Scheme of assessment

Find past papers and mark schemes, and specimen papers for new courses, on our website at aqa.org.uk/pastpapers

This specification is designed to be taken over two years.

This is a linear qualification. In order to achieve the award, students must complete all assessments at the end of the course and in the same series.

A-level exams and certification for this specification are available for the first time in May/June 2019 and then every May/June for the life of the specification.

All materials are available in English only.

Our A-level exams in Design and Technology: Product Design include questions that allow students to demonstrate their ability to:

  • recall information
  • draw together information from different areas of the specification
  • apply their knowledge and understanding in practical and theoretical contexts.

Aims

Courses based on this specification must encourage students to:

  • be open to taking design risks, showing innovation and enterprise whilst considering their role as responsible designers and citizens
  • develop intellectual curiosity about the design and manufacture of products and systems, and their impact on daily life and the wider world
  • work collaboratively to develop and refine their ideas, responding to feedback from users, peers and expert practitioners
  • gain an insight into the creative, engineering and/or manufacturing industries
  • develop the capacity to think creatively, innovatively and critically through focused research and the exploration of design opportunities arising from the needs, wants and values of users and clients
  • develop knowledge and experience of real world contexts for design and technological activity
  • develop an in-depth knowledge and understanding of materials, components and processes associated with the creation of products that can be tested and evaluated in use
  • be able to make informed design decisions through an in-depth understanding of the management and development of taking a design through to a prototype/product
  • be able to create and analyse a design concept and use a range of skills and knowledge from other subject areas, including maths and science, to inform decisions in design and the application or development of technology
  • be able to work safely and skillfully to produce high-quality prototypes/products
  • have a critical understanding of the wider influences on design and technology, including cultural, economic, environmental, historical and social factors
  • develop the ability to draw on and apply a range of skills and knowledge from other subject areas, including the use of maths and science for analysis and informing decisions in design.

Assessment objectives

Assessment objectives (AOs) are set by Ofqual and are the same across all A-level Design and Technology: Product Design specifications and all exam boards.

The exams and non-exam assessment will measure how students have achieved the following assessment objectives.

  • AO1: Identify, investigate and outline design possibilities to address needs and wants.
  • AO2: Design and make prototypes that are fit for purpose.
  • AO3: Analyse and evaluate:
    • design decisions and outcomes, including for prototypes made by themselves and others
    • wider issues in design and technology.
  • AO4: Demonstrate and apply knowledge and understanding of:
    • technical principles
    • designing and making principles.

Assessment objective weightings for A-level Design and Technology: Product Design

Assessment objectives (AOs) Component weightings Overall weighting
Paper 1 Paper 2 NEA
AO1     15 15
AO2     25 25
AO3 7.5 7.5 10 25
AO4 22.5 12.5   35
Overall weighting of components 30 20 50 100

Assessment weightings

The marks awarded on the papers will be scaled to meet the weighting of the components. Students’ final marks will be calculated by adding together the scaled marks for each component. Grade boundaries will be set using this total scaled mark. The scaling and total scaled marks are shown in the table below.

Component Maximum raw mark Scaling factor Maximum scaled mark
Paper 1 120 x1 120
Paper 2 80 x1 80
NEA 100 x2 200
Total scaled mark: 400

Non-exam assessment criteria

Setting the task

Students must undertake a substantial design and make task and produce a final prototype based on a context and design brief developed by the student.

Taking the task

With reference to the context, students will develop a specific brief that meets the needs of a user, client or market.

The brief must be of an appropriate level of complexity and contain a degree of uncertainty of the outcome so that students can engage in an iterative process of designing, making, testing and evaluating.

Students must produce a final prototype based on the design brief they have developed, along with a written or digital design folder or portfolio.

Students must produce a written or digital design folder clearly evidencing how the assessment criteria have been met together with photographic evidence of the final manufactured prototype outcome.

Evidence

Students must produce a final prototype based on the design brief that they have developed.

Students should produce a concise folder. We recommend that this folder should not exceed 45 pages.

Students who do not follow these guidelines will penalise themselves by not meeting the expectations of the assessment appropriately.

Students that exceed the recommended length will self-penalise by not being appropriately focused on the demands of the task. Students that produce work that is shorter than the recommended page count will self-penalise by not allowing appropriate coverage of the assessment objectives.

Time limits

Time limits for completion of the NEA are not specified because the process of producing the design portfolio is iterative and undertaken independently, while the final prototype is manufactured under immediate guidance or supervision in school/college. Where specialist processes or equipment are required beyond the school/college they may be utilised but this must be documented in the Candidate Record Form (CRF).

We expect students to be selective in their choice of material to include, and to manage their time appropriately.

Marking the task

Five criteria are produced for assessment. Each band should be viewed holistically when making assessments. Students who produce no work for a criterion, or who produce work below that of A-level standard, should be awarded a mark of zero.

The criteria should not be viewed as a linear process to be followed in a step-by-step manner. Rather students should be encouraged to cross reference the criteria throughout, and assessors encouraged to award marks where they are deserved and can be evidenced.

Guidance on applying the marking critieria

Level of response marking instructions are broken down into mark bands, each of which has a descriptor. The descriptor for the mark band shows the average performance for the level required. Before you apply the mark scheme to a student’s project, review both the prototype and portfolio and annotate/make notes on it to show the qualities that are being looked for. You can then apply the marking criteria. Start at the lowest band of the marking criteria and use it as a ladder to see whether the work meets the descriptor for that band. The descriptor for the band indicates the different qualities that might be seen in the student’s work for that level. If it meets descriptors for the lowest band then go to the next one and decide if it meets this, and so on, until you have a match between the band descriptor and the student's work. You can compare your student’s work with the standardisation examples to determine if it is the same standard, better or worse. When assigning a level you should look at the overall quality of the work. If the project covers different aspects of different levels of the mark scheme you should use a best fit approach for defining the level and then use the variability of the work to help decide the mark within the band.

To select the most appropriate mark in the band descriptor, teachers should use the following guidance to locate the best fit:

  • where the student’s work fully meets all statements, the highest mark should be awarded
  • where the student’s work mostly meets all statements, the most appropriate mark in the middle of the range should be awarded
  • where the student’s work just meets the majority of statements, the lowest mark should be awarded.

There will be instances where a student fully meets for example 3/4 statements but only just meets the other. In this scenario a best fit approach should be taken. If, in this scenario, the range of marks within the band was 16–20, then a mark of 18/19 would be appropriate.

Feedback

Students are free to revise and redraft a piece of work before submitting the final piece for assessment. You can review draft work and provide generic feedback to ensure that the work is appropriately focussed. In providing generic feedback you can:

  • provide feedback in oral and/or written form
  • advise on resources that could be used
  • remind students of the key sections that should be included in their final folder.

In providing generic feedback you cannot:

  • correct a student’s work
  • provide templates, model answers or writing frames
  • provide specific feedback to students on how to improve their projects to meet the requirements of the marking criteria
  • provide feedback where a student has produced an incomplete stage and this is sufficient to allow progression to the next stage. If such support is given to students, then this must be recorded on the Candidate Record Form (CRF) and the students mark should be adjusted accordingly.

Whilst students may be guided in general terms, the final outcome must remain their own. Advice can be used to evaluate progress to date. A clear distinction must be drawn between providing feedback to students as part of work in progress and reviewing work once it has been submitted by the student for final assessment.

Once work is submitted for final assessment it cannot be revised. It is not acceptable for you to give, either to individual students or to groups, feedback and suggestions as to how the work may be improved in order to meet the marking criteria.

In accordance with the JCQ Instructions for conducting NEAs, any support or feedback given to individual students which has not been provided to the class as a whole must be clearly recorded on the CRF and the student’s mark must be appropriately adjusted to represent the student’s unaided achievement.

Assessment criteria

  Section Criteria Maximun marks
AO1 (30 marks)

Identify, investigate & outline design possibilities

A

Identifying and investigating design possibilities

20

B

Producing a design brief and specification

10
A02 (50 marks)

Design & make prototypes that are fit for purpose

C

Development of design proposal(s)

25

D

Development of design prototype(s)

25

A03 (20 marks)

Analyse & evaluate

E

Analysing and evaluating

20

Section A: Identify and investigate design possibilities

Central to the success of the NEA is the selection, by the student, of a context that will provide them with the opportunity to challenge themselves as a designer. Care should be taken, and guidance sought, to ensure that the context chosen offers the student the scope and complexity for a piece of work that is worthy of consideration for the award of an A-level.

Having chosen their context and potential user(s) they then need to plan and carry out an extensive investigation into all aspects of the context in order that they might operate from a position of knowledge when making subsequent decisions.

The student will be expected to employ a variety of both primary and secondary methods of investigation. These might include visits organised by themselves or others, surveys and questionnaires could be used to inform. Useful and relevant material can be gained from others via the internet, books, magazines or interviews. Students should also be encouraged to undertake, where relevant, practical experimentation and disassembly as methods for further understanding and exploring the context and its related issues.

At this stage it is expected that the student will begin to explore their thinking on possible solutions by producing concept ideas that take into account the information collected. At this stage of the process these first concept ideas will merely demonstrate the student's initial thinking and should serve to stimulate later more considered thoughts regarding their design proposal(s) and design prototype(s).

It should be noted that it is not expected that the assessment criteria be seen as a linear process and that aspects from this, and other assessment criteria, might be present throughout the student’s portfolio. Wherever it takes place, it is expected that this work will be rewarded.

Mark

Description

16–20

  • Excellent rationale provided for the context selected, with continuous reference throughout the project to the end user and the constraints that need to be considered in formulating a final solution.
  • Student employs a comprehensive range of strategies and techniques, including both primary and secondary methods of investigation, practical experimentation and disassembly, to thoroughly explore design opportunities. All sources have been fully referenced.
  • First concepts are both fully relevant to the context and feasible for further development and are clearly communicated through a fully appropriate variety of methods and techniques.
  • All investigations relate directly to the design context, issues are identified and fully addressed and the student demonstrates a detailed and perceptive understanding of the information gathered.

11–15

  • Good rationale provided for the context selected with clear reference to the end user and the constraints that need to be considered in formulating a final solution.
  • Student employs a broad range of strategies and techniques, which may include primary and secondary methods of investigation and/or practical experimentation to explore design opportunities. Most sources have been fully referenced.
  • First concepts are mostly relevant to the context and feasible for further development and are communicated through a variety of methods and techniques which are mostly appropriate.
  • Most investigations relate directly to the design context, issues are identified and addressed and the student demonstrates a good understanding of the information gathered.

6–10

  • Adequate rationale is provided but lacks focus for the context selected with some reference to the end user and consideration of the constraints in formulating a final solution which may lack clarity.
  • Student employs a limited range of strategies and techniques, which may include some practical activities, to explore design opportunities. Some sources have been referenced.
  • First concepts show some relevance to the context and may be feasible for further development and are communicated through a limited variety of methods and techniques that may not be appropriate.
  • Some investigations relate to the design context, issues are identified but may not be fully addressed and the student demonstrates an adequate understanding of the information gathered.

1–5

  • Limited rationale provided for the context selected with minimal reference to the end user and the constraints that need to be considered in formulating a final solution.
  • Student employs a single strategy or technique, which may include practical activities, to explore design opportunities. Source referencing is minimal.
  • First concepts show little relevance to the context and are unlikely to be feasible for further development. These are communicated through basic methods and/or techniques.
  • Investigations may not relate directly to the design context, a limited number of issues are identified but not addressed and the student demonstrates only a basic understanding of the information gathered.

0

Nothing worthy of credit.

Section B: Producing a design brief and specification

The student is required to produce a clearly stated and challenging design brief that addresses the context and meets the needs of the intended user(s).

The student should formulate a fully detailed design specification that is informed by their investigations and makes full use of the material collated. Statements in the specification need to be clear and unambiguous. There should be specific references to measurable outcomes as well as qualitative statements. Whatever format is chosen to present the specification it is expected that this will be a live and working document that will be constantly referenced throughout the process.

The specification should also include details on how the student intends to organise their time and activities in order to ensure a successful completion of the process.

It should be noted that it is not expected that the assessment criteria be seen as a linear process and aspects from this, and other assessment criteria, might be present throughout the student’s portfolio. Wherever it takes place, it is expected that this work will be rewarded.

Mark

Description

9–10

  • A comprehensive, clearly stated and challenging design brief resulting from a thorough consideration of investigations undertaken, that fully addresses both the context and the needs and wants of the intended user(s).
  • The student has produced a comprehensive, detailed and well explained design specification which will fully guide the student's design thinking.
  • A detailed project management approach to prototype development, including time management and determining quantities and costs of materials, has been fully integrated into the specification.

6–8

  • A well considered design brief with a degree of challenge, resulting from well considered investigations, that addresses the context and most of the needs and wants of the intended user(s).
  • The student has produced a detailed and partially explained design specification which will help to guide the student's design thinking.
  • There is evidence of a project management approach to prototype development including time management and determining quantities and costs of materials, but may be lacking in detail.

3–5

  • An adequate design brief which may lack challenge and clarity, resulting from partially considered investigations that only superficially address the context and the needs and wants of the intended user(s).
  • The student has produced a design specification which is lacking in some detail and will only guide student's design thinking to a limited extent.
  • There is some evidence of a basic project management approach to prototype development including time management and determining quantities and costs of materials related to the development of the prototype, but it is not fully integrated into the specification.
1–2
  • A basic design brief, lacking both clarity and challenge which makes limited use of the investigations, may not address the context in full and only meets some of the needs and wants of the intended user(s).
  • The student has produced a design specification which contains minimal detail and does not guide their design thinking.
  • There is minimal evidence of project management being considered as part of the specification.

0

Nothing worthy of credit.

Section C: Development of design proposals

Design proposals should reflect on first concepts and take full account of the design brief and design specification. The aim should be that the development of their design proposal(s) leads to a prototype that can be manufactured by the student given their skills and experience. In developing their proposals the student will be expected to make constant reference to their design brief and design specification, to identify if further investigations are required and to carry these out. Design proposals can be demonstrated through a variety of different media, but whatever methods are chosen, they should be of a high quality befitting this level of qualification and show evidence of analysis and annotation (although these elements are not assessed in this assessment criteria). Modelling is seen as a key element of this assessment criteria, whether this be part modelling, practicing of manufacturing and finishing techniques, the production of scale models or material experimentation. There is also the expectation that students will produce working drawings, plans and patterns to enable successful prototype manufacturing to take place. The use of CAD is encouraged, but this should not be the only form of design communication that is used.

It should be noted that it is not expected that the assessment criteria be seen as a linear process and aspects from this, and other assessment criteria, might be present throughout the student’s portfolio. Wherever it takes place, it is expected that this work will be rewarded.

Mark

Description

19–25

  • The rationale for design decisions is clearly documented and fully justified with constant reference being made to the design brief, specification and investigations throughout the development of their design proposal.
  • In the development of innovative design proposals the student will demonstrate clear evidence of originality, creativity and a willingness to take design risks.
  • Excellent use of a variety of modelling techniques to support ongoing development work throughout. This is supported by the use of drawings, sketches, annotations and notes showing clear evidence of design thinking.
  • Excellent ongoing development of design proposals, achieved through exploration of and experimentation with different materials, techniques and processes leading to an excellent quality design of a prototype for manufacture.
  • Comprehensive and fully detailed manufacturing specification produced which makes specific reference to relevant quality control checks and allows fully accurate interpretation by a third party.
  • Project management for manufacturing allows for further development of design proposals in response to ongoing evaluation, testing and full consideration of contingency planning as prototype development takes place.

13–18

  • The rationale for design decisions is documented and justified with regular reference being made to the design brief, specification and investigations throughout the development of their design proposal.
  • In the development of their design proposals, many of which will demonstrate an innovative approach, the student will demonstrate evidence of originality, creativity and a willingness to take design risks.
  • Good use of modelling techniques support ongoing development work throughout, showing clear evidence of design thinking supported by the use of drawings, sketches, annotations and notes.
  • Good ongoing development of design proposals, achieved through exploration of and experimentation with different materials, techniques and processes leading to a good quality design of a prototype for manufacture.
  • A detailed manufacturing specification is produced which includes reference to relevant quality control checks and allows for mostly accurate interpretation by a third party.
  • Project management for manufacturing allows for some further development of design proposals in response to ongoing evaluation and testing with some consideration of contingency planning as prototype development takes place.

7–12

  • The rationale for design decisions is documented with some justification and reference to the design brief, specification and investigations throughout the development of their design proposal.
  • In the development of their design proposals, some of which will demonstrate evidence of innovation, there will be elements of originality, creativity and a willingness to take design risks.
  • Adequate use of modelling techniques to support development work. There is evidence of drawings, sketches, annotations and notes which can be seen to inform subsequent design thinking.
  • Some ongoing development of design proposals, achieved through exploration of and experimentation with different materials, techniques and processes leading to an adequate quality design of a prototype for manufacture.
  • An adequate manufacturing specification produced which makes some reference to quality control checks and allows partially accurate interpretation by a third party.
  • Project management for manufacturing allows for some further development of design proposals in response to evaluation and testing and enables the made outcome to be achieved in a realistic and achievable timescale.

1–6

  • The rationale for design decisions is documented but this may not always be justified and may be lacking reference to the design brief, specification and investigations during the development of their design proposal.
  • In the development of their design proposals the student will demonstrate little evidence of innovation, originality, creativity and willingness to take design risks.
  • Basic use of a single or only simple, modelling technique(s), with limited evidence that this supports any subsequent development work. There is some evidence of drawings, sketches, annotations or notes but these do not always inform their design thinking.
  • Basic refinement of design proposals, with only basic exploration and experimentation of different materials, techniques and processes leading to a basic quality design of a prototype for manufacture.
  • A basic manufacturing specification produced with limited reference to quality control checks, which may not be sufficiently detailed for a third party to interpret accurately.
  • Superficial evidence that project management for manufacturing allows for further development of design proposals and which may not enable the made outcome to be achieved in a realistic timescale.

0

Nothing worthy of credit.

Section D: Development of design prototypes

Design prototypes are just that, they need to be directly related to the design proposals and show consideration, at all stages, of how the design thinking continues to be developed and the prototype(s) refined. Given the level of this qualification it is expected that the student will demonstrate their practical skills to a high level using all of the potential resources, tools, machines and equipment at their disposal. During the development of their design prototype(s) the student should be encouraged to continue to experiment and adapt their design proposals as they progress. Constant testing and evaluation is expected to form part of this process. The use of CAM is encouraged, but this should not be the only form of manufacturing that is used.

It should be noted that it is not expected that the assessment criteria be seen as a linear process and that aspects from this, and other assessment criteria, might be present throughout the student’s portfolio. Wherever it takes place, it is expected that this work will be rewarded.

Mark

Description

19–25

  • Excellent justification provided for selection of appropriate materials and components and proposed techniques and processes, demonstrating an excellent understanding of material properties to ensure excellent quality prototype(s) that are fit for purpose.
  • Significant complexity or challenge is involved throughout the production of prototype(s). The student demonstrates excellent manufacturing skills combined with an excellent understanding of the need for dimensional accuracy and precision.
  • The student has selected and used appropriate tools, machinery and equipment, including CAM where required, and worked with a high level of skill, precision and accuracy to produce their prototype(s).
  • Prototype(s) fully address the design brief, satisfying all major points of the specification and take into account all amendments/modifications to their original design proposals as necessary.
  • Student makes all required modifications to the prototype in a fully considered manner in light of feedback from user trials and third party feedback and as a result of testing and evaluation carried out against earlier iterations of the prototype.
  • Quality assurance is evident throughout and it is clear where planned quality control checks have been applied throughout the process to ensure consistency and safety.
  • Clear evidence throughout the manufacturing process that appropriate health and safety processes have been both considered and employed.

13–18

  • Good justification provided for selection of appropriate materials and components and proposed techniques and processes demonstrating a good understanding of material properties to ensure good quality prototype(s) that are fit for purpose.
  • There is some complexity or challenge involved throughout the production of prototype(s). The student demonstrates good manufacturing skills combined with a generally sound understanding of the need for dimensional accuracy/precision.
  • The student has selected and used appropriate tools, machinery and equipment, including CAM where required, and worked with a good level of skill, precision and accuracy to produce their prototype(s).
  • Prototype(s) mostly address the design brief, satisfying the majority of major points of specification and takes into account some amendments/modifications to their original design proposals as necessary.
  • Student makes some well thought out modifications to their prototype in light of feedback from user trials and third party feedback and as a result of testing and evaluation carried out against earlier iterations of the prototype.
  • Quality assurance is evident at most stages in the process and it is clear where planned quality control checks have been applied to ensure consistency and safety.
  • There is evidence throughout the manufacturing process that appropriate health and safety processes have been both considered and employed.

7–12

  • Adequate justification provided for selection of appropriate materials and components and proposed techniques and processes demonstrating an adequate understanding of material properties to ensure adequate quality prototype(s) that are mostly fit for purpose.
  • There is some complexity or challenge within aspects of the prototype. The student demonstrates adequate manufacturing skills combined with some understanding of the need for dimensional accuracy/precision.
  • The student has selected and used appropriate tools, machinery and equipment, including CAM where required, and worked with an adequate level of skill, precision and accuracy to produce their prototype(s).
  • Prototype(s) partially address the design brief, satisfying some of the major points of specification, but do not always take into account amendments/modifications to their original design proposals.
  • Student makes some superficial modifications to their prototype(s) in light of feedback from user trials and third party feedback and as a result of testing and evaluation carried out against earlier iterations of the prototype.
  • Quality assurance is evident at stages in the process and it is clear where quality control checks have been applied to ensure consistency and safety.
  • There is some evidence during the manufacturing process that appropriate health and safety processes have been both considered and employed.

1–6

  • Little justification provided for selection of materials and components and proposed techniques and processes, not all of which may be appropriate, only a basic understanding of material properties demonstrated which may lead to the production of an inadequate prototype(s).
  • The development of the prototype(s) offers little in the way of complexity or challenge, only basic manufacturing skills are demonstrated, showing little understanding of the need for accuracy and precision.
  • The student has selected and used appropriate tools, machinery and equipment, including CAM where required, but has worked with only a basic level of skill, precision and accuracy to produce their prototype(s).
  • Prototype(s) address only few parts of the design brief, and few of the major points of specification, they do not take into account amendments/modifications to their original design proposals.
  • Student makes a few minor modifications to their prototype in light of feedback from user trials and third party feedback and as a result of testing and evaluation carried out against earlier iterations of the prototype.
  • Basic quality assurance is sporadic throughout the process and it is not always clear where quality control checks have been applied.
  • There is little evidence during the manufacturing process that appropriate health and safety processes have been both considered and employed.

0

Nothing worthy of credit.

Section E: Analysing and evaluating

In awarding marks for this section it is vital to remember that evidence for analysing and evaluating can take place in any part of the NEA. Students should be encouraged to be constantly analyzing their work and recording their thoughts in order to explain their thinking. Ongoing evaluation should be seen to be informing the decision making process, particularly being used to bring about modifications to design proposals and prototype development. Central to this is the close and regular involvement of the proposed client/user(s) making sure that the prototype is both fit for purpose and meets the requirements of the client/user(s) rather than just meeting those of the student.

Mark

Description

16–20

  • Comprehensive evidence of analysis and evaluation throughout the process, which has clearly informed the chosen context, client or user and the subsequent development and manufacture of the prototype.
  • Testing is carried out in a focused and comprehensive way with clear evidence of how the results have been used to inform the design and any modifications to the prototype.
  • Student has provided a well reasoned critical analysis of their final outcome which links clearly to their design brief and specification and provides full justification for the extent to which the prototype is both fit for purpose and meets the needs of the client/user.
  • A comprehensive critical evaluation of their final prototype, clearly identifying how modifications could be made to improve the outcome, together with a full justification for these modifications and full consideration provided for how the prototype could be developed for different production methods.

11–15

  • Good evidence of analysis and evaluation at most stages of the process which has informed the chosen context, client or user and the subsequent development and manufacture of the prototype.
  • Testing is carried out in a focused manner with some evidence of how the results have been used either to inform the design or to make any modifications to the prototype.
  • Student has provided a reasoned critical analysis of their final outcome which links to their design brief and specification and provides some justification for the extent to which the prototype is fit for purpose and meets most of the client/user needs.
  • A good evaluation of their final prototype together with clear justification for modifications that could be made to improve the outcome and informed consideration provided for how the prototype could be developed for different production methods.

6–10

  • Adequate evidence of analysis and evaluation at some stages of the process which has had some influence on the chosen context, client or user and the subsequent development and manufacture of the prototype.
  • Testing is carried out with minimal evidence that the results have been used to either inform the design or to make modifications to the prototype.
  • Student has provided an analysis of their final outcome with some links to their design brief and specification and makes reference to how the prototype is fit for purpose and meets some client/user needs.
  • An adequate evaluation of their final prototype together with some justification for modifications that could be made to improve the outcome as well as some consideration given to how the prototype could be developed for different production methods.

1–5

  • Basic evidence of analysis and evaluation which has had limited influence upon the chosen context, client or user and the subsequent development and manufacture of the prototype.
  • Testing has been carried out but the results may not have been used to inform subsequent design or modifications to the prototype.
  • Student has provided a superficial analysis of their final outcome which may not refer to the design brief and specification and which does not address the extent to which the prototype is either fit for purpose or meets client/user needs.
  • Evaluation of final prototype is superficial and any suggestions for modifications are made with little if any justification and there is little or no consideration as to how the prototype could be developed for different production methods.

0

Nothing worthy of credit.