Jumping right in with your form intersections, you're definitely demonstrating good growth here, in terms of your understanding of the relationships between the different intersecting forms - especially those involving flat-on-flat surfaces, with those involving curved surfaces still throwing some confusion into the mix, as shown with the corrections here. That is pretty normal at this stage, as it is now that students have had enough experience with combining and intersecting forms that we can actually talk a bit more productively about how to parse through defining those intersection lines.

This diagram, which demonstrates how we can think about intersections as different relationships between surfaces, rather than thinking of them in terms of being whole forms intersecting with one another. I can see you already picking up on this in some cases (you generally handle the transition of an intersection from one plane of a box to another well, taking advantage of the edge to introduce a sharp corner/change in trajectory to the intersection line) but I can see this faltering when you get into more curving surfaces.

Continuing onto your object constructions, I can happily say that you've done a great job with this one. Where the previous few lessons all focus on working in a sort of reactive manner, building things from inside out (so in a sense, you can draw the head mass way too big and that's fine, as long as you keep building upon it with solid forms, your proportions will be off but for our purposes that's not strictly wrong), this one is all about working from the outside in, in order to emphasize precision.

Precision is often conflated with accuracy, but they're actually two different things (at least insofar as I use the terms here). Where accuracy speaks to how close you were to executing the mark you intended to, precision actually has nothing to do with putting the mark down on the page. It's about the steps you take beforehand to declare those intentions.

So for example, if we look at the ghosting method, when going through the planning phase of a straight line, we can place a start/end point down. This increases the precision of our drawing, by declaring what we intend to do. From there the mark may miss those points, or it may nail them, it may overshoot, or whatever else - but prior to any of that, we have declared our intent, explaining our thought process, and in so doing, ensuring that we ourselves are acting on that clearly defined intent, rather than just putting marks down and then figuring things out as we go.

In our constructions here, we build up precision primarily through the use of the subdivisions. These allow us to meaningfully study the proportions of our intended object in two dimensions with an orthographic study, then apply those same proportions to the object in three dimensions.

Looking throughout your constructions, you've put a lot of effort into making decisions - which are at the heart of precision. Looking at this candle holder for instance, I can see that in the orthographic plans, while you may not have decided exactly what the spacing on either side of the row of candles would be, you did employ the mirroring technique to ensure that they were equally spaced to the left and to the right. You also used subdivision to establish equal spacing between the candles as well.

There are certainly ways in which this precision can be increased and improved - it's less of a matter of doing it right vs. wrong, but more "what kind of choices can we make to increase the precision and specificity of the decisions we're making". So one such way would be to actually decide at the orthographic plan stage, just how much of the candle holder's depth would account for the spacing (in terms of fractions). At a glance, we might go with 1/10th, or 1/16th. It doesn't specifically have to be correct (that's more a matter for accuracy's concern). We simply have to make the decision, and then hold to it.

So, if there's some element that would logically be at the 39/50ths mark, then you can probably simplify things by placing it at 4/5ths, as long as it doesn't end up conflicting with some other rounding decision you've made.

Another way in which we can achieve at least the groundwork for more precision is in how we handle our curves. In these notes, I introduced the idea of taking our curves and representing them first as chains of straight lines, or flat surfaces. I noticed that the spout on this teapot would have been a great opportunity for that, though you did end up jumping right into those curves. Here's a demonstration of a mug - you can see how the concepts regarding those curves was applied there, in case you were unsure of how to go about it.

All in all though, you're still doing great, and these are merely the introductory point of these concepts. There will be plenty of room to develop them further as you make your way through the remaining parts of the course. I'll go ahead and mark this one as complete.