Design Technology HL IA Grader
This page provides a comprehensive guide to the Design Technology Higher Level (HL) Internal Assessment (IA), detailing the assessment criteria and offering insights to help you interpret your grades effectively. An embedded grader is available to facilitate self-assessment of your IA.
Quick Start Checklist
Before you begin, ensure you have the following:
- Design Brief and Specification: Clearly defined problem statement and detailed design specifications.
- Conceptual Designs: Multiple design ideas with sketches and annotations.
- Development Documentation: Technical drawings, material selections, and manufacturing plans.
- Prototype and Testing Data: Evidence of prototype creation and testing results.
- Evaluation and Reflection Notes: Analysis of testing outcomes and considerations for improvements.
- Citations and References: Properly formatted references for all sources used.
Rubric Breakdown (Paraphrased & Plain English)
The Design Technology HL IA is assessed across six criteria, each contributing to your final mark.
Criterion A: Analysis of a Design Opportunity (9 marks)
Focus: Identifying and understanding a design problem.
- High Performance: Thoroughly research and clearly define the design problem, providing a detailed brief and justified specifications.
- Medium Performance: Identify a design problem with some research; brief and specifications may lack detail.
- Low Performance: Superficial problem identification with minimal research and unclear specifications.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Comprehensive research, clear problem definition, detailed brief, and justified specifications. |
| 4-6 | Good | Adequate research, defined problem, brief, and specifications with some justification. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Limited research, vague problem definition, brief, and specifications. |
Criterion B: Conceptual Design (9 marks)
Focus: Generating and developing design ideas.
- High Performance: Present multiple feasible ideas, use modeling to test concepts, and justify the final choice.
- Medium Performance: Generate some ideas with limited modeling; justification may be weak.
- Low Performance: Few ideas with little development or justification.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Diverse ideas, thorough modeling, and strong justification for final design. |
| 4-6 | Good | Several ideas, some modeling, and reasonable justification. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Few ideas, minimal modeling, and weak justification. |
Criterion C: Development of a Detailed Design (9 marks)
Focus: Creating a detailed plan for the chosen design.
- High Performance: Provide detailed technical drawings, justify material and process choices, and outline a clear manufacturing plan.
- Medium Performance: Include technical drawings with some detail; justification and planning may be incomplete.
- Low Performance: Basic drawings with little detail; minimal justification and planning.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Precise drawings, well-justified choices, and comprehensive manufacturing plan. |
| 4-6 | Good | Clear drawings, some justification, and a basic manufacturing plan. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Simple drawings, limited justification, and vague manufacturing plan. |
Criterion D: Testing and Evaluation (9 marks)
Focus: Assessing the prototype and suggesting improvements.
- High Performance: Implement a thorough testing strategy, analyze results against specifications, and propose detailed improvements.
- Medium Performance: Conduct testing with some analysis; improvement suggestions may lack depth.
- Low Performance: Minimal testing with little analysis or improvement suggestions.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Comprehensive testing, detailed analysis, and well-justified improvements. |
| 4-6 | Good | Adequate testing, some analysis, and reasonable improvement suggestions. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Limited testing, superficial analysis, and vague improvements. |
Criterion E: Detailed Development of a Commercial Product (9 marks)
Focus: Adapting the design for commercial production.
- High Performance: Modify the design considering commercial manufacturing constraints, providing detailed drawings and models.
- Medium Performance: Some consideration of commercial production with partial modifications and documentation.
- Low Performance: Little to no consideration of commercial production aspects.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Detailed modifications for commercial production with comprehensive documentation. |
| 4-6 | Good | Some modifications with adequate documentation. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Minimal modifications and limited documentation. |
Criterion F: Making Choices for Commercial Production (9 marks)
Focus: Justifying decisions for commercial manufacturing.
- High Performance: Provide well-researched justifications for material and process choices, considering scale and cost.
- Medium Performance: Justify choices with some research; considerations may be incomplete.
- Low Performance: Little justification with minimal research.
| Mark Band | What It Means | Evidence You Must Show |
|---|---|---|
| 7-9 | Excellent | Thorough justifications with detailed research and considerations. |
| 4-6 | Good | Reasonable justifications with some research. |
| 1-3 | Basic | Limited justifications with minimal research. |
How to Interpret Your Grade from the Tool
The embedded grader provides a mark for each criterion, which you can sum to determine your total IA score. This total can be compared against the grade boundaries to estimate your final grade.
- Between Bands: If your score is near the upper or lower limit of a band, focus on the specific criteria where you scored lower and consider how to enhance those areas.
- Improvement Actions:
- Criterion A: Enhance research depth and clarity in problem definition.
- Criterion B: Develop more diverse ideas and utilize modeling techniques.
- Criterion C: Provide detailed technical documentation and justify choices.
- Criterion D: Implement comprehensive testing and analyze results thoroughly.
- Criterion E: Consider commercial production constraints and adapt designs accordingly.
- Criterion F: Conduct in-depth research to justify manufacturing decisions.
Annotated Examples
High-Band Excerpt:
"The design problem was identified through extensive user interviews and market analysis, leading to a detailed brief and comprehensive specifications. Multiple design ideas were generated, each evaluated through concept modeling and user feedback, culminating in a final design choice justified by its alignment with user needs and feasibility."
Why It Scores High: Demonstrates thorough research, diverse ideation, and strong justification, addressing multiple criteria effectively.
Mid/Low-Band Excerpt:
"A design problem was chosen based on personal interest, with a brief and specifications outlined. A few design ideas were sketched, and one was selected without extensive modeling or user feedback."
What's Missing: Lacks comprehensive research, diverse ideation, and justification, leading to lower scores in multiple criteria.
Grade Boundaries & Converting Your Mark
Grade boundaries can vary by examination session. It's essential to consult the latest IB documentation or your instructor for the most accurate information.
Common Mistakes & Fast Fixes
- Mistake: Insufficient research in Criterion A.
- Fix: Conduct thorough market analysis and user interviews.
- Mistake: Limited design ideas in Criterion B.
- Fix: Generate multiple concepts and use modeling to evaluate them.
- Mistake: Lack of detailed technical drawings in Criterion C.
- Fix: Provide precise drawings with material and process justifications.
- Mistake: Superficial testing in Criterion D.
- Fix: Implement comprehensive testing strategies and analyze results thoroughly.
- Mistake: Ignoring commercial production constraints in Criterion E.
- Fix: Adapt designs considering
