Video transcript
TBA
Unpacking the criteria for Achieved for 91643 (4:02 mins)
Video transcript
Kia ora and welcome.
This webcast is intended to provide guidance and advice on the requirements for Level 3 Construction and Mechanical Technology standard 91620: Implement complex procedures to integrate parts using resistant materials to make a specified product.
Specifically, this webcast will unpack what is required to reach Achieved for this standard.
At Level 3, students are required to carry out complex procedures that demand a high level of precision and accuracy.
The complexity lies in the precision required to create two or more assembled parts to be integrated, and the individual techniques must require a high degree of accuracy, such as cutting a rebate for a hinge versus screwing a hinge on.
Trialling and feedback must be seen to inform the selection of those complex procedures. It is not necessary for students to trial and gather feedback on every procedure needed to make the product but do note that the word ‘procedures’ is plural. Students must trial and compare at least two methods for at least two complex procedures.
Students are most likely to attain the standard when they are given the opportunity to select, trial, compare, and determine for themselves, the techniques which could be used in the complex procedure. Evidence should show that the student, not the teacher, made the informed decisions.
The scheduling of techniques and tests is required, and this means a construction plan must outline the order in which the specified product will be made.
This plan will be completed before fabrication begins and is not a lengthy log or diary of what has been done, but a plan for what will be done, and it must clearly identify when testing (or checks) against reference points will occur.
Evidence of testing against reference points is what demonstrates that the student has tried to reduce their margin for error when integrating the individual parts. Reference points are the fixed positions, edges, or marks that guide the accurate and seamless assembly of individual parts, so they align and operate efficiently.
This is best done by annotating the schedule and including photographs in the evidence, which show when and how the checks for precise alignment were made to confirm the accuracy of the integration before final assembly.
This will also assist to ensure the specified product meets specifications. Explanatory Note 7 provides examples of reference points.
The integration environment is crucial to this preciseness but is often neglected in the evidence. Explanatory Note 6 defines an integration environment as ‘the workspace, tools, equipment, and assembly aids involved in construction.’ Photographs are sufficient to attest to this, but those photos should be carefully selected to also show the equipment used to ensure precise integration.
Evidence of the student working in a manner that meets Health & Safety regulations is required for this standard, and at Level 3 this should not be a list of workshop rules. Annotated images of the student acting safely in the workshop are required.
The specifications developed by the student or set by the teacher are crucial.
Specifications must include details of how the precise integration of parts enables the product to function as intended.
For additional explanation and examples of what is required for this aspect of the standard, see the exemplars and National Moderator Report on the Technology Subject page on the NZQA website.
Further assessor support for this Level 3 Construction and Mechanical Technology internal Achievement Standard is also available on Pūtake, NZQA’s learning management system.
Thank you.
91620 Understanding the criteria for Achieved (3:58 mins)
This video discusses the criteria for Achieved and how to meet it, including complex procedures, selection, scheduling, testing, integration, and specifications.
Video transcript
Kia ora and welcome.
This webcast is intended to provide guidance and advice on the holistic assessment of Technology standards.
Specifically, this webcast will unpack what is required when holistically examining evidence for the Implement standards at Levels 2 and 3.
NZQA allows assessors to attest to evidence that may not be directly visible in the final submitted student work. Specifically related to Technology standards, this would most likely include evidence of meeting Health & Safety regulations, the skilful implementation of procedures, or the efficient implementation of procedures.
In standards requiring students to implement procedures, assessors must ensure that Health & Safety regulations have been actively applied in a real and observable manner during practical work.
A list of generic workshop rules in a student’s portfolio does not meet this criterion. Similarly, a tick in a box or a broad statement on the assessment schedule lacks the necessary detail to confirm compliance.
Purposeful and relevant attestation should include specific details about the actions observed and the procedures followed. For example, a brief note might describe the use of correct personal protective equipment or safe handling of tools.
This can be supported by annotated photographs showing the student performing tasks safely. Both written observations and images can be attached to the assessment schedule to provide verifiable evidence of Health & Safety compliance.
Here is an example of an attestation that would contribute to verification of the student applying Health & Safety regulations.
To attain grades higher than Achieved, students are required to skilfully, then economically implement procedures. If the evidence is not directly visible the teacher can attest to how these criteria were met. However, the attestation must explicitly reference how the student met the grade.
A tick in a box, or a general statement on the assessment schedule cannot verify attainment of Merit or Excellence grades. To ensure the attestation is verifiable, the teacher should record what is observed at the time it occurs and ideally include the date of the observation. These observations must be retained at all levels for verification and moderation.
Here are three examples of attestations that would contribute to verification of unseen evidence at Merit and Excellence.
In summary, best practice when assessing holistically and attesting to evidence that is not directly observable should include the following:
- A clear explanation of how the student met the criteria.
- Real-time documentation of observations, ideally dated, and where possible supported with photographs.
- These records can be attached to the assessment schedule.
- All attestations must be retained for both internal assessment verification and external moderation purposes.
For additional explanation and examples of what is required for this aspect, see the exemplars and National Moderator Report on the Technology Subject page in the NZQA website.
Further Assessor Support is also available on Pūtake, NZQA’s learning management system.
Thank you.
Attesting to unseen evidence - Implement Standards (4:04 mins)
This video discusses evidence that is not directly visible, attestation of applying techniques, verifying Merit and Excellence, and best practices.