[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-623760-105":59,"doc-detail-623760-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","gce-design-technology-unit-9dt01-phone-charger-commentary-sheet-full-portfolio","GCE Design & Technology Unit: 9DT01 - Phone Charger - Commentary Sheet - Full Portfolio","","GCE Design & Technology Unit 9DT01 assessment commentary evaluates a candidate’s Phone Charger full portfolio across multiple grids. The feedback reviews investigation and evidence of client/user needs, critiques superficial research methods and limited analysis, and assesses technical specification quality, measurability, and justification. It also highlights strengths such as prime research evidence from disassembly, while noting gaps in dimensional data, iterative depth, ergonomic application, and evaluation-linked testing for higher marks.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":20,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/gce-design-technology-unit-9dt01-phone-charger-commentary-sheet-full-portfolio/623760/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/gce-design-technology-unit-9dt01-phone-charger-commentary-sheet-full-portfolio/623760.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Fans","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-01","2026-10-20",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":24},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What does Grid 1 expect regarding investigation evidence for the phone charger portfolio?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"Grid 1 expects the candidate to work with a client or market opportunity, investigate needs and wants, identify pertinent issues, and form a range of design opportunities aligned to those needs.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What weaknesses are identified in the candidate’s research section?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"The commentary notes superficial product analysis, simplistic questionnaire outcomes, limited conclusions from disassembly without clear dimensions, and generic material research not directly linked to the charger design.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How is the specification evidence evaluated in Grid 3?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The feedback highlights relevant specification points (e.g., indicating charging status) but says justification is limited and measurability is not specific, with dimensional suitability not supported by explored phone measurements and tests that could be used in later evaluation.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},623760,1792757728,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":19,"category_name":20,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":24,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":29,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},5909892330395,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","GCE Design & Technology Unit: 9DT01  \n\n| Topic: Phone Charger  Full Portfolio  |  |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| General Description\u003Cbr>The folder contained 35 pages. On the initial scan of the folder, it can be seen that all of the assessment criteria appear to be covered/attempted by the candidate. The final product looks simplistic in its outcome, analysis of this section will reveal whether this is the case. |  | Centre Mark | Mod Mark |\n| Grid 1\u003Cbr>Investigation\u003Cbr>Evidence | In this section we expect to see the candidate work with a client/clients or market opportunity. From their interaction pertinent issues are identified and a range of possible design opportunities are formed. The needs and wants of the client should be investigated to justify their initial design thoughts. Possible outcomes can be explored and aligned to the clients wants and needs.\u003Cbr>Slides 2-4 offer 3 possible design outcomes. The candidate clearly has a design outcome in mind, then tries to fit a problem and client to match these. In slide 3, for example the candidate states ‘I plan to make a wireless charger’, they then go on to say,‘My client for this design would be someone who struggles using a wired phone charger’. In all cases a generic suggestion of who the client would be is suggested. Some of the detail of the annotation on these pages are heading in the right direction, with pros and cons, however, the lack depth is in keeping with a lower end assessment. Some reference to design possibilities is made, these are not justified and are based upon a rudimentary product analysis.\u003Cbr>Slide 5, introduces the client. Reading the Bio of the client a wide range problems could have been addressed giving a vast range of possible design outcomes. These possibilities are ignored, and it appears the need of the client is made to match the product the candidate has chosen to make.\u003Cbr>Slide 6. The client interview is based around the product form, with little attention given to how or where the charger would be used. There is no analysis of the clients’ answers. |  | Level 2 |\n\n\n| Grid 2\u003Cbr>Analysis/Research\u003Cbr>Evidence | In this section the research the candidates undertake should be relevant and offer information that have value to the justification of the final design.\u003Cbr>Initially it looks as though research is carried out over slides 7-10. The product analysis, slide 7, is superficial, and lends itself to exploring the size and characteristics of phones. This is a missed opportunity by the candidate, as dimensions and weights would support design decisions made in the idea section of the portfolio.\u003Cbr>The questionnaire on slide 8, asks some basic closed questions. The outcome of this page is simplistic, in that the people questioned, and the client would prefer to charge their phone flat and are prepared to accept a wireless charger. This is low level when compared to the National A level standard. An example of how to further advance the marks in this section, the environment in where the charger would be sited could be explored, or whether the phone needs to be accessed when charging.\u003Cbr>Slide 9, is good evidence of prime research where a charger is disassembled. The conclusions are limited, dimensions are not evident, the strongest conclusion seems to be that cork is used on the base to stop scratching.\u003Cbr>Material research can be found on slide 10, this is generic and is not directly link to the product. Sizes of the motherboard is given as quite large, specific sizes would add value to this work.\u003Cbr>Further research can be found on slides, 21,22 and 24. Slide 21 is ergonomic data of a hand, how this is applied to the product development is not considered.\u003Cbr>Slide 24 has an image of an Arabic style mirror. A direct reference to this is made in the adjacent design sketch. Some low level accreditation for working iteratively can be made here. |  | Level 2 |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Grid 3\u003Cbr>Specification\u003Cbr>Evidence | In this section w","cbCaibv8lZpS6skK","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibv8lZpS6skK","pdf",143126,"English","# Grid 1 Investigation Evidence\n# Grid 2 Analysis/Research Evidence\n# Grid 3 Specification Evidence\n# Grid 4 Design ideas Evidence","[{\"question\":\"What does Grid 1 expect regarding investigation evidence for the phone charger portfolio?\",\"answer\":\"Grid 1 expects the candidate to work with a client or market opportunity, investigate needs and wants, identify pertinent issues, and form a range of design opportunities aligned to those needs.\"},{\"question\":\"What weaknesses are identified in the candidate’s research section?\",\"answer\":\"The commentary notes superficial product analysis, simplistic questionnaire outcomes, limited conclusions from disassembly without clear dimensions, and generic material research not directly linked to the charger design.\"},{\"question\":\"How is the specification evidence evaluated in Grid 3?\",\"answer\":\"The feedback highlights relevant specification points (e.g., indicating charging status) but says justification is limited and measurability is not specific, with dimensional suitability not supported by explored phone measurements and tests that could be used in later evaluation.\"}]","GCE Design & Technology Unit: 9DT01 - Phone Charger - Commentary Sheet - Full Portfolio | PDF",1792470755,15]