A series of new How-To Guides have been developed by universities across the UK as part of the Royal Academy of Engineering’s (RAEng) Diversity Impact Programme (DIP)
Supported by the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, this programme funds projects that inspire change within university engineering departments and tackle unequal outcomes experienced by students from underrepresented groups.
Over the past three years, the Diversity Impact Programme has provided grants of up to £100,000 to 22 university projects. The latest phase focuses on sharing what has been learned through practical, evidence-based How-To Guides that other universities can replicate to embed inclusive practices and strengthen outcomes for all engineering students.
Funded awardees and their guides
Seven awardees have produced user-friendly guides on inclusive approaches within engineering education:
Swansea University – Representation of women engineers and outreach
University of Plymouth – Neurodivergent and disabled students and inclusive programme design
King’s College London – Black engineers’ representation and attainment
University of Dundee – Socio-economic equality and career prospects
University of Strathclyde – Socio-economic equality, mentoring, support, and outreach
University of the West of England – Underrepresented students and the Repair Café
We’re proud that our recently published guide, Integrating the Engineering Professors’ Council’s Inclusive Employability Toolkit into the Higher Education Engineering Curriculum (featured in our Inclusive Employability Toolkit), was developed in collaboration with Wrexham University, one of our Toolkit supporters alongside Canterbury Christ Church University, Equal Engineers, and The Royal Academy of Engineering. Through DIP funding, Wrexham University collaborated with us to develop a How-To Guide demonstrating how to use the Toolkit in practice, featuring real-world case studies of students and educators applying it and detailed session plans. This collaboration has enabled us to share practical, scalable strategies that advance inclusive employability within engineering education. We’re delighted to be featured alongside other outstanding contributions from Swansea University, University of Plymouth, King’s College London, University of Dundee, University of Strathclyde, and University of the West of England.
EPC Launches Inclusive Employability Toolkit to Advance Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in Engineering Education
London, 30 September 2025 – The Engineering Professors’ Council (EPC) has launched a new Inclusive Employability Toolkit designed to support engineering educators and students in embedding Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) principles into employability learning.
Developed with funding from the Royal Academy of Engineering Impact Fund, and in partnership with Canterbury Christ Church University, Wrexham University, Equal Engineers, and the Royal Academy of Engineering, the Toolkit addresses persistent inequities in engineering graduate outcomes and workplace progression.
The Toolkit equips the engineering higher education community to:
Empower employers and students to navigate employment challenges
Educate on employability, EDI, and allyship
Equip individuals to foster inclusive workplaces
Encourage reflection, growth, and engagement with EDI initiatives
Tackling Inequalities in Graduate Outcomes
Despite progress, disparities remain in engineering graduate outcomes. According to the Office for Students (2024), 73% of white male engineering graduates progress into employment compared with 71.6% of female graduates, 68.7% of Asian graduates, and 69.8% of Black graduates. Inequities are also evident for LGBTQ+ students and those from lower socio-economic backgrounds.
Bias in recruitment practices can compound these issues. Research indicates that AI-based recruitment may amplify discrimination, particularly affecting women and minority candidates. Diversity, however, remains a priority for the profession: 81% of engineers say it is an important factor when considering an employer, and 82% of female applicants cite the presence of role models as significant (Royal Academy of Engineering, 2024).
Impact on Students
Early classroom use of the Toolkit has shown positive results. Academics report that it helps students develop reflective practice, engage critically with employability resources, and recognise their personal responsibility in shaping career journeys. Students have also reported improvements in collaboration and group work:
“It has improved me… [Previously] I didn’t even think about any steps [when completing coursework or group work]. I used to just jump straight into [it]… even in our group activity.” — Level 4 CCCU Student A
“[The Toolkit’s game activity] built quite a lot of patience in me… I could give [peers in group work] more time, explain things in more detail, and help them instead of arguing over the work.” — Level 4 CCCU Student B
“I’m still finding my feet [at university] with interacting in a group setting… I think a lot more about other people… I’m constantly conscious [of this] in group work.” — Level 4 CCCU Student C
The Inclusive Employability Toolkit provides a practical framework to embed EDI into engineering education, helping students and educators alike to build more inclusive, equitable, and reflective learning and workplace environments.
For further information, please contact: Contact: Johnny Rich Email: press@epc.ac.uk
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.
Authors: Dr Goudarz Poursharif (Aston University), Dr Panos Doss (Aston University) and Bill Glew (Aston University)
Keywords: WBL, Degree Apprenticeship, Engineering
Abstract: This case study presents our approach in the design, delivery, and assessment of three UG WBL Engineering Degree Apprenticeship programmes launched in January 2020 at Aston University’s Professional Engineering Centre (APEC) in direct collaboration with major industrial partners. The case study also outlines the measures put in place to bring about added value for the employers and the apprentices as well as the academics at Aston University through tripartite collaboration opportunities built into the teaching and learning methods adopted by the programme team.
This case study is presented as a video which you can view below:
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.
Abstract: The Institute of Innovation and Knowledge Exchange works closely with business and industry as well as with universities (e.g. City of Birmingham, Plymouth, Westminster). The case study will feature the application of the Investor in Innovations Standard (Aligned to the ISO 56002 Innovation Management System) within the Research, Innovation, Enterprise and Employability (RIEE) Directorate of Birmingham City University (BCU). The Case Study will look at six key areas: 1. Strategy and Alignment; 2. Organisational Readiness; 3. Core Capabilities and Technologies; 4. Industry Foresight; 5. Customer Awareness; and 6. Impact and Value.
Introduction
This case study draws upon the work and outcomes of the Investor in Innovations (I3) ISO56002 Standard programme Birmingham City University’s (BCU) Research, Innovation, Enterprise and Employability (RIEE) department undertook with IKE Institute to benchmark their existing innovation capabilities, identify gaps and provide an action plan for future improvement in innovation and knowledge exchange (KE).
The validation and benchmarking work conducted with BCU RIEE used a six category standard framework (see fig. 1): strategy and alignment, organisational readiness, core capabilities, technologies and IP, industry foresight, customer awareness and impact and value.
Fig. 1 Investor in Innovations ISO56002 Standard Framework
Aim
The aim of the case study was to examine each of these categories to assess how knowledge exchange methodologies, practices, tools and techniques were being used to support the university’s innovation ambitions, and ultimately, to drive up value and impact.
Innovation and knowledge exchange are inextricably linked (see fig. 2). Innovation needs knowledge exchange to fuel every stage of its process, from listening and discovery, through design and experimentation to implementation and measurement. Conversely, knowledge exchange needs innovation to create a focus for engagement. Innovation gives knowledge exchange its creative, entrepreneurial spirit. The two are required to work in unison if an organisation is to achieve higher levels of innovation maturity.
Fig. 2 The link between the innovation process and knowledge exchange
Enabling innovation and knowledge exchange to work concurrently was shown to be a central theme within RIEE, exemplified, particularly, through their STEAMhouse project (see fig. 3). A collaborative innovation campus which provides product and service innovation and knowledge exchange to business.
Fig 3. BCU RIEE’s STEAMhouse project
Strategy and alignment
The critical aspect of this category was to examine BCU’s Innovation Strategy and how well aligned this was to the overall 2025 Strategy for the university. An underpinning element of the innovation strategy, was reviewing, supporting and improving their innovation ecosystem partners (both business and industry and academic), widening and growing their STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Mathematics) communities of practice, and supporting direct knowledge exchange through the roll-out of commercialisation policies, training, capital and digital infrastructure to support more students and entrepreneurs.
Organisational readiness
This category assessed BCU’s innovation culture, creative capabilities and the structures, processes and governance in place to support innovation developments. When examined through the knowledge exchange lens, these areas translated into BCU’s ability to use KE to spark discussion, curiosity and inspire creativity accelerating the build up of a virtuous growth mindset. BCU have engaged with over 2,500 businesses, and formally assisted 1,425 to start, grow or innovate since 2017/18. BCU demonstrated their ability to leverage this landscape to create powerful sub-networks within their wider ecosystem for greater knowledge exchange, thus, generating a force multiplier at every stage of their innovation process. Internally, dissemination of innovation wins and promotion of ideas sharing has ramped up the institution’s innovation knowledge base and underpinned a sustainable innovation pipeline of activities.
Core capabilities, technologies and IP
For an institution like BCU, this category focused on building capacity in expertise and resource. Rapid access to external knowledge sources within RIEE’s ecosystem helped to reflect different perspectives from SMEs, larger businesses, other academic stakeholders and industrial representatives from associations and learned societies. Development of 100 innovation ambassadors within RIEE has brought greater access to the ambassadors’ own communities of practice and collaborative networks. The use of crowdsourcing mechanisms such as innovation challenges, have helped build momentum around specific product, service or societal problems. Use of collaborative knowledge STEAM tools such as STEAM Sprints, have enabled greater creative problem solving and refinement of selected ideas.
Industry foresight
At the heart of this category is knowledge exchange. Through analysis and synthesis, information becomes intelligence supporting innovation directions. Within RIEE, long-established and engrained partnerships with external stakeholders and engagement on industry forums have been utilised to acquire sectoral knowledge and key market intelligence informing and shaping the exploration and exploitation of new scientific, technological and engineering discoveries. The university’s representation on key regional advisory boards positioned them as thought leaders and led to sculpting regional strategies and plans.
Customer awareness
BCU’s Public and Community Engagement Strategy forms the basis for mechanisms to drive productive knowledge exchange. This category focused on understanding the needs of the customer and involving them in the innovation development process. RIEE demonstrated its ability to use collaborative networks and customer ecosystems to identify challenges. They harnessed co-creation practices and funding – e.g. Proof of Concept Support Fund for Staff – to then deliver innovative solutions.
Effective knowledge exchange requires coherent, relevant and accurate data. Through BCU’s CRM, segmentation and narrow-casting has been achieved. This targeting of specific information through BCU’s online platforms and social media channels has encouraged 13,591 connections with businesses and proliferated greater knowledge exchange with over 2,500 engaged relationships.
Impact and value
This category’s focus ensured that a structured approach to implementation was adopted to maximise commercial success, and measurement of the innovation process meets organisational objectives. In this context, BCU’s community engagement and knowledge exchange through multiple pathways helped to underpin continual improvement of RIEE’s innovation process. The positive impact of knowledge exchange for RIEE has been defined by the development of STEAMhouse project – phase 2, and the creation of BCU Enterprises, to further drive the impact of RIEE, including research, experimentation, exploitation, and commercialisation of product IP and service know-how in STEAM disciplines.
Outcomes
Gaps were identified across all six of the I3 Standard framework categories. The key improvements in KE included:
Identifying methods to activate critical behaviours in staff, students and ecosystem partners, to encourage greater sharing and knowledge exchange;
Clustering innovation activities around key technology domains and IP assets, enabling more targeted knowledge exchange with partners, suppliers and customers within the innovation ecosystem;
Developing a more systematic way to communicate and engage with innovation partners yearly, to assess change in customers’ ecosystems, curate priorities of demand and increase BCU’s innovation maturity level;
Identifying more targeted KPIs to measure RIEE’s activities, thus determining progress and success, return on innovation investment and yield value.
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.
In September 2015 the first university-business co-developed Degree Apprenticeship programmes were launched – having been designed and eligible for funding under the government’s new model for apprenticeship training (Apprenticeship Standards), and expected to be resourced via the so called “apprenticeship Levy”.
Whilst still at a relatively small scale and early stage, as at March 2016, Apprenticeship Standards are ‘ready for delivery’ at the Degree Apprenticeship level in three discipline areas – two of which are engineering-related. A further seven are awaiting approval, five of which are engineering-related.
Some toolkit content is available to members only. For best results, make sure you’re logged in.
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.
In Northern Ireland, the term “Higher level apprenticeships (HLAS)” covers what are known in England as Degree Apprenticeships and offer on-the-job training and off-the-job learning at higher levels, including Foundation Degrees (level 5), Honours Degrees (Level 6), and post-graduate awards (Level 7-8). NB they include Level 8 (PhD) which they explicitly do not in England.
Pilot activity is currently underway with 50 employers in the following priority sectors:
Life Sciences
Insurance
International Tourism and Hospitality Management
Engineering
Building Gas Management
ICT
Business Technology
Sustainable Construction
Civil & Environmental Engineering
Food Manufacturing
Automotive Engineering
Animation, Film and Video
Social media and Digital Marketing
Professional Services
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.
In Scotland, Degree Apprenticeships are part of the Modern Apprenticeship framework and are known as Graduate Level Apprenticeships.
Individuals who participate in the scheme are able to access the same learning opportunities as those who go down the traditional route of direct entry into college or university.
Apprentices can progress to the highest level of professional qualifications with a range of entry and exit points from a Higher National Diploma (SCQF level 8)) to a Master’s degree (SCQF level 11).
The apprenticeships are part funded by participating employers, which means they are only available to their employees.
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.
One of the key recent changes in the apprenticeships landscape has been the announcement by government of a new ‘apprenticeships Levy’ which all employers (with a pay bill above £3m PA) will be required to pay. Current plans are that from April 2017 employers will pay an apprenticeships levy of 0.5% of pay bill (less£10,000) to be held in a dedicated training account for them to use to offset against the costs of providing apprenticeship training ( excluding apprentice salaries)
Although only a relatively small proportion of businesses will be required pay this levy, given their scale and the number of employees and trainees involved – these larger employers are likely to be the most important organisations with whom an HEI is likely to need to engage with when considering developing or delivering higher and/or degree apprenticeship training.
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.
Theme: 
