[Design and Technology] thanks for link and exam feedback

[Aeschlimann, Heather j]

Hi all,

It is interesting how we all see things differently, I guess coming from a different material area I have a different experience.

First, the question on the Product Development cycle is a prime example of the difference between the Study Design - which is what we must teach, and the text book, which is an aid but which the exam is not wriiten to.

In the study design there are four areas so that is what will be marked. Always good to check, particularly with a new study design.

Second, fabric kids are never disadvantaged. The question on the properties/characteristics of fabric for chair covers was so biased to fabric students. How would fabric students cope identifying the properties and characteristics of glass or jarrah or aluminium?

The stool design brief was too restrictive and perscriptive for wood/metal kids limiting their ability to be creative.

So it probably all balances out.

Cheers, Heather



________________________________
From: destech-bounces at edulists.com.au [destech-bounces at edulists.com.au] on behalf of Melissa Treverton [treverton.melissa.j at edumail.vic.gov.au]
Sent: Thursday, 24 November 2011 7:35 PM
To: 'Design and Technology Teachers' Mailing List'
Subject: Re: [Design and Technology] thanks for link and exam feedback

Hi Gabriella and others,

I agree with your comments Gabriella.  Overall it was a fair exam. All of my students said they ended up using stretch fabric in the design as it made sense.  I also had a problem with the final question with the Product Development Cycle, there were only 4 stages + research.  I have always taught 5 +  research ( concept, design, development & prototype, production & distribution, retail & consumer use, evaluation & modification)  Where the question ask students to name the missing 2 there were 2 possible options for stage 3. (production & distribution OR Retail & consumer use) I hope both answers will be marked as correct.  There was a lso a very wordy question asking students to about evaluation criteria ( don’t have the exam on me).  I thought this could have been written in a much clearer manner.

I was also surprised the “design a poster’ question was included again after the feedback last year that it was more of a Vis Com question.

About to start all over again on Monday, feels like a very short turn around.

Melissa Treverton
Design & Technology Teacher
Parkdale Secondary College
Ph: (03 9580 6311
Fax: (03) 9587 3142
Email: treverton.melissa.j at edumail.vic.gov.au<mailto:treverton.melissa.j at edumail.vic.gov.au>
[Description: psclogo]



From: destech-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:destech-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of VERSTRAETEN Gabriella
Sent: Thursday, 24 November 2011 5:21 PM
To: tran.lorraine.i at edumail.vic.gov.au; Design and Technology Teachers' Mailing List (destech at edulists.com.au)
Subject: [Design and Technology] thanks for link and exam feedback

Hi Lorraine
Thank you publishing the link regarding feedback for the exam survey. I had a chance on the weekend to look more closely at the exam and had a couple of comments I was keen to feedback.  It was very timely as I had just finished typing up my response when your email came through.  I have pasted my comments below and would be interested to hear from any other teachers especially textiles in they felt the same as me.

What I feedback:
Overall, I felt it was a good exam that covered a lot of areas.  However, I do have a minor and major concern. My minor concern is Section B, Question q. Even I struggle to understand how to answer the question.  I understand the difference between ‘effective’ and ‘efficient,’ it’s subtle (which a number of students wouldn’t get. I would have to ask here, is this an English comprehension exam or a design and product based exam?) Where in the study design is the comparison between these articulated, especially in reference to the planning and production activities.
My major concern has to do with the Constraints given in the Design Brief to the Costume option which gave Textiles students a distinct disadvantage that none of the other mediums were constrained by.  This is very unfair to the textiles students. It all comes down to one sentence, “Note: Jude dislikes stretch materials.” The brief also states, “The costume needs to allow for ease of movement” due to “some jumping and gymnastics” routines. That constraint screams stretch fabrics. You tell me what gymnastic outfit isn’t made of a stretch fabric – it has to allow for stretch, comfort and ease of movement, which is the exact nature of a stretch/knitted material. That is their core characteristic, ease of movement. Any tracksuit, swimwear, tights, underpants, t-shirts etc. are all made of stretch fabrics. Just by the way, I’d like to know how Jude, male or female, is going to stop his or her jiggly bits from jumping around uncomfortably throughout the routine without the support of stretch fabrics in their underwear!  So this is very unfair to rule these fabrics out.  While the brief doesn’t say that you can’t use stretch fabrics, it says “Notes: Jude dislikes stretch materials.” If the note said “Jude dislikes red materials and materials with a textured surface” as a designer you wouldn’t design Jude a red outfit nor an outfit of textured fabric.  In response as a designer you aren’t going to use stretch fabrics.  So the textiles students needed to design an outfit allowed for gymnastics in its construction, i.e. gussets or loose fit. So there was a degree of difficulty there for textiles students.  Now, I wouldn’t have minded this if the same constraints were then placed on all the other materials.  For example, “the body adornment that Jake didn’t like plastics and resins.” This would be fair. But they weren’t, not one of the other 5 materials listed were presented with such a constraint.  Clearly that comment was added in by someone who didn’t appreciate the significance of the statement or someone who deliberately wanted to undermine the scores of textiles students.  It is disappointing and unfair. So, that was my major concern.

Cheers
Regards

Gabriella


Gabriella Verstraeten
Head of Technology

Thomas Carr College
35 Thomas Carr Drive,
Tarneit, VIC 3029
(P) (03) 8734 2444
(F) (03) 9748 4388
(E) gab.verstraeten at thomascarr.vic.edu.au<mailto:gab.verstraeten at thomascarr.vic.edu.au>

IMPORTANT! This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Thomas Carr College does not represent or warrant that the attached files are free from computer viruses or other defects. The attached files are provided, and may only be used, on the basis that the user assumes all responsibility for any loss, damage or consequence resulting directly or indirectly from the use of the attached files, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not. Any representations or opinions expressed in this email are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of Thomas Carr College.
Please consider the environment before printing this email


Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.

Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood Development.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/destech/attachments/20111125/fd932f6f/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 18137 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
Url : http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/destech/attachments/20111125/fd932f6f/image001-0001.jpg