SFHEA, NMITE, Edinburgh Napier University, discuss embedding ethics in engineering education through wide use of deaf awareness: a gateway to a more inclusive practice.
“An ethical society is an inclusive society”. This is a statement that most people would find it hard to disagree strongly with. As users of the EPC’s Engineering Ethics Toolkit and readers of this blog we hope our message is being heard loud and clear.
But hearing is a problem:
One in five adults in the UK are deaf, have hearing loss or tinnitus. That is 12 million adults or 20% of the population. In the broader context of‘ ‘communication exclusion’ (practices that exclude or inhibit communication), this population figure may be even larger, when including comprehension issues experienced by non-native speakers and poor communication issues such as people talking over one another in group settings such as during meetings.
This ‘communication exclusion’ gap is also visible in an education context, where many educators have observed group discussion and group project dynamics develop around those who are the most dominant (read: loudest) communicators. This creates an imbalanced learning environment with the increased potential for unequal outcomes. Even though this ‘communication exclusion’ and lack of skills is such a huge problem, you could say it’s hidden in plain sight. Identification of this imbalance is an example of ethics in action in the classroom.
Across all spheres, we suggest that becoming deaf aware is one way to begin to address communication exclusion issues. Simple and practical effective tips are already widely disseminated by expert organisations with deep in the field experience (see list of resources below from RNID). Our collective pandemic experience took us all a great step forward in seeing the benefits of technology, but also in understanding the challenges of communicating through the barriers of technology. As engineering educators we can choose to become more proactive in using tools that are already available, an action that supports a wider range of learners beyond those who choose to disclose hearing or understanding related needs. This approach is inclusive; it is ethical.
And as educators we propose that there is an even greater pressing need to amplify the issue and promote practical techniques towards improving communication. Many surveys and reports from industry have indicated that preparing students for real world work environments needs improving. Although they often become proficient in technical skills, unless they get an internship, students may not develop the business skills needed for the workplace. Communication in all its forms is rightly embedded in professional qualifications for engineers, whether EngTech, IEng, CEng or other from organisations such as the UK’s Engineering Council.
And even when skills are explicitly articulated in the syllabus and the students are assessed, much of what is already being taught is not actually being embedded into transferable skills that are effectively deployed in the workplace. As education is a training ground for professional skills, a patchy implementation of effective and active practice of communication skills in the education arena leads to variable skill levels professionally.
As engineers we are problem solvers, so we seek clarification of issues and derivation of potential solutions through identification and optimisation of requirements. The problem-solving lens we apply to technology can also be applied to finding ways to educate better communicators. The “what” is spoken about in generic terms but the “how”, how to fix and examine root causes, is less often articulated.
So what can be done? What is the practical framework that can be applied by both academics and students and embedded in daily life? And how can deaf awareness help get us there?
Our proposal is to work to embed and deploy deaf awareness in all aspects of engineering education. Not only because it is just and ethical to do so, but because it can help us see (and resolve) other issues. But this won’t, and can’t, be done in one step. Our experience in the field shows that even the simplest measures aren’t broadly used despite their clear potential for benefit. This is one reason why blogs and toolkits like this one exist: to help educators embed resources and processes into their teaching practice.
It’s important to note that this proposal goes beyond deaf awareness and is really about reducing or removing invisible barriers that exist in communication and education, and addressing the communication problem through an engineering lens. Only when one takes a step back with a deaf awareness filter and gets the relevant training, do your eyes (and ears) open and see how it helps others. It is about improving the effectiveness of teaching and communication.
This approach goes beyond EDI principles and is about breaking barriers and being part of a broader student development approach, such as intellectual, emotional, social, and personal growth. The aim is to get students present and to be in the room with you, during the process of knowledge transfer.
As we work on making our engineering classrooms better for everyone, we are focusing on understanding and supporting students with hearing impairments. We are taking a step back and getting re-trained to have a fresh perspective. This helps us see things we might have missed before. The goal is not just to be aware but to actually improve how we teach and communicate.
We want our classrooms to be inclusive, where everyone’s needs are considered and met. It is about creating an environment where all our students, including those with hearing impairments, feel supported and included in the learning process. And stepping back and taking a whole human (“humanist”) view, we can define education as an endeavour that develops human potential—not just an activity that produces nameless faceless quantifiable outcomes or products. As such, initiatives such as bringing forward deaf awareness to benefit broader communication and engagement provide a measurable step forward into bringing a more humanistic approach to Engineering Education.
So what can you do?
The first step is always awareness. Inform yourself, raise awareness amongst yourself and your colleagues, and make improvements where you can in your daily education practice
Consider how you might incorporate deaf awareness in your teaching case studies, and consider how deaf awareness can improve the quality of your group work discussions
We’re pleased to report that we are aiming to launch an EDI Toolkit project soon, building on the work that we’ve begun on neurodiversity. Soon we’ll be seeking people to get involved and contribute resources, so stay tuned! (i.e. “If you have a process or resource that helped your teaching become more inclusive, please share it with us!”).
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.
Sustainability competency: Integrated problem-solving; Collaboration.UNESCO has developed eight key competencies for sustainability that are aimed at learners of all ages worldwide. Many versions of these exist, as are linked here*. In the UK, these have been adapted within higher education by AdvanceHE and the QAA with appropriate learning outcomes. The full list of competencies and learning outcome alignment can be found in the Education for Sustainable Development Guidance*. *Click the pink ''Sustainability competency'' text to learn more.
AHEP mapping: This resource addresses two of the themes from the UK’s Accreditation of Higher Education Programmes fourth edition (AHEP4): The Engineer and Society (acknowledging that engineering activity can have a significant societal impact) and Engineering Practice (the practical application of engineering concepts, tools and professional skills). To map this resource to AHEP outcomes specific to a programme under these themes, access AHEP 4 here and navigate to pages 30-31 and 35-37.
Related SDGs: All.
Reimagined Degree Map Intervention: Adapt learning outcomes; Active pedagogies and mindsets; More real-world complexity; Cross-disciplinarity; Authentic assessment.The Reimagined Degree Map is a guide to help engineering departments navigate the decisions that are urgently required to ensure degrees prepare students for 21st century challenges. Click the pink ''Reimagined Degree Map Intervention'' text to learn more.
Projects, and thus project-based learning, offer valuable opportunities for integrating sustainability education into engineering curricula by promoting active, experiential learning through critical and creative thinking within problem-solving endeavours and addressing complex real-world challenges. Engaging in projects can have a lasting impact on students’ understanding and retention of knowledge. By working on projects related to sustainability, students are likely to internalise key concepts and develop a commitment to incorporating sustainable practices into their future engineering endeavours.
Building a brief:
Project briefs are a powerful tool for integrating sustainability into engineering education through project-based learning. They set the tone, define the scope, and provide the parameters for students to consider sustainability in their engineering projects, ensuring that future engineers develop the knowledge, skills, and mindset needed to address the complex challenges of sustainability.
To ensure sustainability has a central and/or clear role within an engineering project, consider the following as you develop the brief:
1. Sustainability as part of goals, objectives, and requirements. By explicitly including sustainability objectives in the project brief, educators communicate the importance of considering environmental, social, and economic factors in the engineering design and implementation process. This sets the stage for students to integrate sustainability principles into their project work.
2.Context: Briefs should always include the context of the project so that students understand the importance of place and people to an engineered solution. Below are aspects of the context to consider and provide:
What is the central problem for the project?
Where is the problem/project located? What data will be given to students to describe the context of the problem? Why is the context important and how does it relate to expectations of solving of the problem or the project solution
Who are the people directly impacted by the scenario and central to the context? What is the problem that they face and why? How are they associated with the project and why do they need to be considered?
When in time does this scenario/context exist? How does the data or information re. the context support the time of the scenario?
3. Stakeholders: Sustainability is intertwined with the interests and needs of various stakeholders. Project briefs can include considerations for stakeholder engagement, prompting students to identify and address the concerns of different groups affected by the project. This reinforces the importance of community involvement and social responsibility in engineering projects. Below are aspects of the stakeholders to consider and provide:
Who are the main stakeholders (i.e. users) and why are they important to the context? (see above) What are their needs and what are their power positions
Who else should be considered stakeholders in the project? How do they influence the project by their needs, interest and power situations?
Have you considered the earth and its non-human stakeholders, its inhabitants or its landscape?
Do you want to provide this information to the students or is this part of the work you want them to do within the project?
4.Ethical decision-making: Including ethical considerations related to sustainability in the project brief guides students in making ethical decisions throughout the project lifecycle. The Ethics Toolkit can provide guidance in how to embed ethical considerations such as:
Explicitly state ethical expectations and frame decisions as having ethical components.
Prompt and encourage students to think critically about the consequences of their engineering choices on society, the environment, and future generations.
5. Knowns and unknowns: Considering both knowns and unknowns is essential for defining the project scope. Knowing what is already understood and what remains uncertain allows students to set realistic and achievable project goals. Below are aspects of considering the knowns and unknowns aspects of a project brief to consider and provide:
What key information needs to be provided to the students to address the problem given?
What is it that you want the students to do for themselves in the early part of the project – i.e. research and investigation and then in the process of their problem solving and prototyping/testing and making?
6. Engineering design process and skills development: The Project Brief should support how the educator wants to guide students through the engineering design cycle, equipping them with the skills, knowledge, and mindset needed for successful problem-solving. Below are aspects of the engineering design process and skills development to consider and provide:
What process will the students follow in order to come to a final output or problem solution? What result is required of the students (i.e. are they just coming up with concepts or ideas? Do they need to justify and thus technical argue their chosen concept? Do they need to design, build/make and test a prototype or model to show their design and building/making skills as well? Do they need to critically analyse it using criteria based on proof of concept or sustainability goals – ie. It is desirable? Viable? Responsible? Feasible?)
What skills should students be developing through the project? Some possibilities are (depending on how far they expect students to complete the solution), however the sustainability competencies are relevant here too:
a. Research – investigate,
b. Creative thinking – divergent and convergent thinking in different parts of the process of engineering design,
c. Critical thinking – innovation model analysis or other critical thinking tools,
d. Decision making – steps taken to move the project forward, justifying the decision making via evidence,
e. Communication, collaboration, negotiation, presentation,
f. Anticipatory thinking – responsible innovation model AREA, asking in the concept stages (which ideas could go wrong because of a double use, or perhaps thinking of what could go wrong?),
g. Systems thinking.
7.Solution and impact: Students will need to demonstrate that they have met the brief and can demonstrate that they understand the impact of their chosen solution. Here it would need to be clear what the students need to produce and how long it is expected to take them. Other considerations when designing the project brief to include are:
Is the brief for a module or a short activity? What is the ideal number of students in a team? Is it disciplinary-based or interdisciplinary (and in this case – which disciplines would be encouraged to be included).
We would want the students to understand and discuss the trade-offs that they had to consider in their solution.
Important considerations for embedding sustainability into projects:
1. Competences or content?
Embedding and/or developing competences is a normal part of project work. When seen as a set of competences sustainability is crosscutting in the same way as other HE agendas such as employability, global citizenship, decolonisation and EDI. See the Global Responsibility competency compass for an example of how competencies can be developed for engineering practice.
Embedding sustainability content often requires additional material, even if it is only in adapting one of the project phases/outcomes to encourage students to think through sustainable practice. For more guidance on how to adapt learning outcomes, see the Engineering for One Planet Framework (aligned to AHEP4).
2. Was any content added or adapted?
Was any content adapted to include sustainability awareness?
– What form of content, seminars, readings, lectures, tutorials, student activity
Were learning objectives changed?
Did you have to remove material to fit in the new or adapted content?
Were assessments changed?
3. Competencies
UNESCO has identified eight competencies that encompass the behaviours, attitudes, values and knowledge which facilitate safeguarding the future. These together with the SDGs provide a way of identifying activities and learning that can be embedded in different disciplinary curricula and courses. For more information on assessing competences, see this guidance article.
Did you map the competences that you already support before changing anything?
What kind of activities did you add to support the development of the competences you wish to target?
Did you explain to the students that these were the competences that you were targeting and that they are considered necessary for all who go on to work and live in a warming world?
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.
Authors: Siara Isaac; Valentina Rossi; Joelyn de Lima.
This month marked a milestone for the engineering education community, as the EPC and E-DAP launched their practical, step-by-step 
