How to survive G1 Design and Technology? | Paper 2 Design Journal, Mock-Ups and Working Prototype

• SEAB 2027 G1 Design and Technology K124 syllabus
• 2027 SEC G1 subject directory
• Understanding the twenty-week Design Project
• Paper 1: five questions, mechanisms and electronics
• G1 Design and Technology: from user needs to prototyping
• Working from real needs and tested models
• Secondary Mathematics foundations for measurements and reasoning
• Parent–student consultation with eduKate Singapore

Independent education guide, October 2026. Every scenario is hypothetical and is not an official design question or an assessed solution. The current SEAB K124 syllabus and school Coursework Supervisor control practical work, safety, authorship and submission.

The official 2027 Paper 2 assessment criteria

Assessment criterion	Marks	Evidence that matters
Planning for and monitoring the Design Project	3	Useful time-stages plan and ongoing records
Formulating design brief and specifications	6	Relevant research leading to clear user-centred criteria
Generating and developing ideas	8	Reasoned alternatives considering user, functionality and environment
Sketching and drawing to design	6	Visual development that helps explore ideas and prototype details
Using mock-ups to design	12	Meaningful models used to explore or test decisions
Communicating proposed solution	14	Clear Presentation Board showing the brief, specifications and how features work
Realising the prototype	21	Appropriate making, quality control and functioning outcome
Total Paper 2	70	Twenty weeks excluding school holidays; internally assessed, externally moderated

Paper 1 is separate: a compulsory one-hour, 50-mark written exam worth the remaining 30%. Questions 1–3 address Design for 18 marks, and Questions 4–5 mechanisms and electronics for 32 marks. A learner should therefore maintain theory revision alongside the project. A sophisticated prototype does not make the written paper disappear.

Design thinking is not a straight line

SEAB’s design model connects needs analysis, research, idea conceptualisation, development and prototyping. The stages can loop back. If a model fails a test, the candidate may need more research or to reconsider the user’s requirement. Revising a design based on evidence can demonstrate understanding; hiding every change to produce a falsely effortless development story does not.

The useful question after a failure is, ‘Which assumption did the evidence challenge?’ A stand that tips may need a different base, a handle that is awkward to grip may need reconsideration, and an attractive display that obstructs reading may need a clearer layout. The right correction depends on the user and the specific brief, not a formula applied indiscriminately.

How to use this project guide

Understand the need · Ideas and mock-ups · Journal and board · Prototype and safety · Original design cases · Questions

1. 1. Begin with the user rather than the product

A design opportunity begins with someone experiencing a real difficulty, not with a candidate wanting to use a favourite machine. Identify the user, activity, environment and observed inconvenience. That is the basis of an appropriate solution, whether it uses wood, plastics, simple mechanisms or another permitted technique.

Imagine three classmates sharing a small study table with pens and rulers. The difficulty may be finding items quickly, preventing a tall ruler from tipping a holder, or leaving room for books. Each need suggests different design priorities. The candidate should observe rather than guess which matters most.

2. 2. Define the problem as a testable question

A vague statement such as ‘make a better desk organiser’ gives little guidance about success. The design brief should describe the intended function and the situation. This might include accessibility, stability or how much space can be occupied, where relevant to the actual task.

For general practice, turn a fictional inconvenience into a sentence about what the proposed design should enable a user to do. Ask which measurable or observable criteria could indicate improvement. The actual K124 examination brief must determine the real work.

3. 3. Understand the difference between needs and wants

A user may prefer a bright colour, but the essential problem may concern fitting an object safely within limited space. Good design takes preferences seriously while distinguishing them from functional requirements. The final solution should address the actual priorities.

Create two columns in a practice notebook: essential function and desirable preference. For a fictional book support, stability may be necessary while a choice of colours may be optional. Explain how that distinction affects the design specifications.

4. 4. Observe how the present object is used

Observation helps reveal where a process breaks down. A design that looks untidy may still work; a visually attractive holder can be awkward when someone uses it repeatedly. Research should focus on user behaviour and constraints rather than merely collecting product photographs.

Use an imaginary existing stand that slips on smooth tables. Ask what observation would establish the problem and which conditions should be recorded. Avoid inventing actual test results; the candidate must gather their own evidence under permitted school arrangements.

5. 5. Ask useful questions about context

Design decisions depend on who uses an object and where. A product intended for a wet kitchen counter may need different considerations from one used in a dry classroom. A fixed workstation and a portable object may also have different requirements.

List relevant questions without pretending to know the answers: Will the user carry it, clean it, adjust it or share it? Which environment and dimensions matter? A good designer discovers details before claiming a chosen idea will work.

6. 6. Keep research relevant and credited

Research may include observation, appropriate product comparisons, published information and images that reveal techniques or materials. It should lead towards clearer choices rather than fill pages with unrelated screenshots. The journal should show why a source helped the design process.

An online photograph of a folding mechanism can be an influence, but copying a complete protected design without acknowledgement is not original work. Describe the principle being studied and how a personally developed idea uses the information appropriately.

7. 7. Formulate a clear design brief

The design brief should express the problem and intended result concisely. It need not sound like a corporate contract; it needs to guide making decisions. A clear brief will also support the Presentation Board and evaluation of the eventual solution.

Compare ‘make a nice wooden object’ with a statement about supporting a textbook at a suitable angle on a specific table. The second gives a purpose for sketching and mock-ups. Candidates must formulate their own brief from the actual released examination opportunity.

8. 8. Turn the brief into specifications

Specifications describe what the solution needs to satisfy. They may concern function, appropriate size, safe access, stability, materials, environment or appearance. A strong specification comes from the research and offers a fair way to examine the proposed outcome.

An invented stand may need to fit a stated workspace and hold a particular model object without tipping in a school-approved test. If the dimensions have not been established, students should identify what they would need to measure rather than invent convenient numbers.

9. 9. Plan a real-time 20-week sequence

The Design Project runs for twenty weeks excluding school holidays. A time-stages plan, such as a Gantt chart, helps identify investigation, ideas, models, prototype work and final communication. It should be monitored during the process rather than reconstructed at the last moment.

After a permitted session, note what was intended, what was actually completed and what changed. If a mock-up shows a problem, revise the next stage rather than quietly erase the delay. A useful plan supports decisions, not a flawless appearance.

10. 10. Use sketches to ask a question

Early sketches should help the designer explore an idea. A rough thumbnail comparing base shape or access position may be more informative than a heavily shaded drawing with no identified purpose. A drawing is part of thinking, not only a presentation.

Create two fictional variations of a desk organiser with different access arrangements. Ask which drawing reveals the user interaction more clearly. Use arrows or relevant dimensions where they help, but do not crowd the page with decorations.

11. 11. Generate genuinely distinct alternatives

Changing only the colour of a product may not explore a functional difficulty. Alternatives should investigate relevant differences: arrangement, folding, reach, grip, storage capacity, or another requirement grounded in the brief. Students should know what distinguishes each idea.

Compare a tall cup, divided tray and fold-out rack for a hypothetical workspace. Ask which criteria each serves or fails. The choice needs evidence from the user’s situation rather than a vote for whichever sketch looks most sophisticated.

12. 12. Evaluate trade-offs rather than search for perfection

One idea may be compact but unstable; another stable but too large. Making a design decision often means balancing relevant advantages and limitations. A learner should be able to explain which trade-off is acceptable for the user, not claim that one concept is perfect in every respect.

Use a simple practice comparison chart. Identify two functional criteria and one environmental or appearance criterion, then describe which alternative best meets the important ones. Do not fabricate physical performance results if the models were not tested.

13. 13. Connect user, function and environment

The 2027 rubric explicitly considers the user, functionality and environment when generating and developing ideas. A proposed product may work on one surface but not another, or be suitable for a particular user yet awkward for someone else. Design choices need context.

For a hypothetical rain-shelter stand, ask how moisture, safe storage and user access matter. The resulting brief might be very different from the same stand intended for a dry office. This exercise tests reasoning rather than materials expertise alone.

14. 14. Make a mock-up to learn, not to impress

A mock-up is a simplified model that helps examine an idea before the final prototype. It may use paper, cardboard, foam board or other school-approved materials. The purpose is to test scale, access, movement or arrangement without assuming the model is already a finished product.

Imagine a cardboard version of a holder. It may reveal that a ruler blocks book access. That discovery can justify a design change. A model with no identifiable test or influence on decision-making shows less understanding.

15. 15. Distinguish a mock-up from the final prototype

Mock-ups are tools for exploration and comparison, while the prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution functions using appropriate technology. A visual resemblance alone does not make a mock-up into a functional prototype.

A cardboard hinge diagram may help explore folding geometry; the final school-supervised prototype must use suitable materials, support and mechanisms to show the intended function. The actual brief and authorised workshop resources determine what is appropriate.

16. 16. Test one important property at a time

A model test is useful when it has an intended question and an observation. If the candidate changes shape, material and load simultaneously, the result may be difficult to interpret. Fair comparison helps identify the most relevant factor.

Use a hypothetical stand stability test on paper. State what conditions would need to remain consistent for two shapes to be compared. Real equipment and load selection must be approved by the teacher, and an untested prediction should not be described as proven.

17. 17. Record mock-up evidence honestly

Photographs or sketches of genuine models can document what happened and why the idea changed. A student who hides every failure or recreates a fake test after the event makes the journal less useful as a real-time record.

Label the intended question, observed result and next decision. An unsteady model may still be a meaningful design step if the finding leads to a justified change. Honest evidence is stronger than a glossy claim of constant success.

18. 18. Understand iteration as intelligent correction

SEAB’s design model is not a strict one-way sequence. A problem in a mock-up can send the designer back to research or a different concept. A revised idea is not a sign that the student lacked talent; it is a normal feature of purposeful engineering and design.

Ask what assumption was contradicted and which new evidence would help. If a handle is uncomfortable, should the first question concern grip size, material, position or another requirement? The answer depends on what was observed.

19. 19. Keep sketches and annotations purposeful

An annotation is valuable when it identifies a material, motion, user interaction or function that would otherwise be unclear. Too many unrelated labels can obscure the actual idea. The journal is meant to reveal development, not reward writing the longest paragraphs.

Compare two sketches of a folding stand, one with clear movement arrows and one with decorative commentary. Ask which better explains how the design works. Focus on the technical relationship the viewer needs to understand.

20. 20. Maintain the Design Journal in real time

The official Design Journal is a real-time record and may contain planning sheets, research, sketches, relevant calculations, mock-ups and prototype evidence. Candidates are advised not to rework design sheets to create a retrospective perfect story.

Use A3-size securely fastened sheets or an A3 sketch pad as specified by SEAB. Ask the Coursework Supervisor how physical mock-ups, prototype, jigs or other objects should accompany the journal. Correct record keeping protects authenticity.

21. 21. Understand why A3 format matters

Technical sketches, observations and development sequences may need enough space to be readable. The A3 journal format is an actual assessment requirement, not a generic suggestion that all drawings must be large. Students should organise evidence accordingly.

Practice arranging a visual explanation with a drawing, one relevant measurement and concise notes. The layout should show the design decision without filling every available centimetre with generic research.

22. 22. Make the Presentation Board answer the brief

The Board communicates the proposed design solution to someone who has not followed every journal page. It should state the brief and specifications and show how the relevant design features work. This is a different communication task from collecting all research history.

SEAB permits a maximum of two single-sided A2-size pieces. A learner should make the solution’s essential function visible through appropriate drawing and annotation rather than decorate two boards with text that does not help explain the outcome.

23. 23. Show the product’s important features clearly

The official criteria reward graphical communication that allows a reader to understand the purpose and function of the design. A technically skilled maker can still lose clarity if the Board hides the movement, grip or access feature that resolves the user problem.

Use a suitable view, exploded detail or sequence sketch when authorised and relevant. A drawing should communicate what the object is meant to do, not merely look like an attractive advertising poster.

24. 24. Connect the board to actual specifications

A Presentation Board that proposes a design unrelated to the stated brief undermines the whole investigation. Review whether each major feature helps meet a relevant specification. Do not claim a property that the prototype or authorised tests did not show.

For a fictional foldable book support, a drawing should make its angle adjustment understandable if that is central to the user’s need. Claims about load rating or durability require evidence, not artistic confidence.

25. 25. Know the role of mechanism choices

Mechanisms such as levers, linkages, gears, cams, pulleys and springs can transmit or change motion. The best mechanism is one that serves the specified user function with suitable design and safety. Adding gears to every project is not evidence of better D&T thinking.

Compare a folding, sliding and rotating motion conceptually for an imaginary holder. Ask which arrangement fits the task and what further information would be needed for the teacher-supervised prototype. Avoid instructions for improvised powered machinery.

26. 26. Know the role of simple electronics

Electronics may be relevant when a design needs sensing, timed control or another function described by the syllabus. But the presence of an LED or a sensor does not automatically make a solution appropriate. The design should justify what the component contributes to the user.

In a practice brief, ask whether a purely mechanical indicator could solve the problem more simply than a powered circuit. The correct choice depends on evidence and constraints. Any physical powered testing must remain in the approved school setting.

27. 27. Choose materials to meet function and conditions

Materials differ in strength, workability, weight, finish and suitability for an intended environment. The candidate should relate material choice to the brief and authorised workshop resources rather than select the most expensive or dramatic material.

A hypothetical classroom organiser may need to be stable, light and safe to handle. Discuss which properties would matter without claiming a specific commercial material has been tested when it has not. Teacher guidance governs real suitability and handling.

28. 28. Use measurements and markings responsibly

Accurate making depends on dimensions, reference points and safe marking-out processes. The syllabus names measuring and marking techniques, but the assessed project must use the school’s approved methods and tools. A precise concept can still fail if the fabricated parts are inaccurate.

Use paper dimension exercises to check arithmetic and spatial reasoning. Actual drilling, cutting or machining must never be taught from an improvised home procedure in this article. Competent supervision is part of correct design work.

29. 29. Treat cutting, shaping and joining as supervised skills

Processes for resistant materials can involve sharp tools, machines, adhesives or heat and must be matched to the selected material. Candidates need safe and appropriate practical methods, not a collection of hazardous workshop tricks. The school’s equipment and training determine permitted actions.

A student should know the purpose of a joint or shape operation and how it contributes to prototype function. If uncertain, they must stop and ask the Coursework Supervisor instead of copying an online demonstration.

30. 30. Build for function before cosmetic finishing

A prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution works. Decorative paint or elaborate surface treatment cannot compensate for a joint that fails or a mechanism that does not perform the required movement. Functional accuracy and safety remain central.

During approved development, prioritise whether the user can perform the intended task and whether relevant specifications are met. Finish and presentation should reinforce that result, not disguise shortcomings.

31. 31. Understand quality control in a school project

Quality control means checking whether the work meets relevant requirements at suitable stages. It can include inspection of dimensions, assembly and observable function within the school’s safe procedures. The rubric places substantial weight on realising a competent working prototype.

Create a paper checklist derived from fictional design specifications. After a school-approved test, record the actual result. A single visual inspection may not prove stability or durability, so state what has and has not been verified.

32. 32. Keep the project within the candidate’s means

SEAB explicitly advises schools to ensure that extended research or specialisation beyond the taught syllabus remains within candidates’ means. This is an important educational safeguard. A solution requiring professional fabrication or inaccessible tools can be unsuitable even when it sounds ambitious.

Discuss a proportionate alternative that uses approved school resources while still addressing the user. Feasibility is not a lack of imagination; it is a design quality. Parents should not purchase industrial equipment to rescue an overcomplicated concept.

33. 33. Audit the seven marking criteria before finalising

The 70-mark rubric is divided across planning, brief/specification, ideas, sketching, mock-ups, communication and prototype. A candidate should be able to identify authentic evidence relevant to each. The assessment is holistic, not a checklist that can be satisfied by adding a stock paragraph under every heading.

If the working model is strong but the Board is difficult to understand, a communication weakness may remain. If the journal is neat but no purposeful models were used, development evidence may be thin. Diagnose the first genuine gap rather than add unrelated pages.

34. 34. Keep Paper 1 revision alongside twenty weeks of making

The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and worth 30%. It includes design reasoning, mechanisms and electronics. A candidate can learn many ideas through the project but still needs practice explaining them in unfamiliar written questions.

Use short revision tasks every week that connect one project concept to a changed scenario. Do not copy the candidate’s own design answer for every question; Paper 1 tests transferable understanding.

35. 35. How parents can help without making the project

Parents can provide encouragement, discuss users’ needs and help the learner plan rest and schoolwork. They should not create the Design Journal, build a substitute prototype or retouch assessed evidence to make it look more competent. Such actions can undermine authenticity and obscure the student’s abilities.

A useful parent question is, ‘What did the mock-up show, and what would you change because of it?’ This supports independent reasoning while keeping the actual examined project in the student’s hands.

36. 36. How tutors can teach through unrelated examples

An outside tutor may teach algebra, sketch reading, mechanisms or decision-making with unassessed examples. They can explain why an A3 development sketch or an A2 Board communicates a different purpose. They should not author the candidate’s actual journal, model or presentation.

General practice can explore a fictional product with changed constraints so that the pupil learns to reason independently. The authentic examination work remains governed by the school supervisor and official K124 rules.

37. 37. A sensible twenty-week rhythm

A general planning sketch might reserve earlier sessions for needs analysis, research and initial concepts, middle stages for developing alternatives and mock-ups, and later stages for supervised prototyping, checks and communication. Actual dates must follow the released question and school schedule.

Progress should be monitored while it occurs, with adjustments when evidence changes. Treat school holidays correctly as excluded from the twenty-week examination period rather than pretending the project has unlimited time.

38. 38. Explore future study without guaranteed outcomes

D&T learning can build practical reasoning useful in industrial and product design, manufacturing, engineering support, building technology or digital fabrication. Those possibilities depend on further qualifications, safe training and personal interests; they are not awarded automatically with K124.

The child’s current subject level does not determine every future route. Check the complete SEC record and the receiving programme’s prerequisites when post-secondary applications become relevant.

39. 39. Finish with a credible design story

A credible project begins with an evidence-backed need, uses purposeful sketches and mock-ups, selects appropriate technology, and culminates in a working prototype communicated clearly. The real-time journal and Board should tell complementary parts of the same story.

Before the teacher’s deadline, check the current assessment brief, evidence, journal format, physical items, Board format and authenticity. A simpler but genuine design is better than an impressive-looking adult-built model the candidate cannot explain.

Seventeen original decisions and the reasoning behind them

1. The user need is confused with a fashionable product

A candidate wants to make a smart lamp before checking whether the user actually needs lighting. What evidence would justify the design opportunity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

2. A stand is elegant but tips easily

A paper model looks appealing yet becomes unstable with a fictional test load. How should the problem lead to a new design question?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

3. Two sketches differ only in colour

The project needs better access, but the alternatives change only paint colour. Which functional variable needs exploration?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

4. The journal is rewritten to hide a failed mock-up

A student replaces real early sheets with a polished story. Why does that conflict with a real-time design record and the advice not to rework sheets?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

5. A mock-up has no identifiable test

A decorative cardboard model is displayed without a decision it helped make. How can the student explain what was actually learned?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

6. The Board is attractive but hides the mechanism

A proposed folding rack has a complex movement, yet the Presentation Board only shows a static front view. Which function should be communicated graphically?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

7. A high-cost component is selected without need

An expensive electronic sensor is added to an ordinary static desk tray. Does it improve the actual user problem, or introduce needless complexity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

8. A source image is copied without attribution

A design feature is lifted from a website and presented as an original concept. How can influences be researched and credited honestly?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

9. The prototype’s material is unsuitable

The chosen material deforms under the intended everyday conditions. Which performance requirement was overlooked, and which school-approved alternatives should be compared?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

10. A great sketch does not yield a working model

The drawing appears convincing, but the assessed prototype cannot perform the required function. Why does the 21-mark realisation criterion matter?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

11. A school holiday is counted as project time

The pupil plans twenty continuous calendar weeks despite the exclusion of school holidays. Which timetable assumption needs correcting?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

12. The teacher is asked to build a difficult part

A candidate wants the supervisor to produce the challenging prototype assembly rather than receive authorised guidance. How does this affect candidate ownership?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

13. An extra page is added instead of testing

The journal becomes longer but no mock-up or functioning evidence improves. What does the rubric actually reward?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

14. A result is called proven after one visual observation

A model is described as stable or durable despite not having been appropriately tested. What evidence would be required before making that claim?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

15. A home tool is introduced without safety training

The pupil tries to use a potentially hazardous machine based on an online tutorial. Why should school-supervised, approved processes control the making?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

16. Paper 1 is ignored because the project is 70%

A candidate stops studying mechanisms and electronics in written contexts. What proportion of the subject is still at risk?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

17. One project difficulty becomes a career label

The student struggles with a joint and decides engineering is impossible. What specific practical or conceptual skill should be taught before making a long-term judgement?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

Quick answers about K124 Paper 2

How long does the Design Project last?

Twenty weeks from the examination question release, excluding school holidays.

How much is Paper 2 worth?

Seventy marks and 70% of G1 Design and Technology.

What must be submitted?

A real-time Design Journal, relevant mock-ups and prototype and a Presentation Board following the official conditions.

What is the journal format?

A3-size securely fastened sheets or A3 sketch pads, with the relevant physical project items.

How large may the Presentation Board be?

A maximum of two single-sided A2 boards.

Are students expected to make mock-ups?

Yes. The rubric specifically assesses meaningful models used for idea exploration and decisions.

Should early journal pages be rewritten after a mistake?

The syllabus advises candidates not to rework design sheets; a real-time record should reflect authentic development.

Is Paper 2 marked only by the teacher?

It is assessed internally and externally moderated according to the published rubric.

Can a parent or tutor build the prototype?

No. The assessed work must demonstrate the candidate’s own abilities within school-supervised conditions.

Does a 70% project remove Paper 1?

No. The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and contributes 30%.

Official syllabus and related eduKateSG guides

• SEAB 2027 G1 Design and Technology K124 syllabus
• 2027 SEC G1 subject directory
• Understanding the twenty-week Design Project
• Paper 1: five questions, mechanisms and electronics
• G1 Design and Technology: from user needs to prototyping
• Working from real needs and tested models
• Secondary Mathematics foundations for measurements and reasoning
• Parent–student consultation with eduKate Singapore

Independent education guide, October 2026. Every scenario is hypothetical and is not an official design question or an assessed solution. The current SEAB K124 syllabus and school Coursework Supervisor control practical work, safety, authorship and submission.

• Read the actual question before settling on a product or design idea.
• Write the user, context, inconvenience and intended function in plain language.
• Create a real-time 20-week plan and monitor progress as work occurs; do not retrospectively fabricate a perfect journal.
• Generate alternatives and build suitable mock-ups to learn why one option might work better.
• Use approved materials and teacher-supervised prototype processes; follow workshop safety rules.
• Finish with a coherent A3 journal, genuine mock-ups and prototype, and a clear Presentation Board on no more than two single-sided A2 sheets.

The official 2027 Paper 2 assessment criteria

Assessment criterion	Marks	Evidence that matters
Planning for and monitoring the Design Project	3	Useful time-stages plan and ongoing records
Formulating design brief and specifications	6	Relevant research leading to clear user-centred criteria
Generating and developing ideas	8	Reasoned alternatives considering user, functionality and environment
Sketching and drawing to design	6	Visual development that helps explore ideas and prototype details
Using mock-ups to design	12	Meaningful models used to explore or test decisions
Communicating proposed solution	14	Clear Presentation Board showing the brief, specifications and how features work
Realising the prototype	21	Appropriate making, quality control and functioning outcome
Total Paper 2	70	Twenty weeks excluding school holidays; internally assessed, externally moderated

Paper 1 is separate: a compulsory one-hour, 50-mark written exam worth the remaining 30%. Questions 1–3 address Design for 18 marks, and Questions 4–5 mechanisms and electronics for 32 marks. A learner should therefore maintain theory revision alongside the project. A sophisticated prototype does not make the written paper disappear.

Design thinking is not a straight line

SEAB’s design model connects needs analysis, research, idea conceptualisation, development and prototyping. The stages can loop back. If a model fails a test, the candidate may need more research or to reconsider the user’s requirement. Revising a design based on evidence can demonstrate understanding; hiding every change to produce a falsely effortless development story does not.

The useful question after a failure is, ‘Which assumption did the evidence challenge?’ A stand that tips may need a different base, a handle that is awkward to grip may need reconsideration, and an attractive display that obstructs reading may need a clearer layout. The right correction depends on the user and the specific brief, not a formula applied indiscriminately.

How to use this project guide

Understand the need · Ideas and mock-ups · Journal and board · Prototype and safety · Original design cases · Questions

1. 1. Begin with the user rather than the product

A design opportunity begins with someone experiencing a real difficulty, not with a candidate wanting to use a favourite machine. Identify the user, activity, environment and observed inconvenience. That is the basis of an appropriate solution, whether it uses wood, plastics, simple mechanisms or another permitted technique.

Imagine three classmates sharing a small study table with pens and rulers. The difficulty may be finding items quickly, preventing a tall ruler from tipping a holder, or leaving room for books. Each need suggests different design priorities. The candidate should observe rather than guess which matters most.

2. 2. Define the problem as a testable question

A vague statement such as ‘make a better desk organiser’ gives little guidance about success. The design brief should describe the intended function and the situation. This might include accessibility, stability or how much space can be occupied, where relevant to the actual task.

For general practice, turn a fictional inconvenience into a sentence about what the proposed design should enable a user to do. Ask which measurable or observable criteria could indicate improvement. The actual K124 examination brief must determine the real work.

3. 3. Understand the difference between needs and wants

A user may prefer a bright colour, but the essential problem may concern fitting an object safely within limited space. Good design takes preferences seriously while distinguishing them from functional requirements. The final solution should address the actual priorities.

Create two columns in a practice notebook: essential function and desirable preference. For a fictional book support, stability may be necessary while a choice of colours may be optional. Explain how that distinction affects the design specifications.

4. 4. Observe how the present object is used

Observation helps reveal where a process breaks down. A design that looks untidy may still work; a visually attractive holder can be awkward when someone uses it repeatedly. Research should focus on user behaviour and constraints rather than merely collecting product photographs.

Use an imaginary existing stand that slips on smooth tables. Ask what observation would establish the problem and which conditions should be recorded. Avoid inventing actual test results; the candidate must gather their own evidence under permitted school arrangements.

5. 5. Ask useful questions about context

Design decisions depend on who uses an object and where. A product intended for a wet kitchen counter may need different considerations from one used in a dry classroom. A fixed workstation and a portable object may also have different requirements.

List relevant questions without pretending to know the answers: Will the user carry it, clean it, adjust it or share it? Which environment and dimensions matter? A good designer discovers details before claiming a chosen idea will work.

6. 6. Keep research relevant and credited

Research may include observation, appropriate product comparisons, published information and images that reveal techniques or materials. It should lead towards clearer choices rather than fill pages with unrelated screenshots. The journal should show why a source helped the design process.

An online photograph of a folding mechanism can be an influence, but copying a complete protected design without acknowledgement is not original work. Describe the principle being studied and how a personally developed idea uses the information appropriately.

7. 7. Formulate a clear design brief

The design brief should express the problem and intended result concisely. It need not sound like a corporate contract; it needs to guide making decisions. A clear brief will also support the Presentation Board and evaluation of the eventual solution.

Compare ‘make a nice wooden object’ with a statement about supporting a textbook at a suitable angle on a specific table. The second gives a purpose for sketching and mock-ups. Candidates must formulate their own brief from the actual released examination opportunity.

8. 8. Turn the brief into specifications

Specifications describe what the solution needs to satisfy. They may concern function, appropriate size, safe access, stability, materials, environment or appearance. A strong specification comes from the research and offers a fair way to examine the proposed outcome.

An invented stand may need to fit a stated workspace and hold a particular model object without tipping in a school-approved test. If the dimensions have not been established, students should identify what they would need to measure rather than invent convenient numbers.

9. 9. Plan a real-time 20-week sequence

The Design Project runs for twenty weeks excluding school holidays. A time-stages plan, such as a Gantt chart, helps identify investigation, ideas, models, prototype work and final communication. It should be monitored during the process rather than reconstructed at the last moment.

After a permitted session, note what was intended, what was actually completed and what changed. If a mock-up shows a problem, revise the next stage rather than quietly erase the delay. A useful plan supports decisions, not a flawless appearance.

10. 10. Use sketches to ask a question

Early sketches should help the designer explore an idea. A rough thumbnail comparing base shape or access position may be more informative than a heavily shaded drawing with no identified purpose. A drawing is part of thinking, not only a presentation.

Create two fictional variations of a desk organiser with different access arrangements. Ask which drawing reveals the user interaction more clearly. Use arrows or relevant dimensions where they help, but do not crowd the page with decorations.

11. 11. Generate genuinely distinct alternatives

Changing only the colour of a product may not explore a functional difficulty. Alternatives should investigate relevant differences: arrangement, folding, reach, grip, storage capacity, or another requirement grounded in the brief. Students should know what distinguishes each idea.

Compare a tall cup, divided tray and fold-out rack for a hypothetical workspace. Ask which criteria each serves or fails. The choice needs evidence from the user’s situation rather than a vote for whichever sketch looks most sophisticated.

12. 12. Evaluate trade-offs rather than search for perfection

One idea may be compact but unstable; another stable but too large. Making a design decision often means balancing relevant advantages and limitations. A learner should be able to explain which trade-off is acceptable for the user, not claim that one concept is perfect in every respect.

Use a simple practice comparison chart. Identify two functional criteria and one environmental or appearance criterion, then describe which alternative best meets the important ones. Do not fabricate physical performance results if the models were not tested.

13. 13. Connect user, function and environment

The 2027 rubric explicitly considers the user, functionality and environment when generating and developing ideas. A proposed product may work on one surface but not another, or be suitable for a particular user yet awkward for someone else. Design choices need context.

For a hypothetical rain-shelter stand, ask how moisture, safe storage and user access matter. The resulting brief might be very different from the same stand intended for a dry office. This exercise tests reasoning rather than materials expertise alone.

14. 14. Make a mock-up to learn, not to impress

A mock-up is a simplified model that helps examine an idea before the final prototype. It may use paper, cardboard, foam board or other school-approved materials. The purpose is to test scale, access, movement or arrangement without assuming the model is already a finished product.

Imagine a cardboard version of a holder. It may reveal that a ruler blocks book access. That discovery can justify a design change. A model with no identifiable test or influence on decision-making shows less understanding.

15. 15. Distinguish a mock-up from the final prototype

Mock-ups are tools for exploration and comparison, while the prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution functions using appropriate technology. A visual resemblance alone does not make a mock-up into a functional prototype.

A cardboard hinge diagram may help explore folding geometry; the final school-supervised prototype must use suitable materials, support and mechanisms to show the intended function. The actual brief and authorised workshop resources determine what is appropriate.

16. 16. Test one important property at a time

A model test is useful when it has an intended question and an observation. If the candidate changes shape, material and load simultaneously, the result may be difficult to interpret. Fair comparison helps identify the most relevant factor.

Use a hypothetical stand stability test on paper. State what conditions would need to remain consistent for two shapes to be compared. Real equipment and load selection must be approved by the teacher, and an untested prediction should not be described as proven.

17. 17. Record mock-up evidence honestly

Photographs or sketches of genuine models can document what happened and why the idea changed. A student who hides every failure or recreates a fake test after the event makes the journal less useful as a real-time record.

Label the intended question, observed result and next decision. An unsteady model may still be a meaningful design step if the finding leads to a justified change. Honest evidence is stronger than a glossy claim of constant success.

18. 18. Understand iteration as intelligent correction

SEAB’s design model is not a strict one-way sequence. A problem in a mock-up can send the designer back to research or a different concept. A revised idea is not a sign that the student lacked talent; it is a normal feature of purposeful engineering and design.

Ask what assumption was contradicted and which new evidence would help. If a handle is uncomfortable, should the first question concern grip size, material, position or another requirement? The answer depends on what was observed.

19. 19. Keep sketches and annotations purposeful

An annotation is valuable when it identifies a material, motion, user interaction or function that would otherwise be unclear. Too many unrelated labels can obscure the actual idea. The journal is meant to reveal development, not reward writing the longest paragraphs.

Compare two sketches of a folding stand, one with clear movement arrows and one with decorative commentary. Ask which better explains how the design works. Focus on the technical relationship the viewer needs to understand.

20. 20. Maintain the Design Journal in real time

The official Design Journal is a real-time record and may contain planning sheets, research, sketches, relevant calculations, mock-ups and prototype evidence. Candidates are advised not to rework design sheets to create a retrospective perfect story.

Use A3-size securely fastened sheets or an A3 sketch pad as specified by SEAB. Ask the Coursework Supervisor how physical mock-ups, prototype, jigs or other objects should accompany the journal. Correct record keeping protects authenticity.

21. 21. Understand why A3 format matters

Technical sketches, observations and development sequences may need enough space to be readable. The A3 journal format is an actual assessment requirement, not a generic suggestion that all drawings must be large. Students should organise evidence accordingly.

Practice arranging a visual explanation with a drawing, one relevant measurement and concise notes. The layout should show the design decision without filling every available centimetre with generic research.

22. 22. Make the Presentation Board answer the brief

The Board communicates the proposed design solution to someone who has not followed every journal page. It should state the brief and specifications and show how the relevant design features work. This is a different communication task from collecting all research history.

SEAB permits a maximum of two single-sided A2-size pieces. A learner should make the solution’s essential function visible through appropriate drawing and annotation rather than decorate two boards with text that does not help explain the outcome.

23. 23. Show the product’s important features clearly

The official criteria reward graphical communication that allows a reader to understand the purpose and function of the design. A technically skilled maker can still lose clarity if the Board hides the movement, grip or access feature that resolves the user problem.

Use a suitable view, exploded detail or sequence sketch when authorised and relevant. A drawing should communicate what the object is meant to do, not merely look like an attractive advertising poster.

24. 24. Connect the board to actual specifications

A Presentation Board that proposes a design unrelated to the stated brief undermines the whole investigation. Review whether each major feature helps meet a relevant specification. Do not claim a property that the prototype or authorised tests did not show.

For a fictional foldable book support, a drawing should make its angle adjustment understandable if that is central to the user’s need. Claims about load rating or durability require evidence, not artistic confidence.

25. 25. Know the role of mechanism choices

Mechanisms such as levers, linkages, gears, cams, pulleys and springs can transmit or change motion. The best mechanism is one that serves the specified user function with suitable design and safety. Adding gears to every project is not evidence of better D&T thinking.

Compare a folding, sliding and rotating motion conceptually for an imaginary holder. Ask which arrangement fits the task and what further information would be needed for the teacher-supervised prototype. Avoid instructions for improvised powered machinery.

26. 26. Know the role of simple electronics

Electronics may be relevant when a design needs sensing, timed control or another function described by the syllabus. But the presence of an LED or a sensor does not automatically make a solution appropriate. The design should justify what the component contributes to the user.

In a practice brief, ask whether a purely mechanical indicator could solve the problem more simply than a powered circuit. The correct choice depends on evidence and constraints. Any physical powered testing must remain in the approved school setting.

27. 27. Choose materials to meet function and conditions

Materials differ in strength, workability, weight, finish and suitability for an intended environment. The candidate should relate material choice to the brief and authorised workshop resources rather than select the most expensive or dramatic material.

A hypothetical classroom organiser may need to be stable, light and safe to handle. Discuss which properties would matter without claiming a specific commercial material has been tested when it has not. Teacher guidance governs real suitability and handling.

28. 28. Use measurements and markings responsibly

Accurate making depends on dimensions, reference points and safe marking-out processes. The syllabus names measuring and marking techniques, but the assessed project must use the school’s approved methods and tools. A precise concept can still fail if the fabricated parts are inaccurate.

Use paper dimension exercises to check arithmetic and spatial reasoning. Actual drilling, cutting or machining must never be taught from an improvised home procedure in this article. Competent supervision is part of correct design work.

29. 29. Treat cutting, shaping and joining as supervised skills

Processes for resistant materials can involve sharp tools, machines, adhesives or heat and must be matched to the selected material. Candidates need safe and appropriate practical methods, not a collection of hazardous workshop tricks. The school’s equipment and training determine permitted actions.

A student should know the purpose of a joint or shape operation and how it contributes to prototype function. If uncertain, they must stop and ask the Coursework Supervisor instead of copying an online demonstration.

30. 30. Build for function before cosmetic finishing

A prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution works. Decorative paint or elaborate surface treatment cannot compensate for a joint that fails or a mechanism that does not perform the required movement. Functional accuracy and safety remain central.

During approved development, prioritise whether the user can perform the intended task and whether relevant specifications are met. Finish and presentation should reinforce that result, not disguise shortcomings.

31. 31. Understand quality control in a school project

Quality control means checking whether the work meets relevant requirements at suitable stages. It can include inspection of dimensions, assembly and observable function within the school’s safe procedures. The rubric places substantial weight on realising a competent working prototype.

Create a paper checklist derived from fictional design specifications. After a school-approved test, record the actual result. A single visual inspection may not prove stability or durability, so state what has and has not been verified.

32. 32. Keep the project within the candidate’s means

SEAB explicitly advises schools to ensure that extended research or specialisation beyond the taught syllabus remains within candidates’ means. This is an important educational safeguard. A solution requiring professional fabrication or inaccessible tools can be unsuitable even when it sounds ambitious.

Discuss a proportionate alternative that uses approved school resources while still addressing the user. Feasibility is not a lack of imagination; it is a design quality. Parents should not purchase industrial equipment to rescue an overcomplicated concept.

33. 33. Audit the seven marking criteria before finalising

The 70-mark rubric is divided across planning, brief/specification, ideas, sketching, mock-ups, communication and prototype. A candidate should be able to identify authentic evidence relevant to each. The assessment is holistic, not a checklist that can be satisfied by adding a stock paragraph under every heading.

If the working model is strong but the Board is difficult to understand, a communication weakness may remain. If the journal is neat but no purposeful models were used, development evidence may be thin. Diagnose the first genuine gap rather than add unrelated pages.

34. 34. Keep Paper 1 revision alongside twenty weeks of making

The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and worth 30%. It includes design reasoning, mechanisms and electronics. A candidate can learn many ideas through the project but still needs practice explaining them in unfamiliar written questions.

Use short revision tasks every week that connect one project concept to a changed scenario. Do not copy the candidate’s own design answer for every question; Paper 1 tests transferable understanding.

35. 35. How parents can help without making the project

Parents can provide encouragement, discuss users’ needs and help the learner plan rest and schoolwork. They should not create the Design Journal, build a substitute prototype or retouch assessed evidence to make it look more competent. Such actions can undermine authenticity and obscure the student’s abilities.

A useful parent question is, ‘What did the mock-up show, and what would you change because of it?’ This supports independent reasoning while keeping the actual examined project in the student’s hands.

36. 36. How tutors can teach through unrelated examples

An outside tutor may teach algebra, sketch reading, mechanisms or decision-making with unassessed examples. They can explain why an A3 development sketch or an A2 Board communicates a different purpose. They should not author the candidate’s actual journal, model or presentation.

General practice can explore a fictional product with changed constraints so that the pupil learns to reason independently. The authentic examination work remains governed by the school supervisor and official K124 rules.

37. 37. A sensible twenty-week rhythm

A general planning sketch might reserve earlier sessions for needs analysis, research and initial concepts, middle stages for developing alternatives and mock-ups, and later stages for supervised prototyping, checks and communication. Actual dates must follow the released question and school schedule.

Progress should be monitored while it occurs, with adjustments when evidence changes. Treat school holidays correctly as excluded from the twenty-week examination period rather than pretending the project has unlimited time.

38. 38. Explore future study without guaranteed outcomes

D&T learning can build practical reasoning useful in industrial and product design, manufacturing, engineering support, building technology or digital fabrication. Those possibilities depend on further qualifications, safe training and personal interests; they are not awarded automatically with K124.

The child’s current subject level does not determine every future route. Check the complete SEC record and the receiving programme’s prerequisites when post-secondary applications become relevant.

39. 39. Finish with a credible design story

A credible project begins with an evidence-backed need, uses purposeful sketches and mock-ups, selects appropriate technology, and culminates in a working prototype communicated clearly. The real-time journal and Board should tell complementary parts of the same story.

Before the teacher’s deadline, check the current assessment brief, evidence, journal format, physical items, Board format and authenticity. A simpler but genuine design is better than an impressive-looking adult-built model the candidate cannot explain.

Seventeen original decisions and the reasoning behind them

1. The user need is confused with a fashionable product

A candidate wants to make a smart lamp before checking whether the user actually needs lighting. What evidence would justify the design opportunity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

2. A stand is elegant but tips easily

A paper model looks appealing yet becomes unstable with a fictional test load. How should the problem lead to a new design question?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

3. Two sketches differ only in colour

The project needs better access, but the alternatives change only paint colour. Which functional variable needs exploration?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

4. The journal is rewritten to hide a failed mock-up

A student replaces real early sheets with a polished story. Why does that conflict with a real-time design record and the advice not to rework sheets?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

5. A mock-up has no identifiable test

A decorative cardboard model is displayed without a decision it helped make. How can the student explain what was actually learned?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

6. The Board is attractive but hides the mechanism

A proposed folding rack has a complex movement, yet the Presentation Board only shows a static front view. Which function should be communicated graphically?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

7. A high-cost component is selected without need

An expensive electronic sensor is added to an ordinary static desk tray. Does it improve the actual user problem, or introduce needless complexity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

8. A source image is copied without attribution

A design feature is lifted from a website and presented as an original concept. How can influences be researched and credited honestly?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

9. The prototype’s material is unsuitable

The chosen material deforms under the intended everyday conditions. Which performance requirement was overlooked, and which school-approved alternatives should be compared?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

10. A great sketch does not yield a working model

The drawing appears convincing, but the assessed prototype cannot perform the required function. Why does the 21-mark realisation criterion matter?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

11. A school holiday is counted as project time

The pupil plans twenty continuous calendar weeks despite the exclusion of school holidays. Which timetable assumption needs correcting?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

12. The teacher is asked to build a difficult part

A candidate wants the supervisor to produce the challenging prototype assembly rather than receive authorised guidance. How does this affect candidate ownership?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

13. An extra page is added instead of testing

The journal becomes longer but no mock-up or functioning evidence improves. What does the rubric actually reward?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

14. A result is called proven after one visual observation

A model is described as stable or durable despite not having been appropriately tested. What evidence would be required before making that claim?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

15. A home tool is introduced without safety training

The pupil tries to use a potentially hazardous machine based on an online tutorial. Why should school-supervised, approved processes control the making?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

16. Paper 1 is ignored because the project is 70%

A candidate stops studying mechanisms and electronics in written contexts. What proportion of the subject is still at risk?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

17. One project difficulty becomes a career label

The student struggles with a joint and decides engineering is impossible. What specific practical or conceptual skill should be taught before making a long-term judgement?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

Quick answers about K124 Paper 2

How long does the Design Project last?

Twenty weeks from the examination question release, excluding school holidays.

How much is Paper 2 worth?

Seventy marks and 70% of G1 Design and Technology.

What must be submitted?

A real-time Design Journal, relevant mock-ups and prototype and a Presentation Board following the official conditions.

What is the journal format?

A3-size securely fastened sheets or A3 sketch pads, with the relevant physical project items.

How large may the Presentation Board be?

A maximum of two single-sided A2 boards.

Are students expected to make mock-ups?

Yes. The rubric specifically assesses meaningful models used for idea exploration and decisions.

Should early journal pages be rewritten after a mistake?

The syllabus advises candidates not to rework design sheets; a real-time record should reflect authentic development.

Is Paper 2 marked only by the teacher?

It is assessed internally and externally moderated according to the published rubric.

Can a parent or tutor build the prototype?

No. The assessed work must demonstrate the candidate’s own abilities within school-supervised conditions.

Does a 70% project remove Paper 1?

No. The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and contributes 30%.

Official syllabus and related eduKateSG guides

• SEAB 2027 G1 Design and Technology K124 syllabus
• 2027 SEC G1 subject directory
• Understanding the twenty-week Design Project
• Paper 1: five questions, mechanisms and electronics
• G1 Design and Technology: from user needs to prototyping
• Working from real needs and tested models
• Secondary Mathematics foundations for measurements and reasoning
• Parent–student consultation with eduKate Singapore

Independent education guide, October 2026. Every scenario is hypothetical and is not an official design question or an assessed solution. The current SEAB K124 syllabus and school Coursework Supervisor control practical work, safety, authorship and submission.

To survive G1 Design and Technology Paper 2, solve a real user’s problem, document your decisions while making them, and test whether the resulting prototype does what it is supposed to do. In the 2027 SEC G1 K124 syllabus, Paper 2 is an individual Design Project that runs for twenty weeks after the examination question is released, excluding school holidays. It contributes 70% of the subject and carries 70 marks. Candidates submit a real-time Design Journal, mock-ups and a prototype, plus a Presentation Board that makes the proposed solution understandable.

The task is not to build the most expensive or complicated gadget. A simple, appropriately tested design that responds to actual user needs can be stronger than an elaborate object disconnected from the brief. Students develop observation, empathy, sketching, making, problem-solving, safe workshop habits and the ability to explain trade-offs. These are useful in engineering support, product design, manufacturing, technical operations and many other directions, but no one G1 project guarantees an admission or career outcome.

Check the official SEAB 2027 K124 Design and Technology syllabus and the official G1 subject directory. The actual examination question governs the candidate’s design opportunity, with school Coursework Supervisors facilitating and assessing work before external moderation. This article uses invented teaching cases and must not become a completed design solution submitted on behalf of a candidate. Physical tools, cutting, shaping, drilling, joining, electrical testing and machinery require authorised school supervision.

Start with six actions that preserve your marks and safety

• Read the actual question before settling on a product or design idea.
• Write the user, context, inconvenience and intended function in plain language.
• Create a real-time 20-week plan and monitor progress as work occurs; do not retrospectively fabricate a perfect journal.
• Generate alternatives and build suitable mock-ups to learn why one option might work better.
• Use approved materials and teacher-supervised prototype processes; follow workshop safety rules.
• Finish with a coherent A3 journal, genuine mock-ups and prototype, and a clear Presentation Board on no more than two single-sided A2 sheets.

The official 2027 Paper 2 assessment criteria

Assessment criterion	Marks	Evidence that matters
Planning for and monitoring the Design Project	3	Useful time-stages plan and ongoing records
Formulating design brief and specifications	6	Relevant research leading to clear user-centred criteria
Generating and developing ideas	8	Reasoned alternatives considering user, functionality and environment
Sketching and drawing to design	6	Visual development that helps explore ideas and prototype details
Using mock-ups to design	12	Meaningful models used to explore or test decisions
Communicating proposed solution	14	Clear Presentation Board showing the brief, specifications and how features work
Realising the prototype	21	Appropriate making, quality control and functioning outcome
Total Paper 2	70	Twenty weeks excluding school holidays; internally assessed, externally moderated

Paper 1 is separate: a compulsory one-hour, 50-mark written exam worth the remaining 30%. Questions 1–3 address Design for 18 marks, and Questions 4–5 mechanisms and electronics for 32 marks. A learner should therefore maintain theory revision alongside the project. A sophisticated prototype does not make the written paper disappear.

Design thinking is not a straight line

SEAB’s design model connects needs analysis, research, idea conceptualisation, development and prototyping. The stages can loop back. If a model fails a test, the candidate may need more research or to reconsider the user’s requirement. Revising a design based on evidence can demonstrate understanding; hiding every change to produce a falsely effortless development story does not.

The useful question after a failure is, ‘Which assumption did the evidence challenge?’ A stand that tips may need a different base, a handle that is awkward to grip may need reconsideration, and an attractive display that obstructs reading may need a clearer layout. The right correction depends on the user and the specific brief, not a formula applied indiscriminately.

How to use this project guide

Understand the need · Ideas and mock-ups · Journal and board · Prototype and safety · Original design cases · Questions

1. 1. Begin with the user rather than the product

A design opportunity begins with someone experiencing a real difficulty, not with a candidate wanting to use a favourite machine. Identify the user, activity, environment and observed inconvenience. That is the basis of an appropriate solution, whether it uses wood, plastics, simple mechanisms or another permitted technique.

Imagine three classmates sharing a small study table with pens and rulers. The difficulty may be finding items quickly, preventing a tall ruler from tipping a holder, or leaving room for books. Each need suggests different design priorities. The candidate should observe rather than guess which matters most.

2. 2. Define the problem as a testable question

A vague statement such as ‘make a better desk organiser’ gives little guidance about success. The design brief should describe the intended function and the situation. This might include accessibility, stability or how much space can be occupied, where relevant to the actual task.

For general practice, turn a fictional inconvenience into a sentence about what the proposed design should enable a user to do. Ask which measurable or observable criteria could indicate improvement. The actual K124 examination brief must determine the real work.

3. 3. Understand the difference between needs and wants

A user may prefer a bright colour, but the essential problem may concern fitting an object safely within limited space. Good design takes preferences seriously while distinguishing them from functional requirements. The final solution should address the actual priorities.

Create two columns in a practice notebook: essential function and desirable preference. For a fictional book support, stability may be necessary while a choice of colours may be optional. Explain how that distinction affects the design specifications.

4. 4. Observe how the present object is used

Observation helps reveal where a process breaks down. A design that looks untidy may still work; a visually attractive holder can be awkward when someone uses it repeatedly. Research should focus on user behaviour and constraints rather than merely collecting product photographs.

Use an imaginary existing stand that slips on smooth tables. Ask what observation would establish the problem and which conditions should be recorded. Avoid inventing actual test results; the candidate must gather their own evidence under permitted school arrangements.

5. 5. Ask useful questions about context

Design decisions depend on who uses an object and where. A product intended for a wet kitchen counter may need different considerations from one used in a dry classroom. A fixed workstation and a portable object may also have different requirements.

List relevant questions without pretending to know the answers: Will the user carry it, clean it, adjust it or share it? Which environment and dimensions matter? A good designer discovers details before claiming a chosen idea will work.

6. 6. Keep research relevant and credited

Research may include observation, appropriate product comparisons, published information and images that reveal techniques or materials. It should lead towards clearer choices rather than fill pages with unrelated screenshots. The journal should show why a source helped the design process.

An online photograph of a folding mechanism can be an influence, but copying a complete protected design without acknowledgement is not original work. Describe the principle being studied and how a personally developed idea uses the information appropriately.

7. 7. Formulate a clear design brief

The design brief should express the problem and intended result concisely. It need not sound like a corporate contract; it needs to guide making decisions. A clear brief will also support the Presentation Board and evaluation of the eventual solution.

Compare ‘make a nice wooden object’ with a statement about supporting a textbook at a suitable angle on a specific table. The second gives a purpose for sketching and mock-ups. Candidates must formulate their own brief from the actual released examination opportunity.

8. 8. Turn the brief into specifications

Specifications describe what the solution needs to satisfy. They may concern function, appropriate size, safe access, stability, materials, environment or appearance. A strong specification comes from the research and offers a fair way to examine the proposed outcome.

An invented stand may need to fit a stated workspace and hold a particular model object without tipping in a school-approved test. If the dimensions have not been established, students should identify what they would need to measure rather than invent convenient numbers.

9. 9. Plan a real-time 20-week sequence

The Design Project runs for twenty weeks excluding school holidays. A time-stages plan, such as a Gantt chart, helps identify investigation, ideas, models, prototype work and final communication. It should be monitored during the process rather than reconstructed at the last moment.

After a permitted session, note what was intended, what was actually completed and what changed. If a mock-up shows a problem, revise the next stage rather than quietly erase the delay. A useful plan supports decisions, not a flawless appearance.

10. 10. Use sketches to ask a question

Early sketches should help the designer explore an idea. A rough thumbnail comparing base shape or access position may be more informative than a heavily shaded drawing with no identified purpose. A drawing is part of thinking, not only a presentation.

Create two fictional variations of a desk organiser with different access arrangements. Ask which drawing reveals the user interaction more clearly. Use arrows or relevant dimensions where they help, but do not crowd the page with decorations.

11. 11. Generate genuinely distinct alternatives

Changing only the colour of a product may not explore a functional difficulty. Alternatives should investigate relevant differences: arrangement, folding, reach, grip, storage capacity, or another requirement grounded in the brief. Students should know what distinguishes each idea.

Compare a tall cup, divided tray and fold-out rack for a hypothetical workspace. Ask which criteria each serves or fails. The choice needs evidence from the user’s situation rather than a vote for whichever sketch looks most sophisticated.

12. 12. Evaluate trade-offs rather than search for perfection

One idea may be compact but unstable; another stable but too large. Making a design decision often means balancing relevant advantages and limitations. A learner should be able to explain which trade-off is acceptable for the user, not claim that one concept is perfect in every respect.

Use a simple practice comparison chart. Identify two functional criteria and one environmental or appearance criterion, then describe which alternative best meets the important ones. Do not fabricate physical performance results if the models were not tested.

13. 13. Connect user, function and environment

The 2027 rubric explicitly considers the user, functionality and environment when generating and developing ideas. A proposed product may work on one surface but not another, or be suitable for a particular user yet awkward for someone else. Design choices need context.

For a hypothetical rain-shelter stand, ask how moisture, safe storage and user access matter. The resulting brief might be very different from the same stand intended for a dry office. This exercise tests reasoning rather than materials expertise alone.

14. 14. Make a mock-up to learn, not to impress

A mock-up is a simplified model that helps examine an idea before the final prototype. It may use paper, cardboard, foam board or other school-approved materials. The purpose is to test scale, access, movement or arrangement without assuming the model is already a finished product.

Imagine a cardboard version of a holder. It may reveal that a ruler blocks book access. That discovery can justify a design change. A model with no identifiable test or influence on decision-making shows less understanding.

15. 15. Distinguish a mock-up from the final prototype

Mock-ups are tools for exploration and comparison, while the prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution functions using appropriate technology. A visual resemblance alone does not make a mock-up into a functional prototype.

A cardboard hinge diagram may help explore folding geometry; the final school-supervised prototype must use suitable materials, support and mechanisms to show the intended function. The actual brief and authorised workshop resources determine what is appropriate.

16. 16. Test one important property at a time

A model test is useful when it has an intended question and an observation. If the candidate changes shape, material and load simultaneously, the result may be difficult to interpret. Fair comparison helps identify the most relevant factor.

Use a hypothetical stand stability test on paper. State what conditions would need to remain consistent for two shapes to be compared. Real equipment and load selection must be approved by the teacher, and an untested prediction should not be described as proven.

17. 17. Record mock-up evidence honestly

Photographs or sketches of genuine models can document what happened and why the idea changed. A student who hides every failure or recreates a fake test after the event makes the journal less useful as a real-time record.

Label the intended question, observed result and next decision. An unsteady model may still be a meaningful design step if the finding leads to a justified change. Honest evidence is stronger than a glossy claim of constant success.

18. 18. Understand iteration as intelligent correction

SEAB’s design model is not a strict one-way sequence. A problem in a mock-up can send the designer back to research or a different concept. A revised idea is not a sign that the student lacked talent; it is a normal feature of purposeful engineering and design.

Ask what assumption was contradicted and which new evidence would help. If a handle is uncomfortable, should the first question concern grip size, material, position or another requirement? The answer depends on what was observed.

19. 19. Keep sketches and annotations purposeful

An annotation is valuable when it identifies a material, motion, user interaction or function that would otherwise be unclear. Too many unrelated labels can obscure the actual idea. The journal is meant to reveal development, not reward writing the longest paragraphs.

Compare two sketches of a folding stand, one with clear movement arrows and one with decorative commentary. Ask which better explains how the design works. Focus on the technical relationship the viewer needs to understand.

20. 20. Maintain the Design Journal in real time

The official Design Journal is a real-time record and may contain planning sheets, research, sketches, relevant calculations, mock-ups and prototype evidence. Candidates are advised not to rework design sheets to create a retrospective perfect story.

Use A3-size securely fastened sheets or an A3 sketch pad as specified by SEAB. Ask the Coursework Supervisor how physical mock-ups, prototype, jigs or other objects should accompany the journal. Correct record keeping protects authenticity.

21. 21. Understand why A3 format matters

Technical sketches, observations and development sequences may need enough space to be readable. The A3 journal format is an actual assessment requirement, not a generic suggestion that all drawings must be large. Students should organise evidence accordingly.

Practice arranging a visual explanation with a drawing, one relevant measurement and concise notes. The layout should show the design decision without filling every available centimetre with generic research.

22. 22. Make the Presentation Board answer the brief

The Board communicates the proposed design solution to someone who has not followed every journal page. It should state the brief and specifications and show how the relevant design features work. This is a different communication task from collecting all research history.

SEAB permits a maximum of two single-sided A2-size pieces. A learner should make the solution’s essential function visible through appropriate drawing and annotation rather than decorate two boards with text that does not help explain the outcome.

23. 23. Show the product’s important features clearly

The official criteria reward graphical communication that allows a reader to understand the purpose and function of the design. A technically skilled maker can still lose clarity if the Board hides the movement, grip or access feature that resolves the user problem.

Use a suitable view, exploded detail or sequence sketch when authorised and relevant. A drawing should communicate what the object is meant to do, not merely look like an attractive advertising poster.

24. 24. Connect the board to actual specifications

A Presentation Board that proposes a design unrelated to the stated brief undermines the whole investigation. Review whether each major feature helps meet a relevant specification. Do not claim a property that the prototype or authorised tests did not show.

For a fictional foldable book support, a drawing should make its angle adjustment understandable if that is central to the user’s need. Claims about load rating or durability require evidence, not artistic confidence.

25. 25. Know the role of mechanism choices

Mechanisms such as levers, linkages, gears, cams, pulleys and springs can transmit or change motion. The best mechanism is one that serves the specified user function with suitable design and safety. Adding gears to every project is not evidence of better D&T thinking.

Compare a folding, sliding and rotating motion conceptually for an imaginary holder. Ask which arrangement fits the task and what further information would be needed for the teacher-supervised prototype. Avoid instructions for improvised powered machinery.

26. 26. Know the role of simple electronics

Electronics may be relevant when a design needs sensing, timed control or another function described by the syllabus. But the presence of an LED or a sensor does not automatically make a solution appropriate. The design should justify what the component contributes to the user.

In a practice brief, ask whether a purely mechanical indicator could solve the problem more simply than a powered circuit. The correct choice depends on evidence and constraints. Any physical powered testing must remain in the approved school setting.

27. 27. Choose materials to meet function and conditions

Materials differ in strength, workability, weight, finish and suitability for an intended environment. The candidate should relate material choice to the brief and authorised workshop resources rather than select the most expensive or dramatic material.

A hypothetical classroom organiser may need to be stable, light and safe to handle. Discuss which properties would matter without claiming a specific commercial material has been tested when it has not. Teacher guidance governs real suitability and handling.

28. 28. Use measurements and markings responsibly

Accurate making depends on dimensions, reference points and safe marking-out processes. The syllabus names measuring and marking techniques, but the assessed project must use the school’s approved methods and tools. A precise concept can still fail if the fabricated parts are inaccurate.

Use paper dimension exercises to check arithmetic and spatial reasoning. Actual drilling, cutting or machining must never be taught from an improvised home procedure in this article. Competent supervision is part of correct design work.

29. 29. Treat cutting, shaping and joining as supervised skills

Processes for resistant materials can involve sharp tools, machines, adhesives or heat and must be matched to the selected material. Candidates need safe and appropriate practical methods, not a collection of hazardous workshop tricks. The school’s equipment and training determine permitted actions.

A student should know the purpose of a joint or shape operation and how it contributes to prototype function. If uncertain, they must stop and ask the Coursework Supervisor instead of copying an online demonstration.

30. 30. Build for function before cosmetic finishing

A prototype should demonstrate how the proposed solution works. Decorative paint or elaborate surface treatment cannot compensate for a joint that fails or a mechanism that does not perform the required movement. Functional accuracy and safety remain central.

During approved development, prioritise whether the user can perform the intended task and whether relevant specifications are met. Finish and presentation should reinforce that result, not disguise shortcomings.

31. 31. Understand quality control in a school project

Quality control means checking whether the work meets relevant requirements at suitable stages. It can include inspection of dimensions, assembly and observable function within the school’s safe procedures. The rubric places substantial weight on realising a competent working prototype.

Create a paper checklist derived from fictional design specifications. After a school-approved test, record the actual result. A single visual inspection may not prove stability or durability, so state what has and has not been verified.

32. 32. Keep the project within the candidate’s means

SEAB explicitly advises schools to ensure that extended research or specialisation beyond the taught syllabus remains within candidates’ means. This is an important educational safeguard. A solution requiring professional fabrication or inaccessible tools can be unsuitable even when it sounds ambitious.

Discuss a proportionate alternative that uses approved school resources while still addressing the user. Feasibility is not a lack of imagination; it is a design quality. Parents should not purchase industrial equipment to rescue an overcomplicated concept.

33. 33. Audit the seven marking criteria before finalising

The 70-mark rubric is divided across planning, brief/specification, ideas, sketching, mock-ups, communication and prototype. A candidate should be able to identify authentic evidence relevant to each. The assessment is holistic, not a checklist that can be satisfied by adding a stock paragraph under every heading.

If the working model is strong but the Board is difficult to understand, a communication weakness may remain. If the journal is neat but no purposeful models were used, development evidence may be thin. Diagnose the first genuine gap rather than add unrelated pages.

34. 34. Keep Paper 1 revision alongside twenty weeks of making

The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and worth 30%. It includes design reasoning, mechanisms and electronics. A candidate can learn many ideas through the project but still needs practice explaining them in unfamiliar written questions.

Use short revision tasks every week that connect one project concept to a changed scenario. Do not copy the candidate’s own design answer for every question; Paper 1 tests transferable understanding.

35. 35. How parents can help without making the project

Parents can provide encouragement, discuss users’ needs and help the learner plan rest and schoolwork. They should not create the Design Journal, build a substitute prototype or retouch assessed evidence to make it look more competent. Such actions can undermine authenticity and obscure the student’s abilities.

A useful parent question is, ‘What did the mock-up show, and what would you change because of it?’ This supports independent reasoning while keeping the actual examined project in the student’s hands.

36. 36. How tutors can teach through unrelated examples

An outside tutor may teach algebra, sketch reading, mechanisms or decision-making with unassessed examples. They can explain why an A3 development sketch or an A2 Board communicates a different purpose. They should not author the candidate’s actual journal, model or presentation.

General practice can explore a fictional product with changed constraints so that the pupil learns to reason independently. The authentic examination work remains governed by the school supervisor and official K124 rules.

37. 37. A sensible twenty-week rhythm

A general planning sketch might reserve earlier sessions for needs analysis, research and initial concepts, middle stages for developing alternatives and mock-ups, and later stages for supervised prototyping, checks and communication. Actual dates must follow the released question and school schedule.

Progress should be monitored while it occurs, with adjustments when evidence changes. Treat school holidays correctly as excluded from the twenty-week examination period rather than pretending the project has unlimited time.

38. 38. Explore future study without guaranteed outcomes

D&T learning can build practical reasoning useful in industrial and product design, manufacturing, engineering support, building technology or digital fabrication. Those possibilities depend on further qualifications, safe training and personal interests; they are not awarded automatically with K124.

The child’s current subject level does not determine every future route. Check the complete SEC record and the receiving programme’s prerequisites when post-secondary applications become relevant.

39. 39. Finish with a credible design story

A credible project begins with an evidence-backed need, uses purposeful sketches and mock-ups, selects appropriate technology, and culminates in a working prototype communicated clearly. The real-time journal and Board should tell complementary parts of the same story.

Before the teacher’s deadline, check the current assessment brief, evidence, journal format, physical items, Board format and authenticity. A simpler but genuine design is better than an impressive-looking adult-built model the candidate cannot explain.

Seventeen original decisions and the reasoning behind them

1. The user need is confused with a fashionable product

A candidate wants to make a smart lamp before checking whether the user actually needs lighting. What evidence would justify the design opportunity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

2. A stand is elegant but tips easily

A paper model looks appealing yet becomes unstable with a fictional test load. How should the problem lead to a new design question?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

3. Two sketches differ only in colour

The project needs better access, but the alternatives change only paint colour. Which functional variable needs exploration?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

4. The journal is rewritten to hide a failed mock-up

A student replaces real early sheets with a polished story. Why does that conflict with a real-time design record and the advice not to rework sheets?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

5. A mock-up has no identifiable test

A decorative cardboard model is displayed without a decision it helped make. How can the student explain what was actually learned?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

6. The Board is attractive but hides the mechanism

A proposed folding rack has a complex movement, yet the Presentation Board only shows a static front view. Which function should be communicated graphically?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

7. A high-cost component is selected without need

An expensive electronic sensor is added to an ordinary static desk tray. Does it improve the actual user problem, or introduce needless complexity?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

8. A source image is copied without attribution

A design feature is lifted from a website and presented as an original concept. How can influences be researched and credited honestly?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

9. The prototype’s material is unsuitable

The chosen material deforms under the intended everyday conditions. Which performance requirement was overlooked, and which school-approved alternatives should be compared?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

10. A great sketch does not yield a working model

The drawing appears convincing, but the assessed prototype cannot perform the required function. Why does the 21-mark realisation criterion matter?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

11. A school holiday is counted as project time

The pupil plans twenty continuous calendar weeks despite the exclusion of school holidays. Which timetable assumption needs correcting?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

12. The teacher is asked to build a difficult part

A candidate wants the supervisor to produce the challenging prototype assembly rather than receive authorised guidance. How does this affect candidate ownership?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

13. An extra page is added instead of testing

The journal becomes longer but no mock-up or functioning evidence improves. What does the rubric actually reward?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

14. A result is called proven after one visual observation

A model is described as stable or durable despite not having been appropriately tested. What evidence would be required before making that claim?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

15. A home tool is introduced without safety training

The pupil tries to use a potentially hazardous machine based on an online tutorial. Why should school-supervised, approved processes control the making?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

16. Paper 1 is ignored because the project is 70%

A candidate stops studying mechanisms and electronics in written contexts. What proportion of the subject is still at risk?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

17. One project difficulty becomes a career label

The student struggles with a joint and decides engineering is impossible. What specific practical or conceptual skill should be taught before making a long-term judgement?

In general non-assessed practice, identify the user, the precise evidence, the trade-off and the next authorised decision. Change a relevant condition and revisit the choice. Never use the illustrative example as the candidate’s actual submitted project.

Quick answers about K124 Paper 2

How long does the Design Project last?

Twenty weeks from the examination question release, excluding school holidays.

How much is Paper 2 worth?

Seventy marks and 70% of G1 Design and Technology.

What must be submitted?

A real-time Design Journal, relevant mock-ups and prototype and a Presentation Board following the official conditions.

What is the journal format?

A3-size securely fastened sheets or A3 sketch pads, with the relevant physical project items.

How large may the Presentation Board be?

A maximum of two single-sided A2 boards.

Are students expected to make mock-ups?

Yes. The rubric specifically assesses meaningful models used for idea exploration and decisions.

Should early journal pages be rewritten after a mistake?

The syllabus advises candidates not to rework design sheets; a real-time record should reflect authentic development.

Is Paper 2 marked only by the teacher?

It is assessed internally and externally moderated according to the published rubric.

Can a parent or tutor build the prototype?

No. The assessed work must demonstrate the candidate’s own abilities within school-supervised conditions.

Does a 70% project remove Paper 1?

No. The one-hour written Paper 1 remains compulsory and contributes 30%.

Official syllabus and related eduKateSG guides

• SEAB 2027 G1 Design and Technology K124 syllabus
• 2027 SEC G1 subject directory
• Understanding the twenty-week Design Project
• Paper 1: five questions, mechanisms and electronics
• G1 Design and Technology: from user needs to prototyping
• Working from real needs and tested models
• Secondary Mathematics foundations for measurements and reasoning
• Parent–student consultation with eduKate Singapore

Independent education guide, October 2026. Every scenario is hypothetical and is not an official design question or an assessed solution. The current SEAB K124 syllabus and school Coursework Supervisor control practical work, safety, authorship and submission.