Please find attached some student samples of our school’s Unit 1 Project.
I am eager to field any questions or suggestions on how it meets the Unit Objectives, how it can be refined to enhance the student experience or any other things that you spot.
Montvue Art Deco Final page student samples.pdf (2.1 MB)
Unit 1 Project Student sample Dan.pdf (3.6 MB)
Unit 1 Project Student sample Jack.pdf (3.6 MB)
Unit 1 Project Student sample Mack.pdf (3.9 MB)
Hi Ben, you and your students have done a great job on your first project! We are running a couple of weeks behind so have loved seeing your inspiration, particularly for the devising section. I saw you took out prototyping in the representing criterion. Was this a time constraint? I’m wondering whether I might do the same thing but wasn’t sure whether we are allowed…? What are your thoughts? I will add my examples in a couple of weeks time
Hi Christie and thanks for your comment here. The project would have been a little too complicated to make a prototype of. Regardless, I asked my classes whether they would have liked to have that opportunity. They said, “Not unless we get more time.” We are teaching Units 1 and 2 in a compressed timeframe so I agree with them. Also, the Project is based on Topic 3 and I do not see any reference to prototyping there. (happy to be corrected if that is not the case!) If I was to incorporate it, I think I would give them a sheet of clear acrylic as a scaled window and have them laser-etch or sticker their art deco design window treatments on there. Thanks for the thought!
I am keen to see how you go with your school. Thanks for sharing when you can.
Hi Ben, I have a very similar task where my students were to enhance a 1937 Beachside Pavilion in Caloundra, (Spanish Mission design style) which is now a surf club kiosk. In regards to your question Christie, I didn’t prototype either, and this decision was based on the subject matter of the syllabus. Ben, I am curious about student Jack, who received a 9 for Exploring, yet his marking criteria was indicated as superficial? Was there an expectation that they communicated to present/pitch to stakeholders? As in strengths& implications and weaknesses and the implications for the stakeholders? My submission date is soon so I am keen to moderate with you when they come in. Thanks again for sharing!
Hi kpr and thanks for your comment. Your task sounds amazing!
Regarding the ‘Exploring’ mark, you will see that it contains a mark for two different criteria; each in a different band. In this case, you need to choose the higher or the lower. You cannot average (in every subject except English apparently!). I went high due to no particular reason or process apart from the other evidence was so high. I have gone low with some other students work. I am interested in other teacher’s thought process in how they decide to go high or low.
There was no pitch to stakeholders for this one as that requirement was not in any of the Unit 1 topics. Happy to moderate a sample of your work when you are ready. email me a webbb at marash dot qld dot edu dot au
I appreciate the conundrum about rewarding results across the bands. I think I remarked my last exam 3 times due to a lack of confidence! I actually need to thank you, as I used your task as inspiration to set my task. So, thanks!
I’ll be in touch with a couple of responses - there will be some variations to your student’s work, as I have made my lot write a pitch. Talk to you soon.
I found the QCAA Accreditation courses helpful. “Course 3 — Understanding and using marking guides” can help build capacity in this area.
Best of luck for your task!
I am currently marking my first completed design project for unit 1 and looking at the results you have given I believe you are pretty much on track. Did you have your students complete parts B and C also?
I can’t see them here or did miss them? I guess in the end they are year 11 and this is their first attempt and all we have to go off is what is on the QCAA site., so I guess it is all in the feedback and ensuring they are hitting the criteria indicators. Thanks for sharing your student work!
Yes all the parts were covered. It is a shame that Parts A, B and C do not flow in logical order as per the double diamond. The reason for this is that they are in the order of the Syllabus Objectives and every subject must outline their task requirements in this same order.
Thanks for your feedback on our school’s judgement. I am happy to mark a blank script for you if you wish to email me firstname.lastname@example.org. It will be good practice for me to do this.
I’ve had a look at I’m a little confused about some of the marks you gave (Jack’s assessment)
You awarded him an 8 in Representing and Communicating yet there isn’t any evidence of him using design specific vocab to present a design proposal - there is just an image.
I’m also struggling to see any use of divergent thinking strategies.
You are correct, however, in not averaging students marks. Their marks have to be from a band in which there is clear evidence.
Please note that I’m just going off information from QCAA and the ISMGs.
I was going to upload some student samples but for some reason it isn’t working properly. When I can do so I will upload student work and I am happy for feedback. (Please note that students completed and submitted an audio presentation)
G’day Nick and thank you for your thoughtful insight into my assessment process. It is excellent to have some fresh eyes look at it.
I see what you mean regarding design-specific vocabulary in the design proposal. I gave them that instruction: that I wanted them to just have the design without any clutter of annotations. I now see that is detrimental to meeting the design criteria and will amend my expectations. Many thanks! There is a second area where design specific vocabulary can be evidenced; the design brief. Jack certainly has that in spades.
Regarding Divergent Thinking strategies, I consider all the annotation around the ideas to be evidence; as Jack is showing that he is thinking broadly about the solving the problem. He has also done a PMI. (although the text has that listed as a Convergent thinking strategy) What would you like to see as strong evidence in this area?
What mark would you allocate for Assessment Objective 4?
I am interested in your thoughts.
Many thanks Nicholas!
I take your point about the notes but we’ve been telling our students that we want to see it more explicitly - just to make it really easy for us to see that they are using divergent thinking and so that for Units 3 & 4 confirmers can easily see this too.
We have been advising our students that they can use brainstorms and/or SCAMPER. I know in the text it says that SCAMPER is a convergent strategy but I’ve done some research and also looked at the syllabus and SCAMPER is listed as a divergent strategy. For Devising mark I would award the student 6 out of 7.
We’re trying to get our students to show as much explicit evidence as possible and cover as much as possible just so that they are prepared for Unit 3 and 4.
We have just started on Unit 2 and we have told our students that we want them to start using/listing Strengths and Limitations to evaluate their ideas (as opposed to PMI) as this aligns with the ISMG and syllabus much better and will enable easier evidence to be identified. For the first assessment our students didn’t really do this and myself and the other design teachers decided that by not doing so was detrimental to their assessment. I’ve found that by doing strengths and limitations it allows for easier synthesis to be evident and for the creation of more discerning refinements.
Please find below samples of our student’s work for Unit 1 IA2. We gave the students a 10-12 page limit. Part A:8-10, Part B: 1 page, Part C: 1 page. Students were also required to submit an audio file of the proposal presentation.
Happy for any feedback.
We’ve completed a Mock assessment in Term 1 on iPads and discovered that if I didn’t create a background table on OneNote the students work would be all over the place and out of proportion. Students used adobe photoshop sketch and or autodesk sketchup. Most now have the procreate app and an apple pencil or a school supplied $17 version. I’ve stuck with the year 11 standards with reference to the year 12 criteria.
There has been a few limitations with OneNote but the positives of review and screen mirror far outweigh the formatting issues. Is anyone else using OneNote and drawing apps?
Ira_Passive_speaker_assessment_v3.pdf (5.5 MB)
My students created either a PowerPoint with audio, or iMovie. Did you use anything similar?
We do use OneNote but mainly as a place for submission and as a collaboration space (we’re going to be using it more for Unit 2). Most of our students hand draw and then scan using either Clearscanner or Camscanner. All students have access to Adobe Suite and we do have some wacom sketch pads but most students still like doing it on paper. We just encourage them to use whatever they believe can get them the best results.
I want to start exploring Procreate as I think it will be a great tool.
Whilst we didn’t give students a template or table we gave them outlines of what should be included on certain pages but left the rest up to them but this could be something to explore.
Hi Sam and thanks for allowing us to peruse your school’s work.
Congratulations on the thoroughness of the work covered. It certainly appears that all the dot points are covered. (although I admit I only glanced over it)
Standing back and glancing over it, I wonder if it has a feel of a design folio, in the way the syllabus intends for them to be? It appears very wordy; in that there is an imbalance between too much bulk-writing and a lesser amount of ideations. It is interesting comparing them to the QCAA sample project; which has the near-opposite balance of wording to ideations. My feedback would be to re-look at Unit 1: Topic 2. That focus was all about schematic diagrams. I wonder if there can be a focus for the bulk text to be presented as schematic diagrams? Would that help?
Any how, thanks again Sam for the opportunity to peruse the work and think through this response. It has been very insightful.
I would like some feedback on the responses we received from our FA2 Project.
Sorry for the delay - I’ve uploaded a couple of responses and ISMGs to accompany. My students are a great bunch - although none have come from a design background in junior years, so their skills are limited. There are lots of things we can continue working on, but I think they did a great job for their first project.
All feedback welcome.
I had a really quick look at your samples and some of the work looks great. I dint have time to look deeply into the marks you awrded on the ISMG’s but did notice that in some criterion you have awarded students a number that does not reflect any evidence the student has provided. Eleana - You have awarded her a 6 for exploring yet there is nothing highlighted in that band. She should have received a 7. Same with Cleo, she should have been awarded a 9 not and 8 for exploring.