Back To Design Technology

IA Playbook

Design Technology IA Criteria Guide

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.

Criteria Breakdown

Did You Know? The easiest score jumps usually come from explicitly naming what the criterion rewards and supporting it with direct evidence.

Criterion A: Analysis of a design opportunity (9 marks)

Examiner Focus

Investigating a problem to develop a design brief and specification

Top-Band Move

The student: • describes an appropriate problem that leads to a design opportunity • develops a detailed brief that identifies the relevant parameters of the problem • develops a design specification that justifies the requirements, based on the outcomes of the research.

Common Penalty

The student: • identifies a problem • develops a simple brief that identifies few relevant parameters of the problem • develops a design specification that states the requirements, with no reference to the outcomes of the research.

Criterion B: Conceptual design (9 marks)

Examiner Focus

Developing and justifying design concepts through modeling

Top-Band Move

The student: • develops feasible ideas to meet appropriate specifications that explore solutions to the problem • uses concept modeling and analyses the outcomes to guide design development • justifies an appropriate idea for detailed development.

Common Penalty

The student: • demonstrates limited development of few ideas that explore solutions to the problem • presents concept models • selects an appropriate idea for detailed development with no justification.

Criterion C: Development of a detailed design (9 marks)

Examiner Focus

Creating a detailed design proposal and manufacturing plan

Top-Band Move

The student: • justifies the choice of appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype • develops an accurate design proposal in sufficient detail for a third party to manufacture the prototype • produces a detailed plan for the manufacture of the prototype.

Common Penalty

The student: • lists some appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype • develops a design proposal that includes few details and is not sufficient for a third party to manufacture the prototype • produces an incomplete plan that contains some production details.

Criterion D: Testing and evaluation (9 marks)

Examiner Focus

Evaluating the prototype against specifications and suggesting improvements

Top-Band Move

The student: • justifies a testing strategy to measure the success of the prototype • evaluates the success of the prototype against the design specification • demonstrates how the prototype could be improved, considering how individual improvements affect the design as a whole.

Common Penalty

The student: • states a testing strategy to measure the success of the prototype • evaluates the success of the prototype against few aspects of the design specification with no evidence of testing • lists how the prototype could be improved.

Markbands

Criteria point markbands to benchmark where your current draft sits and what a stronger band demands.

Criterion A: Analysis of a design opportunity (9 marks)

Points 0

The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

Points 1-3

The student: • identifies a problem • develops a simple brief that identifies few relevant parameters of the problem • develops a design specification that states the requirements, with no reference to the outcomes of the research.

Points 4-6

The student: • identifies an appropriate problem that leads to a design opportunity • develops a brief that identifies some of the relevant parameters of the problem • develops a design specification that outlines the requirements, with limited reference to the outcomes of the research.

Points 7-9

The student: • describes an appropriate problem that leads to a design opportunity • develops a detailed brief that identifies the relevant parameters of the problem • develops a design specification that justifies the requirements, based on the outcomes of the research.

Criterion B: Conceptual design (9 marks)

Points 0

The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

Points 1-3

The student: • demonstrates limited development of few ideas that explore solutions to the problem • presents concept models • selects an appropriate idea for detailed development with no justification.

Points 4-6

The student: • develops ideas with reference to the specifications that explore solutions to the problem • uses concept modeling with limited analysis of the outcomes to guide design development • selects an appropriate idea for detailed development with limited justification.

Points 7-9

The student: • develops feasible ideas to meet appropriate specifications that explore solutions to the problem • uses concept modeling and analyses the outcomes to guide design development • justifies an appropriate idea for detailed development.

Criterion C: Development of a detailed design (9 marks)

Points 0

The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

Points 1-3

The student: • lists some appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype • develops a design proposal that includes few details and is not sufficient for a third party to manufacture the prototype • produces an incomplete plan that contains some production details.

Points 4-6

The student: • describes some appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype • develops a design proposal that includes most details necessary for a third party to manufacture the prototype • produces a plan for the manufacture of the prototype.

Points 7-9

The student: • justifies the choice of appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype • develops an accurate design proposal in sufficient detail for a third party to manufacture the prototype • produces a detailed plan for the manufacture of the prototype.

Criterion D: Testing and evaluation (9 marks)

Points 0

The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below.

Points 1-3

The student: • states a testing strategy to measure the success of the prototype • evaluates the success of the prototype against few aspects of the design specification with no evidence of testing • lists how the prototype could be improved.

Points 4-6

The student: • describes a testing strategy to measure the success of the prototype • evaluates the success of the prototype against some aspects of the design specification • outlines how the prototype could be improved.

Points 7-9

The student: • justifies a testing strategy to measure the success of the prototype • evaluates the success of the prototype against the design specification • demonstrates how the prototype could be improved, considering how individual improvements affect the design as a whole.

Build Sequence

Did You Know? Most weak drafts fail from sequence chaos, not lack of ideas.

Step 1

Frame the design opportunity

Identify a real problem, then turn it into a focused brief and specification that are clearly justified by research.

Step 2

Develop and compare concepts

Generate more than one feasible solution and use concept modelling to show why the chosen direction is strongest.

Step 3

Build a detailed proposal

Document materials, components, dimensions, and manufacturing steps so another person could reproduce the prototype.

Step 4

Test and refine

Evaluate the prototype against the specification, then explain improvements with clear cause-and-effect reasoning.

Submission Checklist

  • The brief and specification are justified by the research, not copied from it.
  • Concept selection is explained, not just presented.
  • The final design proposal is detailed enough for third-party manufacture.
  • Testing evidence is tied directly back to the original specification.

Quick Wins

  • Use the specification as a checklist for every development decision.
  • Include comparison language when explaining why one concept won over another.
  • Tie each proposed improvement to a specific limitation observed during testing.

Did You Know?

Stress-Test Your DT IA Before Submission

Marksy highlights weak links between brief, concept, development, and testing so you can fix them fast. Marksy is built to grade faster with criterion-level precision, so you can improve before final submission.

1. Upload your IA draft PDF to Marksy.
2. Get criterion-by-criterion feedback fast.
3. Revise and resubmit with focused improvements.
Marksy grading results view

Instant Grading Results

See where your score is now, not just where it could be.

Marksy criteria-wise feedback highlights

Criterion-Level Feedback

Marksy explains feedback by rubric criterion, so revision is targeted.

Marksy actionable todo feedback list

Action List To Improve

Get concrete next edits instead of vague "improve analysis" advice.

Marksy AI detection and highlight review

Confidence And Integrity Signals

Review flagged sections and strengthen authenticity before submission.