[Year 12 SofDev] SD 2104 Post mortem progress report

[Esther Andrews]

Hi Darren,
You raise an interesting point. I would have thought that linear searching should have been listed as an “including”. Perhaps it is taken for granted. It certainly seems like an oversight in the wording.
And now that I look, I see that Adrian Janson’s text only mentions linear searching in passing. So I guess unless students have done some linear search examples in class they might be caught out.
My students start with linear searches and did them to death so they should have had no trouble identifying it (on a good day!).
Regards,
Esther.

From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Darren Scott
Sent: Monday, 17 November 2014 9:18 AM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] SD 2104 Post mortem progress report

Hey all, something I’d like to check up on is Section A Question 6 … not the answer (more than happy that it’s a linear search), but the knowledge required compared to the study design.

The dot point in the study design is:
• techniques for searching, including binary search, and techniques for sorting, including bubble sort and quick sort

I thought it was mentioned in the past that the word “including” meant that the particular item could be in an exam, whereas anything not in the “including” was not specifically examined. Ergo, there could be (and has been) exact questions on bubble sort and quick sort, but not selection, insertion, gnome or any of the others. I assume most of us cover the “includings” in a lot more detail than the “not includings” – I know I’ve only paid lip service (one slide of a PowerPoint and three minutes of explanation) to linear searching as an alternative to binary searching.

I realise that I’m probably making a mountain out of a molehill here, and from memory Section A is allowed to be “tricksy” (if it’s not A, not B and not D then it must be C), but would the student who has focussed only on the study design be at a disadvantage here? How many would have said “it’s not a sort and binary search is the only one specifically in the study design” and chosen D?

Thoughts? Am I worrying over nothing?

Darren Scott
Catholic College Bendigo


[cid:image001.png at 01D00249.AE3F0C20]

Darren Scott
Teacher
Catholic College Bendigo

'Live the Good News'

La Valla (Yrs 7-9): Ph: 03 5449 3466

Coolock (Yrs 10-12): Ph: 03 5445 9100

Finance Office: Ph: 03 5445 9191





From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au<mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au> [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au] On Behalf Of Mark
Sent: Sunday, 16 November 2014 2:14 PM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: [Year 12 SofDev] SD 2104 Post mortem progress report

Hello, Mondayphobes.

I see there is already discussion of the SD exam underway, which is good to see.

(I don't read other discussions until I finish my post mortem, but I look forward to doing so.)

I like the exam so far: there has been little to pick on.

My SD post mortem<http://www.vceit.com/p/postmortem-2014s.htm> so far covers sections A and B.
It's an early draft - please expect typos and dumb comments.

Cheers
Mark

--

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

I love the sound of people's voices after they stop talking.

I, Mark Kelly, am entirely responsible for the offensive verbiage I spew forth.
Have I offended anyone with this post?  I would not be surprised.
If offended, please whinge to me at the email address above.
Please leave poor Kevork alone.  It is not his fault.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20141116/0c34861d/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 8501 bytes
Desc: image001.png
Url : http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20141116/0c34861d/image001-0001.png