It is cool to work towards the final solution as you are, but remember the division between AS3.1 and AS3.2 in the video. Once the brief and final concept are finsihed/evaluted etc, the stakeholders, keyfactors and brief change for AS3.2 and another Technology project worth another 8 credits at Level 3 gets underway.
You need to get your final concept evalutated etc. I've copied my 'comprehensive' feedback regarding AS3.1 etc into the comment below.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Jonathan Shephard: In Disguise Y13 ICT Feedback 19/7/09
ReplyDeleteOverview –
You appear to be making good progress towards the completion of your desired website …
However there are currently core elements missing with regards to fulfilling a technology process which are likely to hinder you in obtaining more than an achieved for Achievement Standard 3.1 (90613). These include:
• A general lack of discussion or justification as to why things are changing (such as the timeframe for the completion of your project – In March you expected to have the site uploaded early May). In the technology process you should have a journal documenting your discoveries and justifying your changes. It appears that many changes have been made without justification.
You have a number of POA’s and briefs but there appears to be little discussion about why the changes are being made.
Should the expected completion date have been in the brief in the first place? I note that in the initial interview they had no completion requirement date.
• Sort your survey key factor analysis on ratings and discuss the significance – you could group the key factors into categories
There are a number of areas that still need to be addressed to bring your submitted work up to an achieved level for AS 3.1 (some of these I may have overlooked – others you have told me that you have but I haven’t managed to track them down in your submitted documentation). These include:
• The need to be more specific with the specifications (ie you can not be too general as otherwise assessing against the criteria becomes subjective)
• Prioritization of resources not mentioned anywhere, though access to feedback from stakeholders or meeting with the client are likely to have been issues. Time requirements to complete certain tasks may have been overlooked
• Perhaps I need to check on your rational behind font choice as for feedback/direction regarding the design of the website (is this documented?)
• Any resolution requirements for images (check Natcoll marking schedule P3)
• Is there any application of CRAP design/layout required or being applied? Do you have layout specifications? I note that the existing website has numerous proximity errors.
• EVIDENCE of ethical practice. It can’t be written by you … print out email or whatever.
• Dates of research URL’s, as for code copied from URL’s and those URL’s with the sources acknowledged.
• Feedback from the modeling of the conceptual design. Provide details of who said what when … and it is better to have the stakeholder write it
For the Level 4 Unit Standard 18738 – if you are working towards acquiring this – much of the technology process documentation is not required, however we need to check that you are fulfilling: Performance criteria relating to the following elements -
• 1.2 specifications are likely to need more work in order to make then assessable
• 1.4 What testing procedures are you going to employ to ensure that your website fulfills your clients needs.
• Element 3 (3.1, 3.2 and 3.3) follow from 1.4 and an evaluation of feedback
• Element 4 when uploaded and fully operational
Note also, when you submit your final website, we need a complete electronic version, not printouts of the code which Mr Wallis obtained from you last year.