[Year 12 Its] RE: IPM 2006 Study Design

Thu Apr 7 10:45:53 EST 2005

It is great for us all that we have champions like Paula at work on the
cutting edge of our next revolution. We should all try to do more by posting
some feedback about the new study design. Saying nothing may become a tacit
acknowledgement that we should do nothing!

Fantastic holiday reflection Stephen, it is easy to forget how many
stakeholders there are and all the things that they want and need. I just
posted something to the year 7 to 10 list, reflecting on some of the changes
we are planning for an integrated middle-school IT curriculum. Interested in
your thoughts.

Regards Roland

-----Original Message-----
From: is-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:is-bounces at edulists.com.au] On
Behalf Of Stephen Digby DEET
Sent: Wednesday, 6 April 2005 3:30 PM
To: 'IS List'
Subject: [Year 12 Its] RE: IPM 2006 Study Design

Thanks Paula for the invitation to contribute.  It is great when these
offers come so frequently and openly (if only DE&T worked that way !!!)

I think that the key problems arise from 

* students

   -  overwhelmingly want practical skills and knowledge that they can use
in their current or future work (whether it is specifically vocational or
just useful in the repertoire).

   -  (reluctantly) accept that they have to learn "theory" because

       - - it puts the practical skills & knowledge in context and

       - - thus makes it more understandable and transferable

* VCAA

    - needs theory so that it can continue to argue for intellectual equity
and rigor among studies

    - has reduced space for practical skills and knowledge to make room for
theory

    - has removed specific practical skills and knowledge because it has
given these to VET and TAFE and does not want duplication

* teachers

  - want to deliver all theory within a practical context so they want space
to develop skill that allow complex theory to be experienced.  This takes
time and so the amount of theory covered is in inverse proportion to the
amount of practical work (some ivory tower dwellers will always argue that
any good teacher can deliver everything simultaneously !)

  - want to be able to offer specific courses that meet student needs or be
able to change a generic course to meet those needs.

  - want to deliver the nest study score they can

* unis

 - don't want students to think they have already "done" something which
needs to be studied in depth at university

 - IT is such a chaotic and changeable creature that the more specific the
skills, the less predictable is their utility.

 - Thus, unis want students with the highest "general purpose" skills
development - (1) reading (2) comprehension (3) composition (4) clear &
logical thinking (5) persistence and self-discipline.  They are far less
interested in specific prepatory skills unless they are "tailored".

Thus, I support:

Year 11:

General course structure focused on applications of "application software"
e.g. 2 a semester and 3 over the year (including options for application
environments that support programming).  Application types specified with
associated skill/ knowledge lists to ensure standards are comparable.
Assessment task library collected from practicing teachers, vetted for
standards and made available on line as recommended standards guide and
curriculum support.  Students who wish to focus on system design would
likely choose a programming support application for the whole year.

Year 12 Systems: changed to de-emphasis general theory unrelated to the
capacity of the course to offer related skills and experience.  Focus on
software development (programming) with specific assessment questions
related to each allowed language, as well as generic questions re.
programming.  Secondary focus on hardware with options available e.g. WiFi
systems, network systems, personal computer systems.  Each with specific
assessable content description (differences and overlap).  Idea being to
encourage depth c whatever the school can provide practically to play with.
Main improvement - more programming time and focus; less general theory of
which students are unlikely to have any possibility of direct experience;
more specific hardware focus so that schools are encouraged to provide hands
on; more of the course specifically assessable at end of year exam via
optional sections.

Year 12 IPM:  Changed to de-emphasis general theory unrelated to the
capacity of the course to offer related skills and experience.  Focus on
software applications at high standard. Approved software types and "brands"
c associated specific examinable skills & knowledge (not possible if only
vague software "types" are specified).  2 applications all year.  Students
encouraged to complete portfolio tasks of increasing complexity as in a job
e.g. MS Access - flat file DB, related DB c standard reports, customised
data structure and outputs, customised features requiring macros, linked
tables; improve existing design (disassemble, reassemble); complete DB based
on output document samples etc.  Main improvement - more application use
time and focus; less general theory of which students are unlikely to have
any possibility of direct experience; more specific software focus so that
schools are encouraged to provide hands on; more of the course specifically
assessable at end of year exam via optional sections.

Just some holiday thoughts......

==================================
Stephen Digby, Learning Technology Manager
digby.stephen.p at edumail.vic.gov.au
Cheltenham Secondary College
www.cheltsec.vic.edu.au <http://www.cheltsec.vic.edu.au/> 
Ph: 613 955 55 955  Fx: 9555 8617
==================================

  _____  

From: Maiser at novell2.fhc.vic.edu.au [mailto:Maiser at novell2.fhc.vic.edu.au]
On Behalf Of Christophersen, Paula P
Sent: Thursday, 24 March 2005 11:44 AM
To: IS List
Subject: RE: IPM 2006 Study Design

The VCE IT study design is accredited until the end of 2006, so it's
business as usual until the commencement of 2007. A reaccredited study
design will be available in schools in early 2006. This is in line with the
VCAA's policy of providing schools with a year's notice of its reaccredited
study designs.

I'm not certain if I should be asking this question, but here goes!! If
anyone has some opinions on the suitability of the current 6-unit structure
of VCE IT, please share them.  Many of you expressed your opinions in the
online survey last year, and these have been taken into account. The
committee reviewing the study is considering the viability of some other
study structures. Some possibilities include:

*    two studies of 4 units each

*    one study only of 4 units

*    a couple of 'stand-alone' units at units 1 and 2 that have a clear
focus/context rather than just Info Tech 1 and Info Tech 2; and then the IPM
and IS-type structure at units 3 and 4

*    the current offering (6 unit structure)

*    the current offering, but with an option within units 3 and 4

*    ...?   

I'm happy for people to send their comments directly to me, if that is their
choice. Alternatively, an open discussion may result in other options being
proposed. Looking forward to reading your comments!

Regards

Paula Christophersen

ICT Curriculum Manager

VCAA

41 St Andrews Place

EAST MELBOURNE 3002

(03) 9651 4378

-----Original Message-----
From: Maiser at novell2.fhc.vic.edu.au [mailto:Maiser at novell2.fhc.vic.edu.au]
On Behalf Of Philip Brown
Sent: Thursday, 24 March 2005 9:33 AM
To: IPM List
Subject: IPM 2006 Study Design

Has anybody any idea where next years study design for IPM is at? Is there a
web site or discussion forum which is discussing the developments or
proposed changes? 

P. Brown
Oxley College
9727 9917

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 & Training. 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/is/attachments/20050407/fdc0406b/attachment-0001.html