中文（繁體）
中文（简体）
English
IB Design Technology SL: Drilling Paper 1, Paper 2 and the Design Project
TUTORZONE EXAM DRILL GUIDE · IB DESIGN TECHNOLOGY SL: CONCEPTS, PRODUCT DATA, PROJECT EVIDENCE
Design Technology SL is most often mis-weighted: multiple choice 20%, short answer and extended response 40%, design project 40%, and two of the three rest on product evidence built up over the year rather than on last-minute memorising. This page is the drilling method only – how to spread a 12-week plan across the three parts, the order to read each paper, how to cut the time, and what the error log should record.
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 | Multiple choice is answered on impression, without separating human factors, materials and life-cycle, so a reworded option wins. |
| Paper 2 (short answer and extended response) | analysis and argument built around one product | Short answers define terms but never attach them to the data of the named product, and the extended response carries no comparison or judgement. |
| Design project (internal assessment) | five criteria starting from the redesign of an existing product | The design project reads as a process log with no reason given for each revision and no test or user feedback behind it. |
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: Weeks 1-3: sweep the concepts once, giving each one a real product and a set of figures – material, service life, cost – on a card. Use multiple choice only for recognising question types and mark which word in the option was changed.
Weeks 4-6: timed papers. Hold the multiple choice to its limit; answer each short question in three lines, concept, product evidence, conclusion; keep the extended response to describe, compare, judge, with one causal sentence per paragraph.
Weeks 7-9: the design project. Turn the five criteria into a checklist, write the reason and the expected effect before every revision, and file test data or user feedback as evidence next to the criterion it answers.
Weeks 10-12: redo only the recurring question types, add two full papers, and write the three weightings and times on the back of the admission slip.
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
The error log keeps three columns, one part of the course per page: the question and its command word; the move that lost the mark, whether a confused concept, missing product data or an unjudged discussion; and the fixed move for next time. Three entries in the same column and that question type gets ten more attempts.
How many years should you drill?
The Design Technology course and its weightings have been revised, so old sessions cannot be copied wholesale: confirm the three weightings against the current guide and specimen material first, then use older questions as concept practice and take only their phrasing and data presentation. The design project is internally assessed with no published past questions, so every revision during the year has to leave evidence behind.
How many years of past papers is enough?
The Design Technology course and its weightings have been revised, so old sessions cannot be copied wholesale: confirm the three weightings against the current guide and specimen material first, then use older questions as concept practice and take only their phrasing and data presentation. The design project is internally assessed with no published past questions, so every revision during the year has to leave evidence behind.
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.
Should SL students drill HL questions?
Not as full papers, but HL extension material is useful for concept practice because its data and charts are richer. SL short answers still demand product-based analysis, and the difficulty lies in applying concepts to real figures, not in the question itself.
How can the design project be drilled?
Not with papers, but with a checklist built from the five criteria: write the reason and expected effect before each revision, then file test data or user feedback next to the criterion it answers. By assessment time the pages with evidence beside each criterion mark themselves.
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 |
Original mock: IB Design Technology SL mock paper with answers; more practice in the practice area.
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.
