← DesignPractice questionsLog in

QCE Design exam: Fri 6 Nov, 12:30pm — 27 days away

ATARMAxxing · Design

QCE Design Practice Questions

64 exam-style questions · full worked solutions

The 64 practice questions inside the QCE Design Mastery Pack, grouped by area of study. Every question comes with a full worked solution.

  1. Human-centred design process — Devising and Evaluating16 questions · 35 marks
    • Multiple choice × 12
    • Explain × 1
    • Evaluate × 1
    • Examine × 1
    • Justify × 1
  2. Human-centred design principles — Empathy, Inclusivity and Representation16 questions · 35 marks
    • Multiple choice × 12
    • Explain × 1
    • Justify × 1
    • Analyse × 1
    • Evaluate × 1
  3. Sustainable design process — Redesigning, Evaluating and Proposing16 questions · 35 marks
    • Multiple choice × 12
    • Identify and explain × 1
    • Apply × 1
    • Critically evaluate × 1
    • Propose and justify × 1
  4. Sustainable design influences — Life Cycle, Materials, Regulation and Precedent16 questions · 35 marks
    • Multiple choice × 12
    • Analyse × 1
    • Evaluate × 1
    • Justify × 1
    • Explain × 1
Sample question

Design Brief — Pre-seen Stimulus

You are a designer engaged by SilverStep Aged Care, a residential aged-care provider operating seven facilities across South-East Queensland. SilverStep has identified a critical safety and dignity concern: a significant proportion of residents (aged 72–94) experience difficulty with standard footwear due to oedema (foot swelling), reduced manual dexterity, cognitive decline, and varying foot morphologies. Current facility-issue slip-on shoes result in poor fit, increased falls risk, skin breakdown and ulceration, and resident distress. The organisation wishes to commission a redesigned adaptive footwear system that can be donned and doffed independently or with minimal carer assistance, accommodates swelling and orthotic inserts, prevents falls, protects skin integrity, and respects the dignity and personal identity of residents.

Design Criteria (established from stakeholder research)

  1. Safe — reduces falls risk on linoleum, carpet and outdoor paths; meets AS/NZS 2210.3 or equivalent slip-resistance standard.
  2. Accessible — can be donned and doffed independently by a resident with reduced grip strength and limited dexterity, or assisted by a carer within 60 seconds.
  3. Adaptive — accommodates foot circumference variation of ±2 cm (oedema management) without tool use; accepts removable custom orthotics up to 12 mm depth.
  4. Skin-safe — eliminates internal seams at pressure points; breathable upper material; cushioned midsole ≥20 mm at heel.
  5. Dignified — appearance consistent with civilian footwear norms (not medical-device aesthetic); available in at least three colourways.
  6. Sustainable — constructed predominantly from recycled or recyclable materials; designed for disassembly and end-of-life material recovery.

Task 1 — Devising

Question 1 (12 marks)

Using divergent thinking strategies, devise a range of design ideas in response to the SilverStep design brief above.

Your response must:

  • generate a quantity and variety of design ideas (demonstrating fluency and flexibility) that address different aspects of the brief
  • include at least one genuinely novel or unexpected concept that moves beyond obvious or conventional solutions (demonstrating originality)
  • describe annotated ideation sketches in sufficient verbal detail that design intent is clear — including form, materials, fastening/closure mechanisms, sole construction, and any adaptive features
  • explicitly connect each idea to one or more design criteria from the brief
  • reference at least one divergent thinking strategy by name and demonstrate its use.

Write your devising response below. You may use annotated sketches and/or written descriptions of those sketches.

Show the worked answer

Answer: Worked solution

Band A Sample Response — Task 1 Devising

Divergent thinking strategy declared: SCAMPER (Substitute, Combine, Adapt, Modify, Put to other uses, Eliminate, Reverse)


Idea 1 — Magnetic Hook-and-Loop Wraparound Slipper-Shoe (SCAMPER: Substitute + Combine)

A low-cut slipper-shoe with a split-toe-box upper constructed from seamless knitted recycled polyester (no internal seam pressure points — Criterion 4). The fastening system substitutes conventional laces with a dual-zone magnetic snap system embedded in a wide hook-and-loop strap that wraps from the lateral heel around the dorsum, allowing single-handed closure. The magnets auto-align within 15 mm of contact, requiring zero fine motor control. The strap width is 55 mm, providing adjustable circumference of ±3 cm (Criterion 3). The midsole is a 22 mm EVA foam with a recycled rubber outsole in a herringbone tread pattern rated to R12 anti-slip (Criterion 1). Colourways in charcoal, navy and terracotta achieve a civilian aesthetic (Criterion 5). Sketch annotation notes: plan-view ortho sketch showing strap geometry, exploded side elevation showing midsole/outsole laminate, and a detail circle showing magnetic snap cross-section with tolerances annotated.

Idea 2 — Pneumatic Air-Chamber Expansion Upper (SCAMPER: Adapt from athletic compression tech)

An ankle-height boot adapting pneumatic air-bladder technology from athletic performance shoes to the oedema management context. A hand-pump bulb at the heel (reminiscent of Reebok Pump but simplified to one-button deflation) inflates an air-chamber lining that gently conforms to the resident's foot volume at any point in the diurnal swelling cycle, then deflates fully for easy donning (Criterion 3). The upper is smooth-faced vegan leather (PU-coated recycled nylon) over the air bladder, meeting the civilian aesthetic criterion. Deflation is a single large tactile button operable with a closed fist, meeting dexterity constraints (Criterion 2). The midsole integrates a 12 mm orthotic recess as standard (Criterion 3). Limitation noted in sketch annotation: pump mechanism adds 60 g mass — tradeoff against oedema adaptability.

Idea 3 — Elastic Gore Panel Side-Entry Shoe (SCAMPER: Eliminate — eliminate fastenings entirely)

Inspired by the Chelsea boot form, this concept eliminates all fastenings by using three wide elastic gore panels — medial, lateral and dorsal — in a 4-way stretch Lycra/spandex blend. The foot enters via a large rear heel gusset that opens to 200 mm width, guided by a heel horn sewn into the lining (Criterion 2, doffing by heel-hook tab). The knitted-mesh upper has no internal seams whatsoever (seamless circular-knit construction) (Criterion 4). The flat outsole uses an extended heel counter for stability and a rocker sole geometry to assist forward weight transfer, reducing trip hazard at toe-off (Criterion 1). Designed for disassembly: the two-component sole unit uses a pressure-sensitive adhesive rated for 500 cycles, allowing midsole/outsole separation for recycling (Criterion 6).

Idea 4 — Modular Toe-Box Exchange System (SCAMPER: Put to other use — apply modular phone-case logic to footwear)

A novel concept applying the modular consumer electronics metaphor: the shoe has a fixed heel/midsole unit and an interchangeable toe-box that click-locks onto a standardised rail system via two ABS polymer clips. Residents with different toe deformities (bunions, hammertoes) select a toe-box module — standard rounded, wide-fit, or extra-depth — and click it onto the universal platform. The entire shoe is thus personalised without carer involvement (Criterion 2, 3, 5). The rail system is made from reclaimed injection-moulded recycled polypropylene from single-use PPE (end-of-life hospital gowns) — a circular economy material loop within the healthcare context (Criterion 6). Sketch annotation: exploded axonometric showing clip-rail geometry, three interchangeable toe-box modules drawn at 1:2 scale, and a detail of the clip mechanism in locked and unlocked positions.

Idea 5 — 3D-Printed Lattice Outsole with Bespoke Insole (SCAMPER: Modify — modify manufacturing method)

Modifying the manufacturing paradigm: a facility-owned FDM 3D printer produces a bespoke lattice outsole and insole from TPU filament derived from recycled plastic bottles, using a digital foot scan taken by a carer with a tablet-based photogrammetry app. The upper is a stretch cotton-lycra slip (washable, replaceable) that velcros onto the printed chassis. The lattice geometry is algorithmic — density varies by plantar pressure zone (higher infill at heel and first metatarsal head, lower at arch) improving both comfort and falls prevention through optimal ground contact (Criteria 1, 4). The cotton upper is the sole non-recyclable component; the printed chassis is 100% recyclable TPU at end-of-life. This concept addresses mass-customisation at facility scale — each pair is unique to the resident. Sketch annotation: top-view of lattice outsole showing infill gradient, side-elevation of assembled shoe, and a diagram of the manufacturing workflow (scan → slice → print → assemble).

Note: Each sketch includes a title, scale indicator, material callouts with recycled content percentages, and criterion tags (e.g. [C1], [C3]) connecting the design feature to the brief.

Included in the QCE Design Mastery Pack

20 full-length practice exams with worked solutions, 20 revision notes, 64 practice questions and 200 flashcards.

Unlock Design — $20

Preview a sample note and question free on the QCE Design hub →

Design · 64 practice questions