A2005/022 - 1 December 2005

Summary of recommended changes to the Level 3 Technology achievement standards

Background

This year the Level 3 Technology achievement standards have been reviewed. This review is part of the planned cycle of review that takes place after the first year of use of achievement standards.

• Initial feedback and comments were collated from teachers/schools, moderators, examiners, markers, material developers and other stakeholders.
• This information was reviewed by an expert subject panel and recommendations were made in March 2005.
• The recommendations were sent out for full consultation to secondary schools, tertiary institutions, and others in the education sector, in April/May 2005.
• Feedback from this full consultation has informed the recommendations described below.

Purpose

The purpose of the attached summary is to provide teachers with the necessary information that will allow them to plan programmes for 2006. It is possible that there will be further changes but these are not likely to be major ones.

It is hoped that the final standards will be registered and published on the NZQA website this month. It is recommended that teachers sign up to the NZQA web update alert service on www.nzqa.govt.nz so that they will receive notification of this registration of achievement standards, as soon as it is published.

Main recommendations resulting from the review

General

Credit Values

The credit values of this set of achievement standards have been adjusted so that the credit value of each standard better reflects the notional time that a student would need to cover the requirements for the standard. This has meant that the credit values of 90613 and 90620 have increased from 6 to 8, and the values of 90676, 90677, 90680, 90682, 90684, 90686, 90688, 90679, 90681, 90683, 90685 and 90687 have all increased from 3 to 4. The subject expert panel have advised that the intention is that a school/student would choose which of the standards would best fit with the technology programme offered in the school. A student would not have time to develop evidence for the whole suite of standards in a year's programme. Also it is not expected that a student would attempt both 90613 and 90620 in a one year programme because of the significant time demands involved in these two standards.

Generic versus Specific Nature of the Standards

There was support from the national consultation for a move towards generic standards and this is in the same direction as indicated by the early draft of the reviewed essence statement of the curriculum. There were also concerns expressed about the potential for 'double dipping' by having both the generic versions of Technology 90613 and 90620 and the context specific versions of the same standards. Therefore the context specific standards for Technology 90614 – 90619 have been recommended to be deleted, as a first move towards the more generic approach. However it has been decided to retain the context specific versions of Technology standards 90680, 90682, 90684, 90686, 90688, 90679, 90681, 90683, 90685 and 90687 as it was considered too early to move these to a more generic approach. The generic version of 90628 has been recommended to be deleted to remove the possibility of 'double dipping'.

Other Changes

Technology 90613

There has been a minor change in the title – deletion of 'in technology'.

'Planning tools' has been replaced by 'project management tools' to provide a clearer progression from Level 2. Project management tools are broader than planning tools. A new explanatory note (EN) has been added to clarify this. It is reproduced below:

Project management tools are used to manage the overall technological development. This involves planning and effective communication between the student, client and other stakeholders.

Project management tools used will be dependent on the nature and the stage of the technological practice being undertaken. Tools include such reflective journal, visual diary, communication and management software as plans of action, Gantt charts, flow charts, block sequence diagrams,

There has been a significant clarification in the requirements relating to brief development. These have now been more clearly described in a new EN 4 that helps to define the progression from Level 2 in this area of development of conceptual design. This has been reproduced in full below:

Brief development entails:

• exploration and critical evaluation of a client issue to identify an authentic need or opportunity
• the development of an initial brief that identifies the constraints and opportunities on the conceptual design and the practice that can be undertaken to develop it. The initial brief should communicate the nature of the conceptual design(s) for the resolution or realisation of the identified need or opportunity
• identifying and accessing skills and knowledge that will be needed to refine the brief and fully investigate the identified opportunities and constraints with consideration of key and wider community stakeholder perspectives
• undertaking ongoing brief refinement and/or modification as based on students developing understandings of social and physical environment of their ongoing practice, and in particular feedback from key and wider community stakeholders. Students should develop an understanding of the need for the conceptual designs to be 'fit for purpose' in its broadest sense, and develop their brief in accordance with this
• development of a final brief that will provide specifications for the student, teacher, key and wider community stakeholders with a means of evaluating the fitness for purpose of the conceptual design presented.

Reference to 'Concerns of wider-community …' has been deleted from the original EN 14 as it was potentially confusing and the notion is captured in the brief development. It would be confusing if teachers and students held the idea that this was where this aspect was to be addressed rather than through out the practice.

Technology 90620

There has been a minor change in the title – deletion of 'in technology'.

'Planning tools' has been replaced by 'project management tools' to provide a clearer progression from Level 2. Project management tools are broader than planning tools. A new explanatory note (EN) has been added to clarify this. It is identical to the one reproduced for Technology 90613 above.

There has been a significant clarification in the requirements relating to brief development. These have now been more clearly described in a new EN 4 that helps to define the progression from Level 2 in this area of development of conceptual design. This EN is identical to the one given above for Technology 90613.

Reference to 'Concerns of wider-community …' has been deleted from the original EN 11 as it was potentially confusing and the notion is captured in the brief development. It would be confusing if teachers and students held the idea that this was where this aspect was to be addressed rather than through out the practice.

Technology 90627

In the first criterion the reference to 'design' in the first sentence has been removed – the design aspect is covered in the second sentence. The progression in the grades has been clarified by the addition of 'explain' for merit and 'justify' for excellence, in relation to necessary design adaptations.

A new second criterion, relating to key factors and their implications, has been introduced to clarify the progression from Level 2.

The progression in the grades has been clarified in the third criterion by the use of 'explain' for merit and 'justify' for excellence in relation to the mode of production.

The third criterion has been split into two criteria to clarify requirements. Once again progression has been clarified by the introduction of 'explain' for merit, and 'justify' and 'discuss' for excellence.

The original fourth criterion has been deleted the requirements have been covered in the other criteria.

A new EN 4 clarifies the brief development that describes a suitable mode of production, and a new EN 5 gives some examples of modes of production. This is reproduced in full below:

Brief development that describes a suitable mode of production entails:

• exploration and critical evaluation of the client's one-off solution(s) to identify its suitability for multi-unit production
• the development of an initial brief that identifies the constraints and opportunities on the mode of production and the processes needed to develop it
• identifying and accessing skills and knowledge that will be needed to refine the brief and fully investigate the identified opportunities and constraints with consideration of key and wider community stakeholder perspectives
• undertaking ongoing brief refinement and/or modification as based on students developing understandings of social and physical environment of their ongoing practice, and in particular feedback from key and wider community stakeholders. Students should develop an understanding of the mode of production and the processes proposed for the multi-unit production of the client's one-off solution(s)
• development of a final brief that will provide the student, teacher, key and wider community stakeholders with a means of evaluating the fitness for purpose of the proposal for multi-unit production of the client's one-off solution(s).

Technology 90676

'Describe' has replaced 'discuss' in the title so that the title better summarises the requirements to achieve the standard. The title has also been amended to clarify that it refers to a 'technologists' practice'.

A clearer progression in the criteria has been established through the use of 'describe', 'explain' and 'discuss' for achieved, merit and excellence respectively.

The option in the criterion for merit has been removed and now uses wording that clarifies that the emphasis is on the impact on the technologist's practice. Reference to informing “own practice” has been removed from the criterion as this is not the focus in this standard.

A new EN 3 defines 'technologist' and makes it clear that this cannot refer to a student. This note also clearly indicates that two or more technologists are required for this standard.

Technology 90677

The title has been changed to indicate that a multi-unit production process is intended.

The single achievement criterion has been split into two to emphasise the two key aspects in the standard.

The progression in grades has been clarified by the expectations of 'analyse' and 'describe' for achieved, 'analyse' and 'explain' for merit, and 'analyse' and 'discuss' for excellence.

The criteria have the word 'existing' inserted before 'production process' to clarify the intent.

Reference to 'viability' has been removed from the excellence criteria, and 'sustainability' added. Sustainability of production processes is considered to be more relevant in this context.

Technology 90680, 90682, 90684, 90686, 90688

The title has been amended to align with the requirements for achievement.

The word 'existing' has been added to all criteria for clarification. The words 'two or more' have been added to the merit and excellence criteria.

The option for merit has been removed and the wording has been amended to indicate the focus is on explaining knowledge and how it has been synthesised in the development of a technological outcome.

An expansion of what is required for a specific area outcome and some examples will be included in the Assessment Specifications published by NZQA.

Technology 90679, 90681, 90683, 90685, 90687

The title has been changed by replacing 'advanced skills' with 'techniques' to provide a progression from the standards at Level 2. This same wording change has been made throughout the standard.

The option for merit has been removed and the wording has been amended to indicate the focus is on demonstrating complex techniques in technology.

Enquiries

Circulars are available from the Qualifications Authority website (www.nzqa.govt.nz/publications/circulars).

A PDF copy of this Circular is available for download.

Please refer any enquiries relating to this circular to:

To receive these circulars by email enter your email address below:

Previous circulars

• 021 - 1 December 2005 - New Zealand Equivalents to International Accounting Standards and International Financial Reporting Standards
• 020 - 11 November 2005 - Level 3 Drama - 2006 Prescribed plays for achievement standard
• 019 - 21 October 2005 - Orders for the 2004 New Zealand Scholarship Technology video and CD
• 018 - 12 October 2005 - 2004 Level 2 examination papers and standards review
• 017 - 12 October 2005 - Shakespearean Plays 2005 - 2010
• 016 - 10 October 2005 - Internal Moderation
• 015 - 10 October 2005 - Review of Level 3 Achievement Standards
• 014 - 10 October 2005 - Visual Arts verification and assessment - NCEA levels 1, 2, 3 and Scholarship in 2005
• 013 - 10 October 2005 - Interpretation of 'choice' in the Level 2 Economics assessment specifications
• 012 - 7 October 2005 - Preparation for the external assessment of Level 1 Technology achievement standards 2005
• 011 - 23 September 2005 - Entry Data for Levels 1 and 2 Aural Language Achievement Standards 2005
• 010 - 16 September 2005 - Level 3 Visual Arts external assessment compassionate consideration process
• 009 - 16 September 2005 - Instructions for Information Management external assessment
• 008 - 2 September 2005 - External Assessment of Level 3 English standards
• 007 - 26 August 2005 - 2006 Level 1 Visual Art assessment:
  90020 Generate and develop ideas in making artworks
• 006 - 8 August 2005 - Assessment for Secondary School Qualifications through the Medium of Te Reo Māori
• 005 - 15 July 2005 - Science 90186 - Carry out a practical science investigation with direction
• 004 - 27 June 2005 - Resources for Information Management Standard 90036 – Apply design principles to produce documents
• 003 - 27 June 2005 - L1-3 French and German assessment Guidelines
• 002 - 17 June 2005 - Level 3 Top Art on tour
• 001 - 10 June 2005