TKI uses the New Zealand Education Sector Logon system for user accounts. A TKI account lets you personalise your experience - enabling you to save custom homepage layouts, create kete, and save bookmarks and searches.
If you already have an Education Sector user ID and password, you are ready to log in. If not, you should register with the link below.
Technological Modelling, Level 3
Pop-up Cards and Shoes Project
School: Katikati College
Teacher: Lloyd Smith
Component: Technological Modelling
Category: Design and Visual Communication
This series of activities was incorporated into two units of work within a Year 10 Graphics course. Functional modelling was an integral part of the shoe design unit but because the outcome was not to be taken through to prototype stage prototyping was covered in the pop-up card unit.
Key messages from the activities include:
Teacher reflective comment
How comfortable was the fit of the activities into your existing unit? Was student buy-in an issue?
Modelling was embedded into two existing units in a relevant way by being
Did you have any particular issues around the process of planning the activities and gathering/preparing related resources?
Being able to have on hand a large and varied range of materials was important. This was achieved by me starting a 'community box' of materials which students could use after they had contributed at least one appropriate material themselves.
You would be targeting a particular level with students who probably hadn't specifically been taught much about that component in their previous years. How much pre-teaching relating to lower levels had to be done?
The original aim was to target Curriculum Level 5 (CL5) but it was obvious before starting that CL3 and CL4 needed to be taught prior to this. In the end the target of CL5 was not reached. This should improve as prior learning is achieved in previous years.
Was student engagement an issue at any stage? Did you employ any particular strategies to get buy-in and retain interest?
Because modelling was embedded in three aspects of the units it was difficult for students not to buy in. In fact they enjoyed the practical opportunities that functional modelling offered.
Did you have any particular assessment issues – such as ensuring validity of the assessment decisions you made?
The students were assessed formatively across the CL3 and some of the CL4 indicators of progression and this didn't seem to be too much of a problem.
Did the linking in of the conceptual learning with the student practice have any noticeable influence on the student practice or the quality of their outcomes?
The student practice and conceptual learning seemed to naturally link. However some casual or low ability students appeared to have problems linking their functional modelling practice to the initial intentions and the final evaluation.
How will you build the experience gained into your overall programme design and assessment planning?
Modelling is naturally embedded into the development of an outcome, so next year I intend to teach the concepts over the three units of work – covering CL3 in term 1, CL4 in term 2 and CL5 in term 3.
On the basis of this year's experience do you have any advice you would give to teachers new to bringing these two strands into their programme design?
On the table below you will find the projects arranged by Level and Strand.
|Level 3||1 project||2 projects|
|Level 4||1 project|