IA Playbook
Move from problem framing to prototype testing with a design process that clearly matches the rubric.
Use this guide to sharpen your brief, justify concept choices, build a manufacturable proposal, and evaluate the final prototype with evidence.
Design Technology IA
See what each criterion measures, how many marks it carries, and what stronger evidence usually looks like.
Criterion names, marks, and mark bands follow the IB subject guide. The band descriptions are our own summaries, so check your subject guide for the exact wording.
How well you identify a problem, write a design brief, and develop a specification from your research.
Stronger evidence
Describes a suitable problem and design opportunity, writes a detailed brief with the relevant parameters, and justifies each requirement from research.
Early-stage evidence
Identifies a problem, writes a simple brief with few relevant parameters, and states requirements without drawing on research.
How well you develop ideas, use concept modelling, and justify the idea you take forward.
Stronger evidence
Develops feasible ideas that meet the specification, analyses concept models to guide development, and justifies the chosen idea.
Early-stage evidence
Develops few ideas in limited depth, presents concept models, and picks an idea without justification.
How well you choose materials and techniques, and whether your design proposal and plan would let someone else make the prototype.
Stronger evidence
Justifies materials, components, and techniques; the proposal is accurate and detailed enough for a third party to make it; the production plan is detailed.
Early-stage evidence
Lists some materials, components, and techniques; the design proposal lacks the detail a third party would need; the production plan is incomplete.
How well you test the prototype, evaluate it against the specification, and show how it could be improved.
Stronger evidence
Justifies a testing strategy, evaluates the prototype against the full specification, and shows how improvements would affect the design as a whole.
Early-stage evidence
States a testing strategy, evaluates the prototype against few specification points without test evidence, and lists improvements.
| Marks | What the draft currently shows |
|---|---|
| 0 | Nothing in the work reaches the lowest band. |
| 1-3 | Identifies a problem, writes a simple brief with few relevant parameters, and states requirements without drawing on research. |
| 4-6 | Identifies a suitable problem that leads to a design opportunity, writes a brief with some relevant parameters, and outlines requirements with little link to research. |
| 7-9 | Describes a suitable problem and design opportunity, writes a detailed brief with the relevant parameters, and justifies each requirement from research. |
| Marks | What the draft currently shows |
|---|---|
| 0 | Nothing in the work reaches the lowest band. |
| 1-3 | Develops few ideas in limited depth, presents concept models, and picks an idea without justification. |
| 4-6 | Develops ideas with reference to the specification, uses concept models with limited analysis, and justifies the chosen idea only briefly. |
| 7-9 | Develops feasible ideas that meet the specification, analyses concept models to guide development, and justifies the chosen idea. |
| Marks | What the draft currently shows |
|---|---|
| 0 | Nothing in the work reaches the lowest band. |
| 1-3 | Lists some materials, components, and techniques; the design proposal lacks the detail a third party would need; the production plan is incomplete. |
| 4-6 | Describes suitable materials, components, and techniques; the proposal has most of what a third party would need; a production plan is given. |
| 7-9 | Justifies materials, components, and techniques; the proposal is accurate and detailed enough for a third party to make it; the production plan is detailed. |
| Marks | What the draft currently shows |
|---|---|
| 0 | Nothing in the work reaches the lowest band. |
| 1-3 | States a testing strategy, evaluates the prototype against few specification points without test evidence, and lists improvements. |
| 4-6 | Describes a testing strategy, evaluates the prototype against some specification points, and outlines improvements. |
| 7-9 | Justifies a testing strategy, evaluates the prototype against the full specification, and shows how improvements would affect the design as a whole. |
Did You Know? Most weak drafts fail from sequence chaos, not lack of ideas.
Step 1
Identify a real problem, then turn it into a focused brief and specification that are clearly justified by research.
Step 2
Generate more than one feasible solution and use concept modelling to show why the chosen direction is strongest.
Step 3
Document materials, components, dimensions, and manufacturing steps so another person could reproduce the prototype.
Step 4
Evaluate the prototype against the specification, then explain improvements with clear cause-and-effect reasoning.
Did You Know?
Marksy highlights weak links between brief, concept, development, and testing so you can fix them fast. The result includes an estimated mark for every criterion, evidence from your draft, and the changes to make first. Your final mark may differ after teacher assessment or external moderation.
Instant Grading Results
See where your score is now, not just where it could be.
Criterion-By-Criterion Feedback
See the estimated mark, evidence, and next step for every assessment criterion.
Action List To Improve
Get concrete next edits instead of vague "improve analysis" advice.
Confidence And Integrity Signals
Review flagged sections and strengthen authenticity before submission.