[Year 12 IPM] Rationale behind the new study design
Keith Richardson
keithcr at fastmail.fm
Tue Feb 21 15:34:35 EST 2006
Thank you Paula - a helpful set of reasons - it may be interesting for
us to re-visit them as we actually work through the course in 2007 with
our students, and log their reactions etc.
Ciao, Keith
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006 14:51:25 +1100, "Christophersen, Paula P"
<christophersen.paula.p at edumail.vic.gov.au> said:
> Dear Mark and Mark and other colleagues
>
>
>
> Since 1:15 pm (time Mark K sent his message) I have been contemplating
> my reply, and while very appreciative of Mark S's support, I am going to
> provide you with some key reasons for making changes to the study
> design. They are not exhaustive, nor ranked in order of importance.
>
>
>
> >From the online survey conducted in 2004, the following key criticisms
> were made of the existing study:
>
> * too much emphasis on theory, hence insufficient time for skill
> development
>
> * excessive focus on breadth of coverage rather than depth of
> understanding
>
> * too much overlap between IPM and IS.
>
>
>
> In addition, we had to closely scrutinise causes for our declining
> enrolments and explore strategies for redressing the increasing gender
> imbalance experienced in all units.
>
>
>
> Armed with this info, plus the collective wisdom of many, some of the
> changes we have made include:
>
> * requiring students to solve problems for real clients. Why?
> Using real data to solve a real problem fosters deeper learning and
> greater engagement. (E.g. Unit 1, Outcome 1; Unit 2, Outcome 3)
>
> * increasing the requirement to solve problems in teams. Why? It
> replicates everyday practices in business, and students learn and
> perform well in team settings (link to VELS, requires the use of
> effective file management strategies, allows for problem solving in a
> virtual environment etc)
>
> * incorporating an ICT career paths component in an outcome
> (Unit 2, Outcome 1). Why? This may assist in increasing interest in
> further study and careers in this area, particularly females. Also
> heightens the relevance of the study to the 'real' world
>
> * requiring only two outcomes to be demonstrated in Unit 3 (both
> Software development [IS] and IT applications [IPM]). This fosters
> greater depth of understanding of the key concepts. This shift is also
> valued by industry
>
> * mandating database software as in Unit 1 and a programming
> language or scripting language in Unit 2. This forges closes links with
> the Units 3 and 4 sequences. There has been criticism of a disconnection
> between Units 1 and 2 and the 3 and 4 sequences
>
> * requiring students in IT applications (IPM) to study three
> software tools. This enables them to develop an understanding of
> problem-solving through doing, rather than learning about it
> (understandings are more transferable to other areas of endeavour). Also
> addresses the first of the abovementioned criticisms.
>
> * multimedia software is studied in all units in conjunction
> with other software tools. This tool is appealing to both males and
> females, and also provides an excellent entree into the more technical
> aspects of IT.
>
> * removing the systems development life cycle from IT
> applications (IPM). Why? This overcomes the overlap between IPM and IS
> (Software development in the reaccredited study) and it redresses the
> criticism of IT applications (IPM) being too theoretical.
>
> * closer links have been made between the styles of learning and
> assessment in the VELS and this study, for example, IT applications,
> Unit 3, Outcome 2 and Unit 4, Outcome 1; Unit 1, Outcome 3 (visualising
> thinking.
>
>
>
> That's enough for now - I've moved from succinctness to abundance.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au]
> On Behalf Of Mark Kelly
> Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2006 1:15 PM
> To: Year 12 Information Technology Processing and Management
> Teachers'Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [Year 12 IPM] Rationale behind the new study design
>
>
>
> A wonderfully concise answer, Paula! (I've just been lecturing my
>
> IPMers about concision and relevance when answering questions!)
>
>
>
> The reasons for changing a course are, I think, as important as the
>
> actual changes that are made.
>
>
>
> Why, for example, is the new course much richer in multimedia? Could it
>
>
> be that: multimedia experience is demanded by tertiary institutions, or
>
>
> employers, or both; it makes the course more attractive to students who
>
> are deserting IT; it makes the course more attractive to girls; the new
>
> course is less geeky and choked with dry theory; etc.
>
>
>
> Things should not be changed without reason, and I think it would be
>
> illumination to have the reasoning explained along with the changes.
>
>
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> Christophersen, Paula P wrote:
>
> > Mark, VCAA has not published its reasons for changing the course, and
> it
>
> > does not for any study. Do you have a specific query?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regards
>
> >
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au]
>
>
> > On Behalf Of Mark Kelly
>
> > Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2006 11:45 AM
>
> > To: Year 12 Information Technology Processing and Management
>
> > Teachers'Mailing List
>
> > Subject: Re: [Year 12 IPM] Rationale behind the new study design
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks, Paula. My only question is the original question :-)
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Has the VCAA published its reasons for changing the course as it has
> done?
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mark
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Christophersen, Paula P wrote:
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> Dear Mark and other interested colleagues
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> All VCE studies follow the same process when undergoing
> reaccreditation.
>
> >
>
> >> Key steps in the process include:
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Establishment of review committee (all teachers have the
>
> >
>
> >> opportunity to submit an expression of interest to be on this
> committee)
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Consideration of the terms of reference, prepared by the
>
> >
>
> >> Board of VCAA
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Preparation of a benchmarking report that investigates
>
> >
>
> >> national and international practices and recommends areas for
>
> >
>
> >> consideration by the review committee
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Ongoing reaccreditation meetings to respond to the terms
> of
>
> >
>
> >> reference and to draft a study design, in accordance with the VCAA
>
> >
>
> >> Principles, Guidelines and Procedures for the Review of VCE studies
> (see
>
> >
>
> >> VCE Bulletin, Supplement 1, March 2003, No 186)
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Regular, formal reporting to internal VCAA committees
> (and
>
> >
>
> >> responding to queries raised by these)
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Consultation with teachers and other targeted
> stakeholders on
>
> >
>
> >> the draft study design (methods include online surveys, paper-based
>
> >
>
> >> surveys, focus group meetings)
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Review of draft study design by independent reviewers
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Refinement of study design, in light of feedback from
>
> >
>
> >> consultation and direction from internal committees
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> * Recommendation for accreditation from the VCAA board, and
>
> >
>
> >> accreditation granted from the Victorian Qualifications Authority.
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> Typically this process takes 9 - 10 months.
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> If you have any further queries, please do not hesitate to ask.
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> Regards, Paula
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> -----Original Message-----
>
> >
>
> >> From: ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au
> [mailto:ipm-bounces at edulists.com.au]
>
> >
>
> >> On Behalf Of Mark Kelly
>
> >
>
> >> Sent: Tuesday, 21 February 2006 10:26 AM
>
> >
>
> >> To: Year 12 Information Technology Processing and Management
>
> >
>
> >> Teachers'Mailing List
>
> >
>
> >> Subject: [Year 12 IPM] Rationale behind the new study design
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> Does anyone (even Paula, perhaps) know of any publication from the
> VCAA
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> that gives a concise justification for the way the new VCE IT (oops
> -
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> 'ICT') study design has been put together?
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> --
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >
>
> >> Mark Kelly
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Mark Kelly
>
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Mark Kelly
>
> Manager - Information Systems
>
> McKinnon Secondary College
>
> McKinnon Rd McKinnon 3204, Victoria, Australia
>
> Direct line / Voicemail: 8520 9085
>
> School Phone +613 8520 9000 <<< NEW NUMBER
>
> School Fax +613 95789253
>
>
>
> Webmaster - http://www.mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
>
> IPM Lecture notes: http://vceit.com
>
> Moderator: IPM Mailing List
>
>
>
> There are 10 kinds of people in the world: those who understand binary
>
> and those who don't.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, resources, subscribe, unsubscribe
>
> IPM Mailing List kindly supported by
>
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
> Authority and
>
> http://www.vitta.org.au - VITTA Victorian Information Technology
> Teachers Association Inc
>
Keith Richardson
IPM List Moderator
Head of ICT, Leibler Yavneh College
Elsternwick
Ph: 03.9528.4911
k.richardson at yavneh.vic.edu.au
More information about the ipm
mailing list