[Year 12 SofDev] The next study design

Mon Feb 11 15:01:44 EST 2013

hi folks,

I feel that teaching the transferable skills of development is surely the most important thing. ie condition, loops, data types and structures, validation, file access, sorting and searching. In essence these haven’t changed since I did Basic at school.

While there is a current focus on mobile devices I don’t believe it needs to be mandated in the programming. Does the nature of the device really matter that much? Surely teaching of these generic programming skills is what is important whether in Java/Eclipse or simulated in VB? Perhaps there is room to tighten up on the OO and prescribe the second programming sac to include an encapsulated class?

Last year I gave my Year 11s equal development time in Android and VB (2008 express) last year with the view to changing over. Almost everyone preferred to work in VB due to ease of use, speed and the idea they were controlling a ‘proper’ computer! So we are using VB again. I guess it is important to think about what kids want more than teachers (me) who feel the need for a change or challenge to make the teaching more interesting (for the teacher!).

The current study design has improved the balance to more programming which has been great. I hope the next one continues in this vein.

cheers
                                      gordon

. .  .   .    .     .      .       .        .         .

________________________________
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au] on behalf of Mark [mark at vceit.com]
Sent: Monday, 11 February 2013 11:20 AM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] The next study design

Hi all. Databases were not, as far as I know, ever a part of SD's study design.
The problem was that too many people were starting to use databases so much that the core principles of traditional programming were being neglected.

The current study design explicitly rules out the use of database programming for that reason: so students focus on core principles rather than an exotic and esoteric subset of programming.

On 11 February 2013 08:38, Kevork Krozian <kevork at edulists.com.au<mailto:kevork at edulists.com.au>> wrote:
Hi James,

I like your idea of a list of emerging technologies and perhaps an annually maintained list so it doesn’t need to be future proof for 4 years.
It would be really good to hear from people who argue that we should not have not databases in SD by shifting the debate to the programming rather than the storage. Check out the Horizon Report for what is expected in 1, 3 and 5 years.

With the programming, I have been trying to find a solution to the issue that has not been resolved regarding databases vs files.
Wouldn’t it be better to mandate programming skills rather than how to store or retrieve data ?
For example, SAC31 will have the following programming structures and skills:

1.       1D arrays and/or records

2.       Integers, reals/floats/doubles, strings and Booleans

3.       Validation for existence, range and type

4.       Storage to persistent memory and retrieval

5.       Selection and iteration

6.       And ………

SAC41 will have the following programming structures and skills:

1.       2D arrays and/or stacks and/or queues  and/or linked lists and/or ……

2.       Integers, reals/floats/doubles, strings and Booleans

3.       Calls to functions and/or procedures with or without parameter passing

4.       Validation for existence, range and type

5.       Storage to persistent memory and retrieval

6.       Iteration, selection,

7.       The use of a mobile device to demonstrate features of the solution

8.       And. ………..

We need to focus on the programming rather than the storage . In that way everyone will deliver the same skill set rather than continuing the unwinnable argument about databases vs files.

Take Care

Kevork Krozian
Edulists Creator Administrator
www.edulists.com.au<http://www.edulists.com.au>
tel: 0419 356 034

From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au<mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au> [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au<mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au>] On Behalf Of Vella, James
Sent: Thursday, 7 February 2013 4:48 PM
To: sofdev at edulists.com.au<mailto:sofdev at edulists.com.au>
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] The next study design & Thanks to Mark

•         Maybe for U1/2 we could look at an approved list of emerging technologies (similar to that of approved languages) for U1O2 where they currently talk of Social networking, robotics & artificial intelligence et al. This list could then be dynamic for every year of the study design – just to keep things nice and fresh

•         It would be awesome for the definition of scope to be clarified

•         Would I become an outcast if I said databases should make a return to being utilized in SD? Is there really a difference between inputting data from a text file which stores data and a formal database…please don’t banish me!

I’m sure more ideas will pop into my head soon enough

Also, a big thanks to Mark for his great site, his resources and his exam post mortems that have kept us all relatively sane over the years. The site and resources have definitely helped me keep my head above water over the past couple of years teaching IT.

[cid:image001.png at 01CE0832.4C220CD0]

Mr James Vella
Head of Technology – ICT
Information Technology/Mathematics Teacher
MacKillop College
Russell Street
Werribee, VIC 3030

•     email: jvella at mackillop.vic.edu.au<mailto:s at mackillop.vic.edu.au>
• phone: +61-3-87345200<tel:%2B61-3-87345200>
• Fax: +61-3-87345261<tel:%2B61-3-87345261>
• mail: PO Box 522, Werribee VIC 3030
•      web: www.mackillop.vic.edu.au<http://www.mackillop.vic.edu.au/>

-----Original Message-----

Message: 1

Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2013 13:02:19 +1100

From: Mark <mark at vceit.com<mailto:mark at vceit.com>>

Subject: [Year 12 SofDev] The Next Study Design

To: "Year 12 IT Applications Teachers' Mailing List"

                <itapps at edulists.com.au<mailto:itapps at edulists.com.au>>,         "Year 12 Software Development Teachers'

                Mailing List"        <sofdev at edulists.com.au<mailto:sofdev at edulists.com.au>>,       "Year 11 Information

                Technology Teachers' Mailing List"           <yr11it at edulists.com.au<mailto:yr11it at edulists.com.au>>

Message-ID:

                <CACu=8Z2J-ejb3JDx-V-rd+7pHJBVcB=jYjbBH6Uve2EPxbKvxQ at mail.gmail.com<mailto:CACu=8Z2J-ejb3JDx-V-rd+7pHJBVcB=jYjbBH6Uve2EPxbKvxQ at mail.gmail.com>>

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

We are now halfway through the 'new' study design and moves will be underway before too long to start designing the next study design. You might want to start sharpening your pencils and knives for that bunfight.

To start the buns flying, I would suggest:

- Study design in general -

- Can we (I?) please get guidance on how defining scope is different to determining solution requirements?  As I see it, defining one's functional and non-functional requirements necessarily also defines scope. If they don't completely define scope, what is missing?

- A personal annoyance of mine in the mandated PSM is that determining evaluation criteria is part of the design phase.  Surely it's part of logical design, not physical design, and could and should happen during analysis?

- The PSM leaves out training from the development phase.

- Implementation has been omitted from the PSM. I think it needs to return, as a separate step or at the end of development.

- Let's make sure the detailed examples actually obey the mandated requirements of outcomes: ITA U4O2, I'm looking at YOU.

- Make sure mandated requirements actually appear in mandated sections of the study design, and not in the "Advice" or "Recommendations" sections - ITA U4O2's "organisations" with a significant S, I'm still looking at YOU - was just unfair.

- All significant changes to a study design should be clearly flagged, and not subtly changed.

- There should be a single (online) point of truth for all mandated VCE IT course and task requirements: sprinkling them across a study design, assessment handbook, FAQs and VCAA bulletins (some up to 3 years old!) leads to accidental non-compliance by teachers.

- Units 1 & 2 -

- I'm pretty happy with the balance overall, but some 'sexying up' would help attract punters - e.g. programming web apps, image/audio editing.

- Perhaps an 'integrated project' to bring together several IT skills into one information product.

- Definitely keep the groupwork.

- Definitely keep the client project.  I loved throwing them out into the real world on unsupervised excursions for most of the term 4 double periods

:-)

- SD -

- Please let's sort out the strange attraction that the study design has for the physical layer of the OSI model.  What is so magnetically attractive about that layer compared to the others, especially the more interesting higher layers?

- And what's with KK U3O1 KK04 - the OSI physical layer' connection to TCP/IP?  AFAIK there is no connection. TCP/IP has its own parallel version of the OSI layers. Kevork may be able to help me better understand this baffling key knowledge.

- I'd like to see linked lists added to data structures.

- Let's remove laptops from the list of allowed "mobile devices". They are certainly not retarded computers any more.  Mine is more powerful than my desktop!

- Let's also remove "gaming consoles". If it's meant to refer to handheld games, say so.  Otherwise it infers that Xboxes are "mobile computing devices", which their cables certainly argue against!

- Completely new fields of IT -

- Most of my suggestions have been mere tinkering with what is already in the study design. What important fields are unrepresented or under-represented in the current study design?  Perhaps...

- 3D printing

- Data centres

- Social/psychological implications of omnipresent computing and communication facilities on children, students, workers, and governments.

e.g. how many of the political revolutions in 2012 were incited and coordinated by social media?

- Privacy in the digital age

- Changing attitudes to information ownership - open source software, "acceptable piracy", Megaupload, Creative Commons, CopyLeft, GNU licences, Facebook privacy settings, Anonymous, Wikileaks, jailbreaking/unlocking (recently outlawed in USA) etc.

- Artificial intelligence, e.g. IBM's Watson, Amazon's suggested buys, Siri, human/computer interfacing (e.g. Google glasses)

- Changes in computing paradigms - mainframes/dumb terminals > smart standalones > cloud/dumb browsers.

Over to you guys. The beach is calling me...

--

Mark Kelly

mark at vceit.com<mailto:mark at vceit.com>

http://vceit.com

--
Mark Kelly
mark AT vceit DOT com
http://vceit.com

Important - This email and attachments may or may not be confidential. If received in error, please contact us and send us a really good joke. We get lonely here, and no-one talks to us in the legal department. Before opening or using attachments check them for viruses and defects: if either exists, open them anyway; life is short, and they might be interesting. Regardless of any loss, damage or consequence, whether caused by the incompetence of the sender or not, our liability is limited to sending you flowers or chocolate. Any representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender, and not necessarily those of vceit.com<http://vceit.com>.

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/sofdev/attachments/20130211/fdfdfa24/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 14012 bytes
Desc: image001.png
Url : http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20130211/fdfdfa24/image001-0001.png 