| Date | November 2019 | Marks available | 2 | Reference code | 19N.2.SL.TZ0.1 |
| Level | SL | Paper | 2 | Time zone | no time zone |
| Command term | List | Question number | 1 | Adapted from | N/A |
Question
Greenfeet publishes a sustainability progress report every year which summarizes the total environmental impact of the products it produces, see Figure 1.
In 2018, Greenfeet launched the Vertue shoe with an upper made entirely from plastic recovered from the ocean, see Figure 2. In 2019, Greenfeet expected to make 1.5 million pairs of Vertue shoes from 200 tons of recovered plastic, using approximately 13 bottles per shoe.
In 2019 Greenfeet updated its original Climeate shoe shown in Figure 3, with yarns made from recycled plastic waste collected from beaches. The updated shoe is shown in Figure 4.
Greenfeet has a strategic goal to reduce water use and water pollution. State the percentage of pollution caused by water pollution.
List two consequences of a manufacturing process that uses large quantities of raw materials.
Outline how the Greenfeet Vertue shoe is an example of waste mitigation.
Outline one driver for cleaning up manufacturing.
Outline why sketches would be used in the development of the Greenfeet Vertue shoe.
Explain one physiological factor considered in shoe sole design.
List one characteristic that the retro-styled Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2019) shares with the original Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2004).
Outline the maximum and minimum percentiles that Greenfeet would use when manufacturing the Climeate shoe.
Describe how the EVA rubber sole of the Greenfeet Climeate shoe could be moulded.
Discuss whether the Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2019) balances the compromise between form and function.
Markscheme
6% ✓
Award [1] for stating the percentage of Greenfeet’s impact from water pollution.
Reduction in/depletion of non-renewable resources ✓
Increased energy use from raw material extraction/during manufacturing ✓
Environmental degradation of areas/landscapes where materials are extracted ✓
Negative social impact on communities where materials are extracted ✓
Increases pollution (from processing high quantities of material) ✓
Added wastage ✓
Storage requirements (of materials) ✓
Award [1] for listing each of two consequences of a manufacturing process that uses large quantities of raw materials up to [2 max].
Answer in brackets is not required to award the mark.
The shoe uses waste material (plastics) recovered from the ocean ✓
By recycling it for production of the shoe uppers ✓
Award [1] for identifying how the Greenfeet Vertue shoe is an example of waste mitigation and [1] for a brief explanation.
Answer in brackets is not required to award the mark.
Do not accept ‘re-use’ or ‘re-purpose’.
Promoting positive impacts/enhancing image ✓
Which will appeal to customers/increase sales ✓
Ensuring neutral impact or minimizing impacts through conserving natural resources ✓
By recycling waste/promoting the recovery of waste from the ocean ✓
Government targets/legislation ✓
Which can help the manufacturer reduce pollution/use of energy ✓
Reducing wastage of energy/resources ✓
Which can increase profits by lowering production costs ✓
Award [1] for identifying a driver for cleaning up manufacturing and [1] for a brief explanation.
Do not award marks between clusters.
To explore form/style/aesthetics ✓
And easily/quickly/cost effectively communicate to/gather feedback from clients ✓
Freehand/rough drawings of designs/concepts ✓
Can be used to convey/visualise/refine/develop the idea ✓
Award [1] for identifying why sketches would be used in the development of the Greenfeet Vertue shoe and [1] for a brief explanation.
Comfort ✓
The design of the sole needs to consider the size/movement of the user ✓
To ensure it does not create any pressure/pain ✓
Fatigue ✓
Users may wear the shoes for long periods of time ✓
And they should be able to flex/feel light/not cause tiredness ✓
Award [1] for identifying a physiological factor considered in shoe sole design and [1] for each distinct explanation up to [3 max].
Do not award marks between clusters.
Two diagonal stripes ✓
Similar panel pattern ✓
EVA rubber sole ✓
Colour scheme ✓
Award [1] for listing a characteristic that the retro-styled Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2019) shares with the Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2004) up to [1 max].
5th – 95th percentile (of adult population) ✓
To fit the majority of the population ✓
Award [1] for identifying the maximum and minimum percentiles that Greenfeet would use when manufacturing the Climeate shoe and [1] for a brief explanation.
Answer in brackets is not required to award the mark.
EVA rubber pieces are placed into the mould✓
And are compression moulded (with heat) ✓
Award [1] for describing the process of how the EVA rubber sole of the Greenfeet Climeate shoe is moulded and [1] for identifying the moulding technique [2 max].
Answer in brackets is not required to award the mark.
The shoe is modern/contemporary/minimally styled/fashionably appealing ✓
Whilst still meeting the basic functional requirements of a sports/leisure shoe ✓
Therefore, achieving a good balance between form and function ✓
The shoe is designed/intended as a casual lifestyle shoe ✓
With limited technical features ✓
Therefore, prioritising form over function ✓
The focus of the shoe is to provide comfort/durability ✓
But with limited aesthetic appeal to a wider audience ✓
Therefore, prioritising function over form ✓
Accept any valid discussion similar to the 3 suggested clusters.
Award [1] for a distinct point of how the Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2019) balances the compromise between form and function up to [1 max].
OR
Award [1] for a distinct point of how the Greenfeet Climeate shoe (2019) does not balance the compromise between form and function up to [1 max].
Award [1] for an evaluative statement.
Do not award marks between clusters.
Examiners report
Very straightforward
Good range of answers provided
Quite straightforward, well answered. Most candidates achieved at least one mark.
Many candidates believed consumer pressure was a driver for cleaning up manufacturing, however it is more a driver for green design (see topics 2.4 & 2.5).
A fair question but not well answered. Very few candidates achieved full marks for this question. Although two clusters were provided in the markscheme, many candidate's answers crossed clusters or missed the point in general.
Most candidates answered from the first cluster, mentioning comfort and some were able to gain a second mark, but not many achieved a third mark from either cluster option. This may have been better as a 2 mark question but was a good discriminator.
A very easy question, well answered. Most candidates opted for the EVA rubber sole (from the stimulus material) or three diagonal stripes.
A reasonably straightforward question with most candidates able to identify the percentile range and good number being awarded two marks.
A difficult question with very few correct responses. The answers most commonly seen from candidates referred to injection moulding. Many also spoke of a liquid rubber being poured into a mould. Very few went for the most apparent correct method of compression moulding.
A very easy question regarding form and function that has proved challenging in the past. The mark scheme allowed for any combination of form/function balance or non-balance meaning almost all students were able to achieve at least one mark. The question was a good discriminator though as achieving 3 marks was more challenging in any form of the argument. Arguing for a balanced compromise provided better opportunities for higher marks.
