DESIGN-TECHNOLOGY · IB Diploma Programme
DESIGN-TECHNOLOGY/22
(HL/SL Core)
Design technology · 2023 · Variant 2
Relative difficulty
Analysis source: International Baccalaureate Organization
Analysis aligned to the official syllabus and assessment design.
3.2 / 5
76
135 min
Resource management and sustainable production (Core)
Cohort performance
Session statistics from official examination reports
Total marks
76
Duration
135 min
Session difficulty
3.2 / 5
Key examiner messages
Top priorities from the principal examiner before you revise
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers.
Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products.
From the ergonomics of legendary chairs to the manufacturing techniques of electric vehicles and sustainable toys, the paper demands both broad syllabus coverage and deep analytical capability.
Compare difficulty across recent years. Compare topic weight by year to spot recurring and returning areas.
Question difficulty map
How candidates performed on each question in this series
No data available in official reports
Assessment objectives
Skill and AO weighting from official examiner commentary
Skill weighting
Shows the skill mix this paper tested most heavily.
Design
Weight: 9100%Analysis
Weight: 889%Materials &
Weight: 778%Manuf
Weight: 667%Ergonomic &
Weight: 556%Psych
Weight: 444%Cycle Analysis
Weight: 333%Graphical and
Weight: 111%
Method marks watchlist
Where working, steps, or method marks were commonly lost
No data available in official reports
Recurring mistakes across years
Themes examiners flag in multiple recent sessions for this subject
No data available in official reports
Question choice intelligence
Mean scores and popularity for optional questions (HKDSE electives)
No data available in official reports
Level exemplars
What candidate scripts at each grade level looked like
No data available in official reports
Grade & admission context
How marks relate to grade thresholds and entry standards
Report type
IB subject report — grade distributions, IA weighting, and HL/SL distinctions
Level 7
Excellent — top band for competitive university offers
Level 6
Very good — strong HL performance
Level 5
Good — solid pass at higher level
Level 4
Satisfactory — minimum for many university credits
Level 3
Mediocre
Level 2
Poor
Level 1
Very poor
Deep insights
What top candidates did
Techniques and approaches examiners rewarded in this series
No data available in official reports
Command word playbook
How to match each command word to the expected response style
Match the expected response style for “Outline” questions.
Give reasons and link mechanism to outcome; each point needs a because/so chain.
Match the expected response style for “State” questions.
State features in sequence or list observable properties — do not explain causes unless asked.
Time traps
Sections where candidates spent disproportionate time relative to marks
Min per mark: 2
Min per mark: 1.7
Syllabus traceability
Topics linked to questions and mark weighting in this session
Resource management and sustainable production (Core)
27 marks this session
Raw material to final product (Core)
18 marks this session
Modelling (Core)
10 marks this session
MCQ trap analytics
Commonly chosen wrong options from examiner commentary
No data available in official reports
Topic heatmap across years
Mark concentration by topic and exam year for this subject
Mark intensity
Raw material to final product (Core)
Resource management and sustainable production (Core)
Modelling (Core)
Innovation and design (Core)
Paper comparison
Marks and duration breakdown across papers in this session
Paper 1 (Standard Level):
Paper 2 (Standard & Higher Level):
Marks you can still earn
Where valid approaches outside the mark scheme may still gain credit
No data available in official reports
Practise what examiners flagged
Target weak topics from this report inside the Revui app
Resource management and sustainable production (Core)
27 marks this session
Practise in RevuiRaw material to final product (Core)
18 marks this session
Practise in RevuiModelling (Core)
10 marks this session
Practise in RevuiSelf-diagnostic checklist
Key actions before you sit this paper — copy and tick off as you revise
- 1Message
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers.
- 2Message
Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products.
- 3Message
From the ergonomics of legendary chairs to the manufacturing techniques of electric vehicles and sustainable toys, the paper demands both broad syllabus coverage and deep analytical capability.
- 4Message
Compare difficulty across recent years. Compare topic weight by year to spot recurring and returning areas.
Teacher briefing pack
One-page session summary for tutors and classroom review
2023 2023
Design technology
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers. Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products. From the ergonomics of legendary chairs t
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers.
Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products.
From the ergonomics of legendary chairs to the manufacturing techniques of electric vehicles and sustainable toys, the paper demands both broad syllabus coverage and deep analytical capability.
- Total marks
- 76
- Duration
- 135 min
- Session difficulty
- 3.2 / 5
Session analysis
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers. Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products. From the ergonomics of legendary chairs to the manufacturing techniques of electric vehicles and sustainable toys, the paper demands both broad syllabus coverage and deep analytical capability.
Updated Jun 14, 2026
Paper breakdown
Paper 1 (Standard Level):
Paper 2 (Standard & Higher Level):
Top chapters
Exam structure insights
Marks by chapter
See where the marks were concentrated so revision time goes to the highest-value topics.
Mark accessibility
Estimate which marks were basic, mid-level, or high-difficulty.
82% within easy or medium reach
Command word frequency
Spot common command words so answers match the expected response style.
Question type mix
Compare the mark share of each paper section and question type.
Extended Response
28·4·37%
Multiple Choice
26·26·34%
Short Answer
22·11·29%
Study ROI
Bigger bubbles recur more often; higher bubbles carry more marks, helping you rank revision priorities.
Difficulty trend
Compare difficulty across recent years.
Time vs marks
Compare marks with suggested time allocation to plan exam pacing.
Paper 1
0.58 m/minPaper 2 Section B
0.50 m/minTotal marks
46
Total time
85 min
Avg pace
0.54
Next-year prediction
Topics worth watching next year, with the reason shown directly below each bar.
User-Centred Design (UCD) (AHL)
90%90%
Classic Design Movements (Bauhaus, De Stijl, Art Deco)
85%85%
Sustainable Consumption and Green Design Strategies
80%80%
Paper analysis
The May 2023 assessment represents a highly balanced and contextualized set of papers. Focusing heavily on real-world industrial examples, it challenges students to apply theoretical design concepts directly to modern commercial products. From the ergonomics of legendary chairs to the manufacturing techniques of electric vehicles and sustainable toys, the paper demands both broad syllabus coverage and deep analytical capability.
Exam tips
Paper format
- Duration
- 1h 30min
- Total marks
- 50
- Question types
- Data-Based / Case-Study Short Answer, Structured Essay
Analysis is paraphrased for study purposes. Always verify against the official examiner report and mark scheme.