IB MYP Design – Sustainable and ethical design Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs – the IB holds copyright in its own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available through your school or the IB store.

This practice set covers sustainable and ethical design for IB MYP Design, aligned to the International Baccalaureate Organization, Middle Years Programme Subject Brief – Design, from 2014. It suits MYP years 4 and 5; there is no SL/HL split. MYP has no prescribed content list – schools design their own units – so this set practises two related concepts the brief names, sustainability and ergonomics, plus data ethics.

Each question names the criterion it trains. Real MYP work is judged against criterion level descriptors (1–8), so the [1] points are a revision aid, not IB marks. All data and products are fictional.

Study first with the study guide and revision notes. Also: criteria in practice questions and design cycle questions.

Questions

1. (Criterion A) Name the five stages of a product’s life cycle in order, and give one design decision that makes the final stage less harmful. [3]

2. (Criterion A and D) A single-use PET water bottle has a life-cycle energy of 2.4 MJ. A reusable steel bottle takes 60 MJ to make, and each wash uses 0.1 MJ. Assume one wash per use.

(a) Find the first whole number of uses at which the reusable bottle has the lower total energy. Show your working. [3] (b) Calculate the total energy of each option over 180 uses, and the energy saved by the reusable bottle. [2] (c) State one assumption that, if wrong, could reverse your conclusion. [1]

3. (Criterion A) A school is designing lockers and bags for 11–16 year olds.

(a) Which percentile should set the height of the locker door opening? [1] (b) Which percentile should set the height of the highest coat hook? [1] (c) Fictional shoulder-to-hip lengths are 360 mm (5th percentile) and 440 mm (95th percentile). What adjustment range should a backpack strap give? [1] (d) The 95th percentile hand breadth is 94 mm. The locker handle needs 10 mm clearance on each side. Find the handle’s internal length. [1]

4. (Criterion A and D) Life-cycle energy for a fictional desk lamp, in MJ: raw materials 40, manufacture 15, distribution 5, use 12 per year for 8 years, end of life 4.

(a) Calculate the total life-cycle energy and the percentage used in the use stage. [2] (b) A redesign with an LED module adds 10 MJ to raw materials but halves the use-stage energy. Calculate the new total and the percentage reduction. [3] (c) Explain why the designer should focus on the use stage for this product. [1]

5. (Criterion A and B) Three materials are considered for a phone stand. Scores are 1–5 (5 = best).

Criterion (weight)	PLA (3D printed)	Recycled aluminium	Bamboo plywood
Strength (×2)	2	5	4
Low embodied energy (×3)	4	3	5
End-of-life options (×3)	2	5	3
Finish (×1)	3	5	4

(a) Calculate the weighted total for each material and state which scores highest. [3] (b) Explain why the designer must justify the weights, not just the scores. [2]

6. (Criterion A) A fictional microwave for a shared kitchen has small flat touch buttons, labels in 8-point grey text on a silver panel, and a red or green light as its only signal that cooking has finished. Identify three barriers to inclusive use, and for each suggest an improvement. [6]

7. (Criterion A – digital design) A student is designing a homework-planner app. The draft sign-up form asks for: name, email, password, date of birth, home address, phone number, school, subjects and a profile photo. The form has a pre-ticked box: “Share my data with partners”.

(a) Using data minimisation, state which fields the app needs and which it should remove. Justify one removal. [3] (b) Explain two changes that would give users informed consent. [2]

8. (Criterion D) A fictional adjustable headphone band was tested with 40 users: 26 said it fitted, 9 said it was too small and 5 said it was too large.

(a) Express each result as a percentage. [2] (b) Interpret the results and recommend one change to the design. [2]

9. (Criterion D – extended) A student redesigned a school canteen tray. Fictional test data: old tray 610 g, new recycled-polypropylene tray 420 g; 24 of 30 users rated the new grip comfortable; the tray survived a 500-cycle dishwasher test without damage; a 12 mm raised lip cut recorded spills in one week from 18 to 7. The canteen serves 300 pupils. Write an evaluation of the tray’s impact on the client and target audience, using the data. [8]

10. (Criterion A – extended) Design situation: a school sports day produces a large amount of single-use packaging from drinks and snacks. Write a research plan for criterion A that uses life-cycle thinking, materials choice, ergonomics or inclusive design, and ethics. Include primary and secondary research. [8]

Answers

1. Raw materials, manufacture, distribution [1]; use, end of life, in that order [1]. Any one decision: screws not glue so parts separate; a single, labelled recyclable material; replaceable parts [1]. [3] Examiner insight: The order matters: “use” before “distribution” loses the second point, and a decision needs a design action, not just “recycle it”.

2. (a) Reusable total = 60 + 0.1n; single-use total = 2.4n [1]. Equal when 2.3n = 60, n ≈ 26.09 [1]. At 26 uses the reusable is still higher (62.6 against 62.4 MJ), so the first whole number is 27 uses (62.7 against 64.8 MJ) [1]. (b) Reusable: 60 + 0.1 × 180 = 78.0 MJ; single-use: 2.4 × 180 = 432.0 MJ [1]. Saving = 354 MJ [1]. (c) Any one: the bottle is lost before 27 uses; washing uses more energy than assumed [1]. Examiner insight: Rounding 26.09 down to 26 is the classic slip; check both 26 and 27 so your answer is justified by evidence.

3. (a) 95th percentile of height, so the tallest users fit through the opening [1]. (b) 5th percentile of reach, so the smallest users can reach it [1]. (c) 440 − 360 = 80 mm of adjustment [1]. (d) 94 + 2 × 10 = 114 mm [1]. Examiner insight: Clearance goes to the large end, reach to the small end; a percentile without the reason is weaker analysis.

4. (a) Use stage = 12 × 8 = 96 MJ; total = 40 + 15 + 5 + 96 + 4 = 160 MJ [1]. Use share = 96 ÷ 160 × 100 = 60% [1]. (b) New total = 50 + 15 + 5 + 48 + 4 = 122 MJ [1]. Reduction = 160 − 122 = 38 MJ [1]; 38 ÷ 160 × 100 = 23.8% [1]. (c) The use stage is the largest single stage (60%), so a change there saves more than any change elsewhere [1]. Examiner insight: Forgetting the extra 10 MJ gives 112 MJ – change every stage the redesign affects.

5. (a) PLA: 2×2 + 3×4 + 3×2 + 1×3 = 25 [1]. Aluminium: 10 + 9 + 15 + 5 = 39 [1]. Bamboo: 8 + 15 + 9 + 4 = 36; recycled aluminium scores highest (39 out of 45) [1]. (b) The weights decide how much each criterion counts, so a different weighting can change the winner [1]. They must come from the client’s needs found in research, or the matrix just dresses up a choice already made [1]. Examiner insight: Show each multiplication; a slip with no working hides the method you understood.

6. Any three barriers, each with a matching improvement (one point for the barrier, one for the fix):

• Small flat buttons are hard to find and press for users with limited sight or dexterity [1]; use larger raised buttons with tactile markers [1].
• Grey 8-point text on silver has low contrast and is too small [1]; use larger, high-contrast text and symbols [1].
• A red or green light is the only signal, which fails colour-blind and blind users [1]; add a sound and a change of symbol or text [1]. [6] Examiner insight: Each fix must match its barrier; “make it bigger” for a colour problem scores the barrier only.

7. (a) Needed: a name or username, email, password, subjects [1]. Remove: date of birth, home address, phone number, photo (school is optional) [1]. Justification, e.g. a home address is not needed to plan homework and would put a child at risk if leaked [1]. (b) Leave the partner-sharing box unticked, or remove data sharing altogether [1]. Add a short plain-language notice saying what is collected, why, and how to delete it [1]. Examiner insight: Justify a removal against the app’s purpose; “it is private” alone does not explain why the solution does not need it.

8. (a) Fits 26 ÷ 40 = 65% [1]; too small 22.5%, too large 12.5% [1]. (b) About a third did not fit, and more were too small than too large, so the adjustment range is too narrow at the small end [1]. Recommend extending the lower end of the range, then retesting with users near the 5th percentile [1]. Examiner insight: A criterion D recommendation must follow from the data; “make it more adjustable” without saying which end loses the second point.

9. Model indicative points:

• Mass reduced by 190 g (31.1%) per tray, using less material [1].
• Recycled polypropylene lowers the raw-materials stage, and a single material can be recycled again at end of life [1].
• With one tray per pupil, 300 trays use about 57 kg less material [1].
• 24 of 30 users (80%) rated the grip comfortable, so it suits most users [1].
• 6 of 30 (20%) did not, so grip size should be tested with a wider range of hand sizes [1].
• Passing 500 dishwasher cycles supports a long use stage [1].
• Spills fell from 18 to 7 a week (61.1%), less waste and a safer floor for pupils and staff [1].
• Limitation: one week of spill data and 30 users is a small sample; retest over a longer period [1]. [8] Examiner insight: Use the numbers and end with a real limitation; praise without data or weaknesses stays in the lower bands.

10. Model indicative points:

• Clear aim: find out why packaging is used and what the client (the PE department) needs [1].
• Primary: count and sort one sports day’s waste by material [1].
• Primary: interview the client; survey pupils on how drinks are carried and refilled [1].
• Secondary: life-cycle data comparing single-use bottles, cans and reusable bottles, with sources noted [1].
• Secondary: which materials the local recycling service actually accepts [1].
• Ergonomics or inclusive design: refill-station height and tap force suited to the youngest and wheelchair users (5th percentile reach) [1].
• Ethics: fair access – a reusable scheme must not exclude pupils who cannot afford a bottle [1].
• Analyse two existing refill systems for sustainability and inclusivity [1]. [8] Examiner insight: Each research item should say what it will find out and why; a bare list of topics reads as unfocused.

Where marks are usually lost

• Rounding a break-even number down instead of checking the whole numbers either side.
• Comparing totals for products with different lifespans.
• Missing a stage a redesign changes (extra material from a new component).
• Using the 50th percentile for clearances or reaches.
• Weighted matrices with no justification of the weights.
• Inclusive-design suggestions that do not match the barrier named.
• Digital designs that collect personal data without saying why it is needed.
• Impact evaluations with no data and no limitation.

Next steps

• Revision notes
• Study guide
• IB MYP Design course hub
• Printable checklist
• All free 10-minute diagnostics
• Book a free trial class

Official syllabus

International Baccalaureate Organization, Middle Years Programme Subject Brief – Design, from 2014 (published by the International Baccalaureate Organization, © 2015). The brief names ergonomics and sustainability as examples of related concepts; the questions here are original and written by Marlbridge.