Assessing Criteria C

Strands

Strand 1: Justifies the choice of appropriate materials, components and manufacturing techniques to make the prototype

I awarded a two for this strand. Criteria C failed to provide a serious or detailed analysis of materials, components, or manufacturing techniques. Surface level advantages and disadvantages were provided for only three manufacturing techniques.

Strand 2: Develops an accurate design proposal in sufficient detail for a third party to manufacture the prototype

I awarded a three to this strand. A bill of materials is provided. There is no detailed technical drawing nor prototype. A third party would not be able to follow the design.

Strand 3: Produces a detailed plan for the manufacture of the prototype

I awarded a one to this strand. Their is no detail in the step-by-step process. There are no pictures. There are no diagrams. Very few engineers or makers would be able to follow this. There is no discussion of when to use which materials and in what quantities. This entire section is embarrassing.

What should the NBP student have done to achieve a higher score? Describe one improvement to each section (Statement of the Problem; Design Brief; Design Spec)?

Strand 1 - Justify every material and process, provide positives and negatives for every one, compare to competitive materials techniques

Strand 2 - Provide a detailed prototype

Strand 3 - literally everything. Needs a step by step process. Needs to follow the template. Needs to be understandable.

Which is the better Criteria A - IBO Sample or NBP student?

The IBO sample.

1. The IBO sample provided more justifications, comparisons, and analysis for strand 1

2. The IBO sample actually provided a followable prototype

3. The IBO sample provides a clearly followable process that used the construction template

Overall, I would rate the IBO sample a 5, and the NB sample a 2