中文（繁體）
中文（简体）
English
IB Design Technology SL Drill Guide: Papers 1, 2 and the Project
TUTORZONE EXAM DRILL GUIDE · IB DESIGN TECHNOLOGY SL
Built on the IB Design Technology SL course: Paper 1 carries 20%, Paper 2 40% and the design project 40%; one hour for Paper 1 and 1 h 30 for Paper 2. Method only: the order across the three components, calculations versus essays, pacing and a 12-week plan.
How is IB Design Technology SL assessed, and what does each part carry?
Paper 1 (multiple choice): Officially 1 hour; 10 questions (20 marks) in this paper (20%); Paper 2 (short answer and extended response): Officially 1 h 30; 5 questions (30 marks) in this paper (40%); Design project (internal assessment): Individual design project, report up to 3,500 words (33 marks) (40%)
Assessment at a glance (2027)
| Component | Content | Weighting | Duration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 (multiple choice) | Officially 1 hour; 10 questions (20 marks) in this paper | 20% | 1 h |
| Paper 2 (short answer and extended response) | Officially 1 h 30; 5 questions (30 marks) in this paper | 40% | 1 h 30 min |
| Design project (internal assessment) | Individual design project, report up to 3,500 words (33 marks) | 40% | 50 h |
Time is where SL candidates lose most: ten multiple-choice items in an hour (about two minutes each) and a written paper finished inside 1 h 30. Take the calculation items first, then the concept items, and put the judgement sentence in the first paragraph of every extended answer.
What each paper is actually testing
| Paper | Drill focus | How marks are lost |
|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 (multiple choice) | concept recognition: ergonomics, materials, life cycle | Paper 1 time split evenly across ten items, so the later calculations are left and the two-minute rhythm breaks |
| Paper 2 (short answer and extended response) | analysis and argument built around one product | Paper 2 lists a product shortcomings with no comparison, judgement or reason, so the answer stays descriptive |
| Design project (internal assessment) | five criteria starting from the redesign of an existing product | The design project starts in the last two months, only three of five criteria are met, and iteration and testing go unrecorded |
What is each IB Design Technology SL paper really testing, and what should you drill?
Paper 1 (multiple choice): concept recognition: ergonomics, materials, life cycle; Paper 2 (short answer and extended response): analysis and argument built around one product; Design project (internal assessment): five criteria starting from the redesign of an existing product
Drill order: by topic, then by year, then the mark scheme
| Step | What you do | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 1. By topic | Work through each topic, starting with the paper that allows least help (no calculator / closed book) | Exposes what is genuinely not understood |
| 2. By year | Whole papers to time, one or two a week | Trains pace, stamina and question selection |
| 3. Mark scheme | Go through the marking scheme question by question and log the scoring steps you missed | Most lost marks are written wrong, not thought wrong |
Should drilling go by topic first or by year?
By topic first, then whole papers by year, then the mark scheme. The first third of the time goes topic by topic (8-10 years of the same topic back to back), the middle switches to timed whole papers, and the last fortnight only redoes the recurring errors from your log.
A 12-week drilling timetable
| Week | Phase | What to do |
|---|---|---|
| Weeks 1-3 | By topic: foundation | Topic by topic, starting with the easiest marks, building habits and recall |
| Weeks 4-6 | By topic: core | 8-10 years of the same topic back to back, errors classified by topic |
| Weeks 7-8 | By topic: advanced and electives | Elective and higher-order topics, now under time pressure |
| Weeks 9-10 | By year: timed papers | One full paper a week, timed, no reference materials |
| Week 11 | Mark scheme work | Question by question against the marking scheme; list the scoring steps you omitted |
| Week 12 | Plug holes and simulate | Only the recurring errors from your log, then one full exam simulation |
Subject-specific weighting for this timetable: Twelve weeks on SL. Weeks 1-4 drill Paper 1 concept by concept, two a week (ergonomics, materials, life-cycle, sustainability), each paired with a real product and a set of figures, then its calculation items written out with formula, substitution and units. Weeks 5-8 turn to Paper 2, one a week, short answers first and every essay paragraph opening with a judgement. Weeks 9-11 are timed papers (1 h and 1 h 30) while checking the project against each criterion descriptor. The last week reads only the log and the project mark scheme.
Use it properly: this is not a checklist to finish. Every week must keep time for redoing errors, or from week 9 you will be repeating the same batch.
Pacing
| Paper | Time | Suggested split |
|---|---|---|
| Paper 1 (multiple choice) | 1 h | about 2 min per question, calculations first |
| Paper 2 (short answer and extended response) | 1 h 30 min | 45 min short answer, 45 min extended response |
| Design project (internal assessment) | 50 h | staged across the two years, never left to the last two months |
How should the time be split inside each IB Design Technology SL paper?
Paper 1 (multiple choice): about 2 min per question, calculations first; Paper 2 (short answer and extended response): 45 min short answer, 45 min extended response; Design project (internal assessment): staged across the two years, never left to the last two months
The drilling mistakes that cost the most marks
| Mistake | What it looks like | What actually happens | Instead |
|---|---|---|---|
| Mixing up the SL and HL weightings | Quoting SL 20/40/40 as HL 25/45/30 | Study time is allocated to the wrong component and the design project is underweighted | Write your own level’s three numbers down first: SL 20/40/40, HL 25/45/30 |
| Terms memorised but not applied | Knowing what a life cycle analysis is, never having seen one run on real data | Paper 2 is built on a product; a bare definition earns nothing | Attach one real product and one set of numbers to every concept |
| Extended answers that only describe | Listing a product’s faults with no comparison, judgement or reason | The judgement marks in the extended items are all lost | Every paragraph needs a because and a closing conclusion |
| Calculations with no units or steps | Writing 40.9 with no mA, skipping the formula and substitution | Method and unit marks go together | Formula, substitution, units, then the answer |
The error log and the mark scheme
Three columns: concept (the term is recognised but no product or figure comes to mind), steps (formula, units or substitution missing in a calculation), judgement (no comparison or conclusion sentence in an essay). The first and third are fixed together: one product analysis per concept scores in both columns.
How many years should you drill?
The Design Technology guide has been revised, changing the Paper 1 and Paper 2 weightings and the internal assessment criteria, so older sessions cannot be drilled as if current. Work whole papers from the recent sessions, pull older years for concept items only, and check question types against the specimen questions in the current guide.
How many years of past papers is enough?
The Design Technology guide has been revised, changing the Paper 1 and Paper 2 weightings and the internal assessment criteria, so older sessions cannot be drilled as if current. Work whole papers from the recent sessions, pull older years for concept items only, and check question types against the specimen questions in the current guide.
Frequently asked questions
Is this page a mock paper or a drilling guide?
This is the IB Design Technology SL drilling guide: assessment structure, drill order, a 12-week timetable, pacing, common mark losses and the error-log method. For questions with answers, use the IB Design Technology SL mock papers linked under Related.
By topic or by year first?
By topic. Eight to ten years of the same topic back to back is what exposes repeating errors; going straight to whole papers just repeats the same batch under time pressure.
How should the error log be written?
Do not copy out questions. Per error record four things: question reference, which step failed (concept, wording, calculation), what the mark scheme requires, and the correct action next time.
The project is 40% – can I drill Paper 2 less?
No. Both test the same concepts in different forms: the project assesses the record of process, Paper 2 the timed expression. A strong project usually gives Paper 2 essays their material, provided each product analysis is written as a quotable paragraph rather than left in sketches.
Should SL candidates study the HL extension material?
No. SL and HL differ in weighting (SL 20/40/40, HL 25/45/30) and in depth, so HL extension work only crowds out the SL core. Revisit it once all three SL components sit at the target grade.
Official references
| Resource | What to use it for |
|---|---|
| IBO design technology subject brief (first assessment 2027) | Check the paper times, weightings and the five design-project criteria |
| IB design technology course updates (IBO) | Confirm that Paper 3 is gone, that the criteria are common to SL and HL, and the word limit |
Related: IB Design Technology SL mock paper with answers | practice papers index
Next step: find a tutor / register as a tutor
After drilling, the hard part is telling a conceptual error from a writing error. Tell us the year group, the school and your available times, and TutorZone will match you with a tutor who knows the HKEAA assessment requirements.
Demand for tutors in this subject is steady, and those who can explain the marking scheme and where marks are won are especially sought after. Register free; you pay only when a match succeeds.
