Equity in design and technology 

For me, my one big thing for design and technology was really easy to decide. It’s all about equity in design and technology, and the fact that we do not have an equitable offer for our students across the UK.

So imagine giving a group of students across the UK the same real-world design problem. Some will have access to laser cutters, 3D printers, software and specialist workshops. Others will have limited materials, ageing equipment and potentially no specialist teachers. This is all sounding really familiar, I’m sure. Yet we still expect every student to achieve the same outcome. The expectation is still the same. That tension lies at the heart of equity in design and technology.

It is one of the most powerful subjects that we teach. It develops creativity, resilience, problem solving and innovation. I know that today I’m preaching to the converted. It allows students to imagine better futures and design them into the reality we all want for them. But access to that experience is not equal. In some schools, students can experience a wide range of materials and technologies. In others, budgets restrain and compromise those practical opportunities. A student’s experience of design and technology can depend more on the postcode of their school than on their potential.

The same is true of digital access. Design is increasingly shaped by CAD, automation and emerging technologies, but not every school’s infrastructure, devices and software can keep pace. Without those tools, students are limited in how far they can develop their skills.

Staffing adds another challenge. There are fewer and fewer specialists in departments, and we can’t recruit or retain the teachers we need. Specialist teachers aren’t available for those students. We’ve also got staff from other subjects across the school, like PE, music and maths, covering design and technology lessons, and they aren’t giving students a realistic experience of the subject.

Curriculum time matters too. Some students benefit from regular, meaningful design and technology lessons, whereas others have reduced time, potentially on a carousel, and the subject’s importance is taken away. Yet industry needs young people to have those skills for the future, and the innovation needed to build the designs of the future.

There’s also still an issue with how the subject is perceived. The value placed on design and technology can vary massively between schools and leadership teams. Leaders with a creative, design or technological background often recognise the subject’s importance and champion it effectively. Others may not, and that unintentionally reduces its profile and influence. Part of this comes from the outdated stigma around design and technology, and whether students believe the subject is for them. Design and technology should be a subject for every student, regardless of where they’ve come from. That stigma needs to be taken away. It needs to be part of a balanced curriculum that prepares young people for the challenges they face.

These inequalities don’t stop at the classroom door. We also have issues with home support, access to technology and family income. These all influence what students can do beyond the classroom. Some can extend their learning through enrichment opportunities, visits and technology. Others cannot. Talent is evenly spread. Opportunity isn’t.

We also need to recognise barriers that are less visible but equally significant. Gender stereotypes still influence who feels the subject is right for them. Language creates barriers for learners who are developing their English. For students with SEND, environments, tools and assessment methods are not always as accessible as they should be. Yet we champion inclusive design in our curriculum.

So what might a more equitable future for the subject look like? It would be a system where resources and digital tools are more consistently available, and where schools collaborate and share expertise. Teacher recruitment and professional development would be properly supported across all schools. Curriculum time would reflect the subject’s importance, and inclusion would be designed in from the outset.

But we must also be really realistic. Many of these challenges sit beyond the control of an individual teacher or an individual department. A design and technology teacher can’t solve national recruitment challenges alone. A head of department can’t fix inequalities and competing pressures alone. Equally, awarding organisations, subject associations, teacher training providers, school leaders, policymakers, industry and government can’t solve it alone. Each has a role, but no single group holds all the levers needed to create genuine equity in design and technology.

If we’re serious about change, responsibility must be shared. Qualification design, curriculum expectations, teacher training, funding decisions and classroom reality must inform one another rather than operate in isolation. Policy and specifications should be built around ambition for our students, but also around a clear understanding of what schools face. The goal is not to lower expectations. It’s about making high expectations achievable for every single learner, regardless of their starting point. Equity is not about giving everyone the same. It’s about giving everyone what they need to succeed.

And ultimately, the question we need to keep asking is not whether our students have the ability. It’s whether we’re building a system that allows that ability to flourish.