[Year 12 SofDev] Devil's advocate == me?

Fri Jul 29 09:50:13 EST 2011

Hi Mark  (as I crouch behind the crenellations of my ³ivory tower² )

Did you just offer to create the required doc?

Also with regard to weighting the ass criteria I reluctantly weight them
fairly equally as coding is not on the exam. I would prefer to give a much
bigger weighting to the actual coding because that is why I do the subject
and most of my students.

However most coding is now done in xxx (insert India, Philippines or
Indonesia as you wish) so like we do with the mechanics who work on our cars
 we understand what they do (sort of) but would not do it ourselves because
of time etc.

Andrew (as I run for the safety of the stairs in the tower)

On 29/07/11 8:37 AM, "Mark KELLY" <kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au> wrote:

> Hi all.  I have believed that for SD U4O1 students should be provided with an
> SRS, based on the same study design text on p.82 quoted by Maggie: "Students
> must be provided with a design brief that includes an analysis of an
> information problem, couched in terms of an SRS."
> 
> Also in the assessment handbook, p.34: "An accurate interpretation of the
> provided software requirements specifications is evident in the design of a
> feasible solution. "
> 
> Also, regarding:
> "2.       There has been a lot of discussion about needing to include either
> 2D arrays, stacks, queues, sorting and searching (or combinations). There is
> nothing in the Key Skills that states this. "
> The AssHandBook (as I like to call it) says on p.43 (admittedly in the "Sample
> approaches" section (which probably can be interpreted as a suggestion rather
> than a decree) that "The design brief should...include at least one type of
> data structure."
> 
> [Mounts soapbox]
> 
> I must say that as I try to craft an outcome for U4O1 that it is increasing
> frustrating trying to stitch together all the mandates spread across different
> parts of the study design, asshandbook, FAQs, errata, and VCAA bulletins.  In
> the end I go through all the sources copying dictates and pasting them all
> together in one place to aggregrate them and make sense of them, and I suspect
> I still miss bits. 
> 
> It's quite a messy process, and it's no wonder that people can miss key
> information that they didn't see sprinkled here or there.
> 
> I don't suppose VCAA would consider creating an easy-to-use web-based
> amalgamated resource that merged information from all of those sources?
> 
> [Dismounts]
> 
> Cheers
> Mark
> 
> On 28 July 2011 15:14, Matheson, Heath A <Matheson.Heath.A at edumail.vic.gov.au>
> wrote:
>> Good Afternoon, 
>>  
>> My Zimbabwean dollars worth,
>> I tend to use the assessment handbook in creating the SACs and assessment
>> criteria. For this outcome the handbook is a little contradictory /
>> inconsistent / unclear / all of the above? (Eg the mobile phone oversight
>> Paula cleared up for us). The ³designing the assessment task² section pretty
>> much restates the key skills from the study design so I agree with Adrian
>> that we are assessing key skills. In order to be able to address the key
>> skills you need the key knowledge and make sure you choose the most effective
>> and efficient processes to create the solution. In U3 O2 each of my five
>> students used a different method to solve the problem and they all worked.
>> There is nothing to state that queues, stacks, 2D arrays all must be used.
>> However, the performance descriptors do emphasise and require validation.
>> Apart from the use of ³mobile phone² instead of ³device², the description
>> states to create a ³solution in response to a design brief² suggesting an SRS
>> is not essential but the performance descriptors state ³An accurate
>> interpretation of the provided software requirements specifications is
>> evident in the design of a feasible solution² suggesting an SRS is essential.
>> My gut says that the VCAA intends us to provide an SRS again.
>>  
>> I wonder whether it is worth weighting each statement in the performance
>> descriptors equally. The coding will take the most time but does that mean it
>> is more important in creating a solution than say an comprehensive testing
>> table? This is where I would like some opinions.
>>  
>> So my interpretation of what we are assessing (equally?):
>> 1.        interpret the SRS and create a feasible design including all
>> specifications.
>> 
>> 2.       Create a design that takes into account mobile devise constraints
>> and is clear and accurate.
>> 
>> 3.       Clear and logical algorithm .
>> 
>> 4.       The coding and internal documentation is awesome.
>> 
>> 5.       Data validation and ³techniques and procedures² (I take this as data
>> structures, sequence, selection and iteration procedures) are effectively
>> applied. 
>> 
>> 6.        Testing Table
>> 
>> 7.       The solution covering all the SRS.
>> 
>>  
>> By now my Zimbabwean dollars worth is nearly zero so I¹ll sign off!
>>  
>> Cheers,
>>  
>> Heath
>>  
>>  
>> 
>> From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
>> On Behalf Of Margaret King Iaquinto
>> Sent: Thursday, 28 July 2011 2:25 PM
>> To: 'Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List'
>> Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Devil's advocate == me?
>> 
>>  
>> Adrian, what kinds of responses are you looking for (depth, breadth, list?)
>> in your first assessment criterion? Samples you would expect...?
>> 
>> Because I will couch my task in an SRS, the factors are pretty much listed
>> there in functional and non-functional requirements.
>> 
>> I need help here.
>> 
>> Maggie
>> VK3CFI 
>> 
>> On Thu Jul 28 11:47 , 'Adrian Janson' sent:
>> Hi everyone,
>>  
>> OK.  I have been reading a lot of the posts about U4O1  and have written my
>> own which I will post to the lists very shortly.  There has been a lot of
>> talk about the SAC and what needs to be included  but I have some issues /
>> questions for the community. 
>> 
>>  
>> The follow is my opinion only!!!! (disclaimer!)
>>  
>> Now my understanding of Key Knowledge vs Key Skills is this: the key
>> knowledge describes the content of the Area of Study and is full examinable
>> (as is everything in the study design proper).  The Key Skills describe what
>> needs to be addressed via the assessment of the area of study (the SAC).  Not
>> all points within the Key Knowledge need to be assessed via the SAC.
>>  
>> 1.        A lot of people are writing SACs in which the student needs to work
>> from / interpret an SRS.  This is not a requirement of the SAC.  The Key
>> Skill states: Œinterpret solution requirements in order to ....¹.  Now the
>> Œsolution requirements¹ could be framed in an SRS (and for consistency I have
>> done it this way), but it doesn¹t need to be.  The Key Skill in U3O2 stated:
>> Œinterpret software requirements specifications by ...¹.  The Key Skills are
>> different.
>> 
>> 2.       There has been a lot of discussion about needing to include either
>> 2D arrays, stacks, queues, sorting and searching (or combinations). There is
>> nothing in the Key Skills that states this.  I have chosen to write a task
>> that lends itself to a queue  and have included requirements that are need
>> sorting / searching routines  but this is not necessary.  I feel that it is
>> in students best interest to include some of these things so that U4O1 is set
>> apart from U3O2 and there is a progression in skills.  Also as these things
>> are going to appear on the exam it is in the best interest of students. 
>> However, a task need not have these things  the Key Skills says Œwrite
>> solutions and internal documentation¹ and Œinterpret solution requirements in
>> order to design and develop solutions¹ (only).  Yes  the Key Knowledge
>> states Œforms and uses of data structures to organise and manipulate data,
>> including two-dimensional arrays, stacks and queues¹ and it would be hard to
>> write a solution without using a data structure at all  but all the task
>> asks is that students Œwrite solutions¹.
>> 
>> 3.       User interface and validation.  I am putting a fair emphasis on the
>> design of the user interface and the validation as I feel that there needs to
>> be as this is Œa solution¹.  The Key Skills do not mention user interface or
>> validation at all (they are mentioned in detail in the Key Knowledge).  We
>> want students to produce a complete solution  therefore there needs to be an
>> emphasis on these things.  They will also have a significant effect on the
>> testing table.
>> 
>>  
>> Again  all my opinion  and not intended to cause confusion  just to
>> promote an understanding of the task amongst all of us.
>> 
>> (so flame away!!!)
>>  
>> Cheers,
>> Adrian
>>  
>> Adrian Janson B.Sc, Dip.Ed, M.Ed
>> Director of ICT
>> Melbourne High School, Forrest Hill, South Yarra, Victoria 3141 Australia.
>> Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
>> Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
>> E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
>> <http://janson.adrian.a@edumail.vic.gov.au>
>> Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au <http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au/>
>> Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> 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.
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://www.edulists.com.au - FAQ, Subscribe, Unsubscribe
>> IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
>> and
>> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> http://www.vitta.org.au  - VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers
>> Association Inc
> 
> 

-- 
-- 
Andrew Shortell

mailto:shortell at get2me.net
Heidelberg Teaching Unit
Ph 9470 3403
Fax  9470 3215

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20110729/fb6c4cff/attachment.html 