Digital Technologies, programming NCEA 2016

One of the areas that I am interested in each year, is what is the condition of programming in New Zealand Schools.

While it has been going up year upon year, with 5884 students taking NCEA Level One programming in 2016. Up from 3246 when the standards was introduced in 2011. What does this look like nationally.

There are 430 schools that teach Technology at NCEA levels in New Zealand in 2016. I have used that as the base information.
The above map shows the areas of the country where Level One, Level Two and Level Three are taught.

Big Data and NZ Digital Technologies NCEA Level 3 idea

How do students create understanding of Big Data, what can be some of the ideas that they can understand. Plotting data on a map to understand a crash analysis database(need to register to access, research purposes). This I did a couple of years ago. Now I am looking at the ideas of infographics. One that has helped me to understand a bit better the opportunities around this is Brian Foo, the creator of Climate Change Coloring Book on kickstarter.

The Climate Change Coloring Book contains guided coloring activities that explore scientific research and data related to climate change. The goal is to encourage learning, exploration, and reflection on issues related to climate change through act of coloring.

One of the great things about his kickstarter has been the sharing of the code, the code used to generated the art in the book will also freely available to use and extend. This has allowed me to think about what data we have in New Zealand and what could be used to demonstrate the understanding.

https://data.govt.nz/

Pushing the ideas.
Since working in Christchurch I am used to seeing in the papers the number of days that there was poor air quality. This is from http://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/82329452/Canterbury-unlikely-to-meet-air-quality-standards to be able to think about what the ideas of having and showing data could look like.
Gathering data to use from http://data.ecan.govt.nz/Catalogue/Method?MethodId=98
Seems like it does not like to show data from some sites, this could be that the data is no longer being gathered.

DateTime,StationName,CO (mg/m3),NO2 (ug/m3),NOx (ppb),PM10 (ug/m3),PM2.5 (ug/m3),PMCoarse (ug/m3),Relative humidity (%),Temperature (near ground - top of mast) (DegC),Temperature 10m (DegC),Temperature 2m (DegC),Wind maximum (m/s),Wind speed (m/s)
2017-06-01,St Albans,0.354879349470139,15.7742910385132,13.4651327133179,14.1038541793823,8.67333316802979,5.43052053451538,90.6372528076172,0.032423734664917,9.91655158996582,9.94897556304932,2.42499995231628,1.32716655731201

Looking at the data, we need to gather the PM10 (ug/m3), however the data that is being collected for the code in the coloring book above is for PM25. It seems that the New Zealand measurement is PM10 http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1706/S00006/air-quality-monitoring-continues-in-alexandra.htm

What students will need to understand is what is the data recorded, and how it is being used.

Not just a 3D printed object

Good evening,

There was a post on the digital technologies group this week;

Has anyone got a Level 2 assessment that could include 3D printing? It doesn't need to be DT standard. Could be Generic or other.

as well as

I have access to a small 3D printer for the first time this year. I would love some ideas for my Year 10 class on items they could make in SketchUp and 3D print. So far they have printed their name and a little person which I found the idea for on www.thingiverse.com. I would like to utilise the printer more and would love to know what others are doing. Any ideas, advice? Thanks

It is great to see teachers starting to embrace new technologies in their classroom. This started a conversation at school around how do we use 3D printers, is it an outcome that people just want to develop? or should we be looking at the innovation, engagement with learners, inspiring students to look at social good?

I have a students in my WALLE module, LEGO EV3 robotics where students are developing concepts of understanding of automated systems. This students loves to have something tactile with him, it is a way of him being able to concentrate better in class.

Another student has tactile putty with him and is developing his own spinners. Both of these students have some form of learning difficulty.

 

 
We have talked about fitgit cubes and other outcomes throughout the year, but when these emails came through, I started to think, not only of our students who are in our classrooms, but other students as well.

How could Technology Achievement Standards work to help students develop an understanding of their fellow students, but also assist to help better learning outcomes.

Through our Innovate Learning Environment I was able to go have a conversation with them about the idea. It just so happened that most of the gear on the desk was yo yo's fidget spinners, tactile putty, it helped the conversation start. What amazed me was that the class went quiet while the students spoke, the teachers, teacher aides and other students all started listening to what was being talked about and said. Some teachers also talked about how they have had to adapt to change as normally they would have banned these items from class. However through the conversation that we were having, it highlighted how its helped them to concentrate. How it was different from the pen clicking and the finger strumming.

Some of my thoughts that have lead me to this idea.
The ideas come from my students around concentration, entertainment, keeping focus, tactile, simple rather than complicated, Quiet (imagine clicking the pen, or tapping fingers)

The ideas come from the fidget widget, yo yo's, tactile putty, spinners. This is not around a distraction, but as a way to help them maintain focus within the classroom.

Stakeholders can be the ADHD kids in class or school.

Looking at the prototyping assessment for Technology Level 2 - Prototyping, allows for this type of development to happen. It could be used at other NCEA Levels as well.

Developing a Resource called the fidget widget.This assessment activity requires you to make and trial a prototype from a teacher-approved brief. The prototype is to develop a design outcome that helps students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder or Poor Gross Motor Control (Weak muscles, struggle to do activity for a long period of time).

Upon completing this activity, you will submit:

• your prototype
• evidence of how you selected suitable materials, components, tools, and equipment
• evidence of how you used the results of ongoing testing and stakeholder feedback to make and refine your prototype
• evidence of trialling your garment to justify its fitness for purpose, including an explanation of any decisions you made to accept and/or modify your prototype.

Developing an idea for a need or opportunity is what Technology is about. The Technology essence statement:

Technology is intervention by design: the use of practical and intellectual resources to develop products and systems (technological outcomes) that expand human possibilities by addressing needs and realising opportunities. Adaptation and innovation are at the heart of technological practice. Quality outcomes result from thinking and practices that are informed, critical, and creative.

Technology makes enterprising use of its own particular knowledge and skills, together with those of other disciplines. Graphics and other forms of visual representation offer important tools for exploration and communication.

Technology is never static. It is influenced by and in turn impacts on the cultural, ethical, environmental, political, and economic conditions of the day.

When you read the statement and think about what the idea is about, students can see opportunities and start to think of the ideas, rather than just develop a 3D printed outcome.

I attach the following Technology_Level_2_Prototyping Achievement Standard Assessment, it would have to be modified to work within your school, but I hope it would provide an idea of the potential for students.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B7XxvF_5OWc_Y0gwbHNOclBVaGdhZHdSeTlNZ3JIWHdiQ1Vv

Lower levels

Since we are looking at technological products from the curriculum have developed a focus around transformation and manipulation of plastics. First we are looking at the different filaments that can be used, how they are made and the lifecycle of them.

This then leads to an activity that is being developed by the Print Lab, Facebook page here https://www.facebook.com/weareprintlab/
In this lesson plan, students will design and 3D print a 1:50000 scale model of Mount Everest and its surroundings. Each student will be assigned a contour map to analyse before designing it in 3D and preparing it for 3D printing. 16 tiles will be created that assemble to form the 3D contour model.

This leads to a social good project around community and infrastructure, similar to getting students interested in their community project that happened in Christchurch a number of years ago that led to the the Margaret Mahy Playground being formulated and constructed. What is it that students see as needed in their community. This is getting students to look at what is required as part of a community, where it should be placed. This is getting students to create concepts, prototype and refine their designs that they will develop their classroom community for as each student will be required to develop a different part or function.

Another idea is to look at individual towns/cities of New Zealand and find the symbol that they are famous for, develop a map of New Zealand and use the 3D Printed symbols to help students identify the town/city.

Hope this gives you some different ideas.

Standards creep towards year 10

I had this come through my email the other day,

I notice that students in Year 10 may now be able to gain some NCEA credits in Dance and Drama ( Maths and English credits have been offered for several years at Year 10). 

Is this a trend. Are we disadvantaged as a subject if we don't follow suit? Is this even a good idea? I see Hobsonville Point is doing the opposite - removing NCEA Level 1... 

Views?

After the initial shock of the email, and the want to type out something rather quick, I thought I would wait to see how the discussion went... also there is a 5 hour flight between Adelaide and Auckland

We have added a very simple 2 credit Unit standard as its being required by SLT. US25659.

Above was the content from the next email, hang on, what does he mean required by SLT? So the question went back?

It was for all departments 

I think the underlying reason is to increase pass rates for NCEA Level 1. Also to give students early exposure to NCEA. Its been going for 3 or 4 years now .

I would have to say I was stunned, "I think the underlying reason...?"
The thread went one for a bit more, more teachers talked about what they are doing at year 10 around assessment, more Unit Standards were talked about.
My reply is below

While I find the conversation that is happening incredible at present, it has raised both joy and sadness. The ideas around creative programs that build on curriculum and dispositions. The sadness is around some of the offering of standards that are being used to support these programs. I have had to think about what is the expectation that is being pushed on teachers by senior leaders. That has been why my replies have been around understanding of the impact of these ideas, some of which I am still working out to understand as there maybe a lack of my understanding. 

I am seeing standards that are around second change learners. Is this really the best offering for students? 

Is it good assessment practice by offering students a unit standard at year 10? 

Is offering students a unit standard at year 10 preparing them best for the learning required at ncea level one? Do students see the amount of work involved in a 2 credits unit standard that the only grade of achieved as an academic equivalent of another subjects achievement standard where the grades can work towards merit and excellence? 

Is this developing the best outcomes for the students? 

Is this starting towards a mentality of is this worth credits?

Is this helping with student wellbeing? 

What is the key driver for this change? 

Many would be asking what standard would could be offered to students at year 10, what does the student voice say? Part of me would like to see a conceptual or prototype standard that works towards students being able to critically reflect about their work, being able to communicate with others and developed through an understanding of learning. If it was to be a digital technologies standard, digital information skills, or digital media skills, however I would want to look at the knowledge based standards and limit the amount of words for each answer, similar to the idea that Julie put out last year around developing one of the knowledge based standards, give students the practical based skills, as well as evidencing the academic requirement of the subject.

Yes, at Hobsonville Point Secondary school we are looking at a 2 year qualifications pathway for our year 11 and year 12 students. 20 credits at level one and 60 credits at level 2. It does have its challenges and new learning that is taking place. I look forward to the end of this year and the exploration of what courses might look like during the next stage of learning.

While the conversation goes on,  One of the interesting emails included;

Last year our school ditched all standards at Year 10. Reasons for this:
- Student wellness.
- If one subject has credits available at year 10 that puts pressure on all subjects to offer them.
- We have no issue with NCEA Achievement so no need to fit early credits in.

I thought it needed something else using one of the resources that has been developed at school. I especially like the idea of the Kete - portfolio of assessment. The graphic below was created by Heemi.

We have been developing a lot of thinking at school around the ideas of what NCEA is and how we are going to deliver it. Though we have the teachers that have been through the process within other schools working at HPSS. We are also challenging the thinking and ideas of what programmes of learning might be.

This is one of the pieces that we have been working through the narrative with the staff on the ideas of NCEA.

The top section is us looking at what is it that we are trying to work towards, we are looking at it in the way of the bird. The Nga Pirere is the fledgling, Nga Manu is Branching, Kua Rere is the Flight.

The second half is the look of the Kete Aromatawai - the portfolio of assessment, what does this look like for a student.

Through the google group(subject association) it has been explained a number of times that the siloing nature of a students learning has not afforded itself to a classroom teacher being able to have a picture of where a students needs are. I know myself when I was a form tutor as well as a classroom teacher that I accessed the Student Management System to see where a students learning was at. Many times the students did not know themselves where they were at. Even with portals and NZQA a number of credits are not normally entered until the end of the year due to the nature of the subject or have been held due to the schools trying to get students to not look at credit counting or due to having moderation of grades before hand. This is tricky as a number of students, those that are going down the non academic pathways don't see the achievement of their work until too late. Even students that used the apps or keep notes usually had some credits wrong as what they were told in class is different to what has been published.

One person provided an example of not knowing where he was at within his own learning when he was at school on the group. He then found out he was at 144 credits in level one. Are students now are looking at the quality of credits, rather then the quantity of credits. With the ideas that came out in this thread, this was also the case. How can we be delivering quality credits? How is the structure of schools that are aiming for academic success developing pathways for students? How are the other 70% of students being catered for.

These are things that are constantly in our minds. What does a Kete aromatawai look like for the students in your class? How full is the kete and what would it look like for someone outside of school?

Though I am not a parent, I do not have a record of learning that I can look at and see, what does one look like for a student that has gone through a course that has a mixture of achievement standards and unit standards?

Maybe this could be a good teaching as inquiry topic?

Transforming Assessment Praxis

I am on a pilot of a new NZQA Best Practice Workshop model, which is around Transforming Assessment Praxis.

While it hasn't been all inspiring, as most of the work that they have been talking about over the last five weeks has been ideas that I have been working on with my students for the past couple of years. It has made me more aware of what we are trying to do at HPSS. Knowing the learner and working with contexts.

As well as looking at Naturally Occurring evidence

While watching the three hour session tonight that I missed last week, around What currently drives you current assessment practice, What students value, Future shifts, Modes of assessment and naturally occurring evidence. I have been sent two assessments to moderate by another teacher, looking at these tonight and putting the ideals that I have been working through, I have been able to make some changes to evidence statements. While it is an assessment in Digital Information, database creation, the assessment is written in such a way that it allows for a student to develop their own context, yet also offer ideas for those students that can't think of one, or it does show the students what the rigour of the assessment should be. Having the conversation with the teacher on the phone while modifying the assessment through Google Drive has allowed for some great conversations to happen about how the assessment could be delivered, and what contexts should be included to help develop students ideas around rigour.
Evidence statements have now been changed to allow for a screencast of the database working by the student to show how it would function.

But the highlight of the work was on area of the assessment that had been developed which was on to show skilfully or efficiently as required as part of the step up of the assessment. This is the masterpiece of the assessment in my opinion, without even knowing it or putting it in for assessment sake, this allows for naturally occurring evidence of the technology level 2 achievement standard around planning to be included. So a 6 credit assessment, is now a 10 credit assessment.

In the presentation I was watching tonight, was included some information on overlaps. This is something I think originally looked at when the assessments came out, however I think I was turned off at the amount of evidence required by the standards. Having a better understanding of the standards now and evidence required through my role in the subject association helps me to now develop better assessment outcomes. A feature of what we are looking at as part of the Workshop15 in the holidays. To many teachers are talking about the amount of evidence needed for assessments now. Why are we not thinking smarter and allowing the technologies that we use everyday to assist us.

I know look forward to the next two weeks where I get to put my plans for the task into action and develop an assessment resource 

Things to consider …

Prior to writing your assessment resource, you will need to consider the following:

• Your goal
• What the student voice has told me
• Student input into context
• Knowing my student
• Documents which will inform my assessment resource (Achievement Standard, Conditions of assessment, Clarifications documents)
• Modes of assessment
• Variety of ways to collect evidence

My Goal, to look at how naturally occurring evidence and authentic contexts can help develop engaging learning that can be used for overlaps of assessment.

Kiwi students being 'put off' computing

Kiwi students being 'put off' computing
The Dominion Post Monday, 26 May 2008

Unrealistic and vague technology achievements standards are putting school pupils off tertiary courses and careers in the information technology industry, according to a highly critical report commissioned by the Computer Society.

The society commissioned a team of high-powered academics to investigate the 18 technology achievement standards approved by the Education Ministry as part of its National Qualifications Framework. They found none of them were appropriate.

Education Ministry spokesman Mike Bodnar said the ministry had not had time to consider the report but agreed assessment standards for computer science could be improved.

The ministry was undertaking "substantial work" on the senior school curriculum though its Digital Technologies Guidelines that would provide pupils with programmes that were "clearly focused on areas of future training and interest", he said.

But the report's authors – Auckland University of Technology lecturer Gordon Grimsey and Lynfield College computer teacher Margot Phillipps – say that using those guidelines to tackle the problems it identified would be "like painting over flaking paintwork adhering to rotten timber".

Several university professors were among a team of 11 academics and Computer Society office holders who reviewed their findings.

The number of secondary school pupils achieving unit standards in physics and calculus at NQF level 3 exceeded those achieving in computer science by a factor of five-to- one, the report found.

Many achievement standards were "unachievable" by most pupils or didn't assess pupils' competence in any detail. There were also "huge gaps" in the coverage of the skills and knowledge assessed.

"We suspect there is a huge number of potential computing professionals who have already opted out of the discipline during secondary school, either because of the lack of relevant achievement standards, or because of the unpalatable offering of what they are told is relevant for a future computing career," the report says.

The Computer Society commissioned the report after becoming concerned with the suitability of the assessment of ICT pupils at secondary school level and after discussions with the Post Primary Teachers Association.

Computer science needs to be given its own curriculum, which could be aligned with the mathematics curriculum, the report says. "Without this, we see the downward trend of computer science tertiary enrolments in New Zealand continuing. As a nation, we are spurning massive opportunities that come with having highly-skilled computing professionals in our workforce – something we can ill-afford to do.

"The New Zealand curriculum document ignores ICT completely. There is no reference to ICT, IT, information technology or computing anywhere in the document."
The report noted there were few teachers with the necessary skills and knowledge to teach computer science in schools. But it said that if non-specialist teachers were to be encouraged to take these courses, "they should not be put in the position of trying to make unworkable standards work".

Education Minister Chris Carter announced last week that schools would get extra funding of $65.3 million over four years to help meet the costs of ICT.

http://www.stuff.co.nz/4560782a28.html

NCEA Technology Cluster Meeting

NCEA Technology Botany East Cluster Meeting

Wednesday 5th March 2008

Botany College

Introduction

Focus - Level 3, due to the new schools starting in the area. Focus on Technological knowledge.

www.edcentres.auckland.ac.nz <- all the PD for this, Kohia teachers centre.

Courses, Select, Secondary, Technology.

Courses through Kohia are a programme for the year, not just one off courses.

Look at standards

Title of the standard, skills and knowledge in the materials, this is knowledge and skills, not practice knowledge. This supports the students in their technological practice.

What type of skills and knowledge do the students need in the particular area. Look at Technology 2.7

Our role is to support the student to select the appropriate standard.

Should we look at the graphics standards?

Up to August to remove the standard, if they want to remove then you are allowed, it will be a school problem if they don’t remove it.

The standards are based on high level thinking.

Level 1 - Identify, (list, some detail, because)

Level 2, describe, explain (details, grunt, link it back to the specifications, example,

Level 3, Discuss

Scholarship, synthesize, critically analyze, integrate

Identify the knowledge from the technologist. Expand on there knowledge (explain, discuss), what is the knowledge that underpins a technological outcome. What knowledge is needed for the outcome, materials, ict...

we are looking at level 3 on the curriculum standards, we are looking at specific knowledge.

Level 2 -> level 3 is that they write a report

To be able to get excellence, they have to compare and contrast between two or more technologists. a venn diagram is only identify. Look at the DVD of exemplars for examples.

Print and cut out and get the students to look at and compare the technologists what are the key differences because, scaffolding in pace to enable them to get to that level.

Level 2, explain the knowledge that is used to develop the outcomes and explain how that has informed their practice. Give examples of what knowledge they needed and how it helped them. If not giving in a portfolio.

technology 3.4, wider responsibility to the community, legislation, codes of ethics and moral and ethics responsibly. These are constraints, what constraints are imposed on them to create an outcome. the technologist has to understand those things so they can come up with their product. They have to look at appropriateness and feasibility. technologist work within limits, and have to understand the wider community. Appropriateness might change depending in the end user. Engineers are constrained by standards.

Students need to understand constraints. example, go home, want to cook something and not have all the goods for the recipe, so what can we do next. budget, resources are constraints. What are the key factors that are vital for the project, what cannot be changed, deadlines, project management has to work within deadlines, so project milestones are important. Standards need to be looked at, and how desirable they are to meet that standard.

Diagram of vital things in middle, then very important, they clients and stakeholders needs are going between the two things. Non negotiable.

If the students look at the what if, they are looking at excellence.

Articles in the paper, matel toys, they were not using materials that were appropriate. implications for the end user. Just looking at little short clips so that they can look at standards, ethics and morals.

Chief assessors reports will be out soon.

Tech practice at Level 3

Must have a client, prior knowledge, consult with technologists (practice, and depth of knowledge), wider community (different perspective, implications, values and beliefs)

Achievement Objectives, use the new curriculum and the tech practice strand, planning for practice, brief development, Outcome development and evaluation.

Look at personal experience, prior experience of yourself. Have you bene a client, a technologist.

Profile the client, contract or agreement from between the client and students. Roles and responsibilities of both. need to understand that the client is there for a purpose, key decisions need to be between the student and client and not made by themselves. Need to give their client options, final decision needs to be by the client. Intellectual Property. These need to be looked at in the initial brief.

Who how client could, be, access, contracts, communication, when are the times, how often, initial questionnaire, the time for the client.

Techlink has resources for the client.

Beacon Practice, Case Studies, Materials, Client Based Practice, Delivery

This looks at the initial client questions, an ideas, understand what the unit is about through the background, profile the client relationship and the interactions.

Tech Practice, look at the technology curriculum, explanatory Papers, tech Practice, senior secondary.

Look at Level 7.

Brief Development	Planning for Practice	Outcome Development and Education
Unpacking the issue, what prior knowledge do they have, whose, where.	Self awareness, how to reflect. PMI, (Positive, Minuses, Improve)	Research skills, historical issues, innovations in technology and how they impact in their design. Production methods and commercial methods and how that impacts on product development.
Critically analyze, are we asking a surface question, or a deep questioning (what if, what could, why), answering the questions with reasoning and justification.	Work Ethics, own strengths and weaknesses Understand a range of planning tools. (Visual Diary, Gnatt Chart, Journal) Key Stages (assessment, clients needs, teacher?) Look at explanatory notes Level 1, Level 2	resources, functions and aesthetics impact on the environment Codes of ethics Codes of practice Constraints (input form client, testing and trailing, mockups) specification
Clients needs, interviews, questionnaires, surveys, protocols	Documentation, justifying decisions. Resources in terms of time, expertise, materials and costs.	fitness for purpose, appropriateness, and feasibility.
	how are we going to make the judgment, we have to document at least 8 students in full for moderation. how the key stage has gone and how the feedback from the client has affected that stage. Review and revise and record Preempting and forecasting	Triple bottom line, social, Must haves and wants, weighted wants Must have weighting. Feedback

Not a credit counting course, we want a quality course in deeper thinker.

have to do 3.1 or 3.2 or 3.1 and 3.2

3.4 wider community,

3.6 knowledge

3.7 skills

www.techlink.org.nz