Sustainable Manufacturing Choices

Overview

In lesson 9 of 18, students compare 3D printing with subtractive, forming and mass-manufacturing processes. They analyse material properties, waste, energy use, ethics and product life cycle, then recommend a suitable process and material for a design project.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• compare the characteristics and properties of materials used in different manufacturing processes
• analyse how manufacturing choices affect waste, energy use and product life cycle
• consider ethical, environmental and economic factors in design decisions
• justify a sustainable manufacturing recommendation using evidence and design criteria

Success criteria

• I can explain how 3D printing differs from at least two other manufacturing processes.
• I can compare processes using material, waste, energy and life-cycle considerations.
• I can identify an ethical or sustainability issue connected to a manufacturing choice.
• I can justify the best process and material for a proposed product.

Curriculum links

• Analyse needs and opportunities for designing, and investigate and select materials, systems, tools and equipment for designed solutions.
• Analyse and make judgements about how material properties, tools, equipment and processes can be combined.
• Analyse how designers and technologists consider ethical and sustainability factors when improving products and environments.
• Develop design criteria, including sustainability, to evaluate design ideas, processes and solutions.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook and retrieval. Teacher displays a 3D-printed object beside a mass-produced equivalent using the hook comparison slide, then asks, “Which product is more sustainable, and what evidence would we need?” Students independently record one advantage and one possible problem with 3D printing, then share responses with a partner.

2. 5–15 min · Direct teaching: processes. Teacher uses the manufacturing processes slides to explain additive manufacturing, subtractive manufacturing, forming and mass production, including examples such as 3D printing, laser cutting, injection moulding and CNC machining. Students complete the process section of the manufacturing comparison worksheet, identifying what is added, removed, shaped or repeated in each process.

3. 15–25 min · Properties and production choices. Teacher models how properties such as strength, flexibility, heat resistance, durability, weight and surface finish influence a design decision, referring to the material properties slides. In pairs, students use the worksheet to compare likely materials for a small product such as a phone stand, jewellery item or assistive device, explaining which properties are essential and why.

4. 25–40 min · Sustainability investigation. Teacher presents a comparison scenario on the sustainability comparison slides: producing one customised component by 3D printing versus producing 1,000 identical components by injection moulding. Students work in groups of three to complete a decision matrix on the worksheet, considering material waste, energy consumption, production volume, transport, repair or reuse, end-of-life disposal and worker conditions. Groups must identify one benefit and one trade-off for each process.

5. 40–52 min · Design recommendation. Teacher introduces the prompt on the design challenge slide: “Recommend a process and material for a product your class could design and make.” Students independently write a recommendation in the worksheet using the structure: “I recommend ___ because ___. The relevant material property is ___. This choice improves sustainability by ___. A limitation or ethical concern is ___.” Students may consult the command words reference mat when constructing and justifying their response.

6. 52–60 min · Share and exit assessment. Teacher displays the final discussion prompts using the plenary slides and invites selected students to share recommendations. Students complete the worksheet exit ticket: name the best process for a customised product, state one reason, and identify one question that should be investigated before manufacture.

Resources

• the manufacturing and sustainability slide deck
• the manufacturing comparison worksheet
• the command words reference mat
• Images or samples of a 3D-printed and mass-produced product
• Board and markers
• Student devices, if available, for checking material or process information
• Projector or interactive display

Assessment

• During retrieval and direct teaching, check whether students can distinguish additive, subtractive, forming and mass-manufacturing processes.
• Circulate during the decision matrix activity, questioning students about evidence, trade-offs and the relationship between material properties and intended function.
• Collect the recommendation and exit ticket to assess students’ ability to justify a process using sustainability and design criteria.

Differentiation

• Provide a process word bank, illustrated examples and sentence starters for students who need literacy or language support; read key worksheet instructions aloud.
• Pair students strategically and assign roles such as reader, evidence finder and recorder to support participation and reduce cognitive load.
• For EAL/D students, pre-teach terms including additive, subtractive, waste, life cycle, durability and ethical; accept labelled diagrams alongside written explanations.
• Extend confident students by requiring a whole-of-life comparison covering sourcing, manufacture, transport, use, repair and disposal, and by asking them to justify when a less sustainable process may still be appropriate.