Case Study CP812: Year 10 ICT programme

Abstract

Reference: CP812
Classroom Practice: Year 10
Title: Year 10 ICT programme
Duration: One year
Overview: This course is divided into four terms, with a different focus in each. Students began the year learning how a computer works and had the option to be assessed for two NCEA unit standards. In the Graphics segment they each created and promoted a conceptual gadget. In term 3, students developed individual websites and in term 4 learnt programming and produced a computer game.

Focus Points:

• Learning basic computer knowledge and management
• Designing/modelling with computer programs – SketchUp and Adobe Photoshop
• Using graphics for promotional purposes
• Developing and implementing a website
• Practising skills through involvement in a national web-development competition
• Programming skills

Background

Hillcrest High School is one of New Zealand's largest co-educational secondary schools, with a roll of about 1,500 students in 2008.

Technology is offered as options in Years 9-10, with students able to select from Biotechnology, Electronics, Graphics, Food Technology, Information & Communication Technology, and Materials Technology.

Information & Communication Technology is offered as an Applications course in Year 9 and as an Applications or Programming course in Year 10.

Karllie Clifton moved from an art background into teaching ICT. She worked as a florist before deciding on university study for a career in business management. Part-way through her degree she chose to continue along the ICT line, and eventually decided to go into teaching. Karllie started teaching at Hillcrest in 2003, and has taught a Year 10 Programming class each year.

Pre-planning

Karllie has taught the Year 10 Applications programme for five years and says that its content and delivery has remained fairly consistent throughout this time. "Our programme was really good to start with, we've always been happy with it".

A few years ago the school's Technology department decided to reassess students against two unit standards – Level 2: 2780 and 2781. Students were doing these basic computer assessments in the course anyway, so enjoyed the fact that they could move into Year 11 with 12 computing credits with little extra work. Karllie notes that these unit standards are being reviewed so this situation may change in a few years when new standards are substituted.

Teachers from Hillcrest and Katikati College had worked together in a Beacon Practice cluster group in 2004-2007, during which they had developed a range of ICT/Technology programmes.  Dissatisfied with their existing assessment procedures, they developed a set of Alternative Assessment Schedules which made assessing work simpler, more transparent, and broadened the range of assessable methods of documentation to include: physically showing, verbally explaining, writing, sketching and drawing and submitting electronic evidence as appropriate. See Case Study BP604 Teaching in an ICT Context.

Delivery

How a computer works

Karllie's programme was structured so that each part is done in one term. In term 1 students learnt the basics about how a computer works – hardware and software, primary and secondary memory and operating systems. They were given the opportunity to be assessed for Unit Standard 2780 to demonstrate generic computing knowledge.

After learning file management, students created a logical file structure, using Microsoft Windows Explorer, which they could submit for assessment for Unit Standard 2781.

As well as learning the practical aspects of working with computers, students also had to consider computer ethics – privacy, copyright, piracy and organisation confidentiality. Karllie gave students a worksheet with a variety of scenarios, and asked them to consider the implications for data safety in each case.

The term concluded with a section in which students were introduced to correct use of a computer in terms of health and safety issues, such as ergonomics.

Graphics

Students were asked to create the 'ultimate' technology gadget for the 21st century and promote it to a target audience. They began term 2 practising free-hand sketching techniques and drawing shapes using the computer.

The class learnt the basic features of Adobe Photoshop and worked through a tutorial on the program. Karllie then introduced them to the concepts of vector and bitmap imagery – students explored the internet to find and document the differences between the two formats and when they should be used for making an image. Karllie followed this by teaching the basic features of Macromedia Freehand .

After making an initial plan, the students researched different types of gadgets – such as the iPod, mobile phones, Playstation etc – to identify the requirements for a well-designed gadget. Karllie asked students to concentrate on two components – Technological Products and Characteristics of Outcome – and ask questions such as: What is it made of? Why is it made of that? How does it work with the other materials? Why was it shaped like that? How was it shaped like that?

While doing their research the class also studied advertisements, looking at the imagery and text used to market today's gadgets.

Students discussed their ideas with stakeholders and then developed concept sketches, which they modelled using SketchUp and made into a small movie. They also displayed their modelled concept to the class, where they were expected to explain the gadget's functions and purpose and evaluate it and justify its fitness for purpose.

The class discussed attention-catching advertising/promotion and then individually documented examples of good and bad design practices. Karllie talked about design principles such as contrast, repetition, alignment and proximity (CRAP), balance and space, and asked students to find examples on the internet of how well (or not) these principles had been followed.

Students developed their own concept ideas for promoting their gadgets, sketching them on paper and choosing one of these to create on the computer. They finished this work with evaluation of their promotion, to justify its fitness for purpose, and evaluation of their planning.

Web design

In term 3 students developed, created and implemented a website. Preparatory work included researching and evaluating some existing websites. Topics for the students' individual sites had to be educational so, after consulting with their stakeholders and clarifying the purpose of their site, students researched their issue to ensure they had sufficient knowledge/resources for the content of their website.

When developing their concept, students created a site map which identified all page names, titles, navigation and content, and created at least two of their original concepts for their page layouts. They were expected to take/document screen shots, as evidence throughout their development, and show that they had tested their website.

Karllie entered her class into the TVNZ/Net Guide Schools Web Challenge noting that it's a bonus if they do well (of the top 50 web designers in 2007, six of her students were recognised in their categories), but the overall focus of the unit was designing a website. "The Challenge provides practice in uploading work onto another server and transferring files from one server to another. It also involves students fully comprehending that the files are sitting here at school, then they're sitting in Auckland, and they've got to load them again, which is quite a big concept for them to get their heads around at that level. That's why we do it, so students learn about how a website actually works in the real world as opposed to working on the computer in front of them."

Programming

The class was given a basic software project in which they had to design a game. Students first analysed some simple games before setting to work on their own development. Karllie taught them programming using Qbasic .

In their initial brief they had to consider resources, stakeholders (including parental acceptance of a game!), and their own knowledge of gaming. The game had to be original, interactive and fun for the player.

Outcomes

Karllie says that overall she was pleased with the end results of this unit, although a little disappointed that, while some students made great websites, their technological practice in aspects such as brief development was neglected.

In term 4 she reinforced the importance of engaging with all aspects of technological practice and was much more impressed with their brief development, which was the focus of their programming projects. However, she thinks perhaps she expected too much within the given timeframe, as she only saw the class three times a week and activities such as camp interrupted classtime that term.

In order to get students familiar with how they would be assessed at senior level, Karllie wrote some new assessment schedules to fit with the Alternative Assessment Schedules at Levels 1, 2 and 3. She felt it was important that students were assessed on the practical parts of the unit, and therefore gave marks for their practice as well as their programme, based on user-friendliness and good design.

Karllie says that the students enjoyed the practical elements of the unit, especially being able to edit their own graphics, and that those who liked the programming "really got into it". She comments that this class gave students thinking about doing programming in Year 11 the knowledge and experience they needed to make an informed decision and helped with student retention – some students, for example, decided that programming is not for them, but instead of giving up ICT altogether did the Applications course instead.

One of the biggest teaching challenges was the class size – 29 students made it harder to use the Alternative Assessment Schedules and meant she couldn't do all assessments one-on-one. However, she feels happy with how the assessment has gone given such a big class.

What next?

As she wasn't assessing students on the new strands, Karllie has no record of the level of student understanding, but notes that they seemed to understand what they were learning at the time. She will obviously be making much more effort in 2008 to introduce the new strands and get the students involved with them.

Although students enjoyed getting NCEA credits in Year 10, a departmental decision was made to drop the NCEA unit standard assessment in 2008. Teachers were finding that Year 11 students, comfortable with their safety net of 12 credits, wanted to pick which unit standards they would work on, or not bother about.

Karllie will teach two Year 10 classes in 2008, one of which doesn't do programming. This group will do the first three terms from this unit, but in the fourth term will work on software, such as multimedia programs.

Students get a taste of programming in the Year 10 course before going on to Year 11 programming. Karllie says that they lose many students at Year 11 entry because the subject choices reduce to five, but there is still enough for two Year 11 classes, which subsequently feed into one class at Year 12.

While the Year 10 programming course is fairly well developed, Karllie enjoys being able to modify it every year to make it better – "Now, with the new curriculum, we've got the option there to spice it up even more".