[pliddle34]

29/04/2013 at 7:56 am

What do y’all think?

http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/nqcoursematerials/subjects/c/nqresource_tcm4755362.asp

Looks like a good starting point, though some weak points I think… like the description of AVI

[a1an.robertson]

29/04/2013 at 8:55 am

As you say it is a starting point and it is good to see the details being fleshed out from the support notes.

1 point I did notice was, in the example N5 question paper Q3, students were asked to name a bus from a description. On page 29 of the Software notes, only a general description is given. Which is correct?

My main concern is that it is still going to take a fair bit of work to turn them in to “teaching” materials. For example, it does not look like there has been too much thought put in to meeting the needs of our less able N4 learners who will struggle with the amount of text on the pages and the style of some of the activities. Looks like I will be creating quite a few additional write on the sheet activities for the N4 content.

[Ray Krachan]

29/04/2013 at 9:58 am

The question is correct. Pupils need to know which bus does what. The support notes would be used by teachers and fleshed out, as opposed to be used as the only teaching resource. I would not be using the Education Scotland as a resource for pupils, but using it to create my own resources. The fact that it is in word, and easy to edit is great for giving us a starting point to build our own resources around our own pupils needs. Hope that helps.

[Darren Brown]

29/04/2013 at 10:07 am

At our implementation event we asked that the content tables be fleshed out into statements, like Int2/H arrangements, to be clear on what amount of theory detail and what actual pupils would be required to do at each level: decribe, explain, calculate, convert…

We were told that we would get more details and the table would change??? – for instance the ambiguous “frames, sequence” was being removed? Anyone told that?

It worries me some of these single theory words in a table could lead you off on a number of tangents.

[a1an.robertson]

29/04/2013 at 11:32 am

Thanks ray k.

dbrown, I would also love to see a bit more detail. In effect, we are all just a few weeks away from delivering these courses and it would be good to feel a little more comfortable knowing what was required and to what depth.

I had a further though about the level of detail with respect to “basic computer architecture”. If pupils at N5 are required to be able to name and describe the buses, what level of treatment should is expected for interfaces? The notes show a basic description, but are the students, for instance, expected to be able to describe some functions like buffering and voltage conversion with more depth than is shown?