There is a lot of work to be completed here. A lot of this work is on Google Classroom, as you know, and also available in the text book.
A reminder though. Criterion A and B are a written document and Criterion C-E are the presentation
Criterion A - Inquiry Focus (3 marks)
Criterion B - Claims and Perspectives (6 Marks)
Criterion C - Analysis and Evaluation (6 Marks)
Criterion D - Conclusion ( 6 Marks)
Criterion E - Communication (3 Marks)
Project element: Inquiry process document
The inquiry process document demonstrates provides an inquiry focus with:
• an explanation of the connection between the inquiry question, a specific, relevant real-world example as well as course concepts, content and contexts
Resource
The “focus stage of inquiry” includes details about developing and refining an inquiry focus.
Marks Level descriptor
0 - The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below
1 - The focus is limited and/or incomplete. The focus does not include all required elements and/or the real-world example is not specific or relevant to the inquiry.
2 - The focus is adequate. The focus includes an inquiry question and a partial explanation of its connection to a specific, relevant real-world example and course concepts, content and contexts.
3 - The focus is appropriate and targeted. The focus includes an inquiry question and a thorough explanation of its connection to a specific, relevant real-world example and course concepts, content and contexts
Checklist for the inquiry focus
Inquiry question
Does the focus include a powerful question that can be adequately researched?
Will the focus support the project moving beyond description to analysis and evaluation?
Course connections
Does the focus include connections to course concepts, content and contexts?
Is there at least one connection per topic category?
Real-world example
Is a relevant and specific real-world example involving digital systems and/or technologies included?
Explanation
Is there a thoughtful and thorough explanation of the focus?
Format of the focus
Is the focus 300 words or less?
Are there source references, headings, labels and captions as appropriate? Note that these elements do not count against the word limit for the section.
Project element: Inquiry process document.
The inquiry process document demonstrates how research was conducted with:
• a discussion of the claims and perspectives for three sources including a justification of their usefulness in the inquiry.
Resource
The “explore stage of inquiry” and “course toolkit” includes details about claims and perspectives, including how to effectively consider a source’s origin and purpose, meaning and methods as well as corroboration and use. A suggested structure for Criterion B could be as follows
Source 1
Origins and purpose summary:
Where did the source come from?
Who made it?
Why was the source created?
What are some potential biases and limitations for the source?
Meaning and methods summary:
What are the essential and/or main ideas in the source?
What kinds of methods (e.g., qualitative, quantitative, mixed) are used to support these ideas?
How does the source communicate its ideas?
Corroboration and use summary:
Is the source corroborated by other sources and/or trusted experts in the field?
How has the source been used by different people, communities and platforms?
Can the claims in the source be verified?
Justification:
Can you provide a clear and thorough justification as to why this source is relevant and useful for your inquiry?
Why this source and not another?
Repeat for the other 2 sources within the word count limit.
Marks Level descriptor
0 - The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below
1-2 - The discussion of claims and perspectives is limited and primarily descriptive in nature. Fewer than three sources are discussed or there is no justification for their use in the inquiry.
3-4 - There is a partial discussion of the claims and perspectives for each source that includes some justification for their usefulness in the inquiry, but this is not fully developed
5-6 - There is a thorough discussion of the claims and perspectives for each source that includes a clear justification for their usefulness in the inquiry.
Checklist for claims and perspectives
Source selection
Are three essential sources selected for the discussion?
Is each source relevant, of high quality and capable of supporting the demands of the discussion and criterion?
C+P: origins and purpose
Is each source accompanied by a brief, but thorough, discussion of its origin and purpose?
C+P: meaning and methods
Is each source accompanied by a brief, but thorough, discussion of its meaning and methods?
C+P: corroboration and use
Is each source accompanied by a brief, but thorough, discussion of its corroboration and use?
Justification
Is each source accompanied with a clear justification of its usefulness to the inquiry?
Format
Is the claims and perspective discussion 1200 words or less?
Are there source references, headings, labels and captions as appropriate? Note that these elements do not count against the word limit for the section.
Project element: Presentation
The balance of the presentation consists of:
• the student’s own sustained and well-supported analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications of the digital systems for people and communities
Resource
The “investigate stage of inquiry” includes sample supporting questions useful to consider for analysis and evaluation. Additionally, the “course toolkit” provides details about critical and creative thinking relevant to this criterion.
Marks Level descriptor
0 - The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below
1-2 - There is limited analysis and evaluation which is primarily descriptive in nature or of limited relevance to the inquiry focus.
3-4 - The student’s analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities is adequate, but this is not always sustained or well-supported.
5-6 - The student’s analysis and evaluation of impacts and implications for people and communities is effective, sustained and well-supported by evidence.
Checklist for analysis and evaluation
Original
Is the analysis and evaluation reflective of the students own thinking or does it merely repeat the ideas, analysis and evaluation of others?
Effective
Is the analysis and evaluation well-reasoned and convincing?
Does it successfully address the issues raised by the focus in a persuasive and compelling manner?
Sustained
Is the analysis and evaluation thorough and threaded throughout the balance of the presentation?
Well-supported
Is the analysis and evaluation supported with accurate and relevant information as well as evidence from multiple perspectives?
Format
Does the presentation include sections (e.g. introduction, analysis and evaluation) that are labelled and signposted for clear communication?
Does the analysis and evaluation section comprise the balance of the presentation?
Does the analysis and evaluation take advantage of available and useful media and modes?
The presentation concludes by providing:
• further insight reflecting the student’s new understanding and ideas about their inquiry focus following analysis and evaluation
• a discussion of emerging trends and future developments.
Resource
The “reflect stage of inquiry” includes details about offering further insight at the close of inquiry. Additionally, the “course toolkit” provides details about critical and creative thinking relevant to this criterion.
Marks Level descriptor
0 The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below
1-2 The conclusion is limited with little further insight into the inquiry focus. Emerging trends and future developments are referenced with limited or no discussion.
3-4 The conclusion provides adequate further insight into the inquiry focus with a partial discussion of emerging trends and future developments.
5-6 The conclusion provides effective and well-supported further insight into the inquiry focus with a thorough and substantiated discussion of emerging trends and future developments.
Checklist for conclusion
Insight into inquiry focus
Does the conclusion provide effective and well-supported insight into the starting focus?
Emerging trends and future developments
Does the conclusion include a thorough and substantiated discussion of emerging trends and future developments?
Format
Does the presentation include sections (e.g. conclusion) that are labelled and signposted for clear communication?
Does the conclusion take advantage of available and useful media and modes?
Project element: Presentation
The presentation supports understandings through:
• organization of ideas and evidence
• coherent use of media
Resource
The “share stage of inquiry” includes details about sharing discoveries with others. Additionally, the “course toolkit” provides details about effective communication relevant to this criterion.
Marks Level descriptor
0 - The work does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below
1 - Communication is limited. The presentation’s organization and use of media are limited and do not support understanding.
2 - Communication is adequate. The presentation is adequately organized and the use of media is at times coherent but this is not sustained or only partially effective in supporting understanding.
3 - Communication is effective. The presentation is well-organized and coherently uses media to support understanding.
Checklist for the presentation and communication
Organisation
Does the presentation organise ideas and evidence in a logical manner?
Does the organisation support understanding of the issues raised on the part of peers, the teacher and others?
Coherent use of media
Are visuals, text and/or audio carefully used and combined?
Does the presentation contain a recorded commentary in the students voice throughout the presentation and/or the use audible text-to-speech tools?
Is the presentation audible throughout?
Does audio support understanding through normal speed and editing techniques?
Is the presentation constructed with visually appropriate material?
Do visual materials support understanding?
Is all text legible when viewed on screen?
Citations in the project
Are all sources briefly and consistently cited at point of use?
Are citations written, visual and/or verbal?
Do citations include, if known, the surname of author or creator?
Do citations include, if known, the date of publication?
Reference details
Does each reference include, if known, the following details:
Surname of author or creator?
Title of source?
Date of publication?
Format of source?
Page numbers or time codes as applicable?
URL and date of access for online sources?