Example #1: Criterion B

Candidates need to clearly separate whether they are addressing how they applied ATL skills to achieve the learning goal or the product. Candidates that are not clear about this, but rather present how they applied ATL skills in general during their project, are unable to reach beyond the lowest levels of criterion B. 

In the report, candidates need to be very clear about whether they are addressing ATL skill(s) that helped achieve the learning goal or the product. Candidates are advised to label this by headings, in different sections of the report.

Example

Level: 3

The report does not clearly separate Bi and Bii, but for some ATL skills there are indications about whether they were used for achieving the learning goal or product. Further, there are several ATL skills listed and not all of these accounts for each of these are relevant for either the learning goal or the product.

For communication skills there is a very brief account outlining that this skill was used to develop the student’s cooking skills, understood to have been applied for achieving the learning goal. This is one example stating contact with an Italian chef and one about getting feedback from peers. Another similar short outline that implicitly connected to developing cooking skills, is found in connection to social skills. There is some very superficial evidence, but not for all ATL skills brought up. All together this is beyond only a statement about which skills were used, but it is not a detailed account, meaning the work is within the 3-4 descriptor band. Due to the lack of clarity whether these skills were in fact connected to the learning goal, the lower level was awarded.

To reach the higher achievement levels for Bi and Bii, it is not enough to state/outline which ATL skills was applied. Candidates also have to describe/explain ‘how’ ATL skills were applied. Examiners sometimes observe rich descriptions of how ATL skills are applied, but without explanations of why it helped the candidate to achieve the specific learning goal or product. Successful candidates focus on fewer ATL skills, with in-depth explanations of how those skills helped in achieving their learning goal or product, rather than listing a wide range of skills with only superficial mentions of how they were applied. Within criterion B, schools are advised to guide students towards the command terms and to carefully consider requirements for an explanation. 

Example

Level: 3

The work that fits in Bii is very similar to what was mentioned about Bi. However, at some places the product is actually mentioned explicitly. This can be seen for example in communication skills, research skills and thinking skills. Even if so, the ATL skills are only very briefly outlined, the evidence is very superficial (if any) and, as for Bi, the report is vague about whether a skill was in fact applied for achieving the product.

Please note that in this section of the report, there are hyperlinks to content outside of the report. No attempt should be made to follow these links, since it is not a permitted format to submit content through links.