I am missing those details too + an explanation of your design rationale i.e. why exactly these concepts were chosen and executed the way you did it.
For the cookware project, it’s a nice project and it’s completely great that you focused on a user group with special needs, but it’s not explained in much depth why exactly did you pick this solution and how exactly your research led to this. Couldn’t they just cook on induction? Maybe a new service would be more suitable, or an ambient intelligence concept with sensors embedded in the kitchen. Also your experiments with making the interfaces and environment more haptically informative could have been a great start for a concept.
For the silicone, it works for some products, for many others like bakeware - I know a few avid bakers - they do not like it for several reasons - food sticks to it, it does not crisp the edges of what you bake, also the silicone does damage and discolor when exposed to high temperatures. Often the products are not flexible enough where you want them to be more flexible or vice versa, some contain BPAs and other additives making people trust the material less. So I would want to see a thorough test that this is the right material for the product.
If you want to emphasize toy design less you can condense the Fisher Price project to one spread - keeping some of the great concept visualizations and the model making effort - It will be clear enough for the reader. I would group the furniture projects and toy projects together.
I love modular furniture concepts and yours are nice as a concept, also there I am missing details - for example in how incredibly unergonomic that sofa is, how you solve issues like cumulative tolerances between parts, and the end grain on those renders which you will want to avoid in nice woodwork.
You are starting to tell a story with your projects, and you show you have skills and good ideas, I would mostly like to see more consistency and acuity in your design thinking.