Major Design Project
Project Proposal and Project Management
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
- presenting finance plans with a proposed budget and an actual expense table
- understanding the project need with a good base for general discussion.
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
- substantiating the need with research, data, graphs or examples that support the aim of the MDP
- meeting the page limit requirement – 80 pages in 12-point font
- choosing areas of investigation that provide the opportunity for future direction of the project
- providing evidence of detailed exploration and analysis of stated criteria
- including a supporting discussion that is relevant and specific to the intended project, with clear links to relevant actions.
Project Development and Project Realisation
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
- providing evidence of realisation in either a table or a flow chart showing logical steps, including photographs
- documenting progressive design development
- applying some testing and experimentation.
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
- providing evidence of the design process
- conducting genuine experimentation and testing that indicates specific purpose and future directions in design development
- communicating a design process that is specific to the candidate’s own particular design project.
Project Evaluation
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
- understanding the functional and aesthetical aspects of the project
- including positive and negative considerations of the project and the relevant relationship to the proposal in the final evaluation
- making clear reference to the criteria to evaluate success
- honestly appraising the project, making judgements on the success of the process or product.
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
- emphasising ongoing evaluation throughout the development of the project
- using multimedia in the evaluation process
- understanding and focusing closely on the impact upon society and the environment
- spending more time on this section to clearly articulate evaluative measures and results.
Written Examination
Section II
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
- describing similar and different design features of two related products (Q.11 (a))
- understanding the meaning of entrepreneurial activity (Q.11 (b))
- drawing upon more than one example of new and emerging technologies (Q.12)
- articulating the relationship that exists between society’s changing needs and the development of new and emerging technologies (Q.12).
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
- providing product-specific examples to demonstrate understanding of how entrepreneurial activity can influence the success of products (Q.11 (b))
- understanding and articulating the many complexities that contribute to the continuing development of technologies (Q.12).
Section III
Candidates showed strength in these areas:
- knowing what is meant by the term ‘innovative’ (Q.13 (a))
- describing a wide range of sources that inspire designers, such as exploring existing related products or ideas, personal satisfaction, meeting client and consumer needs, nature and new materials (Q.13 (a))
- displaying an understanding of the relationship that exists between timing, economic conditions and the probability of design success (Q.13 (b))
- writing responses of appropriate length that address the full scope of the question (Q.13 (a) and (b)).
Candidates need to improve in these areas:
- developing a deeper understanding of how sources of inspiration can influence creativity and innovation (Q.13 (a))
- understanding the role that the acknowledgement and use of historical occasions and data play in determining the success or failure of designs (Q.13 (b))
- ensuring that all aspects of the question are responded to when writing their response (Q.13 (b)).
