DESIGN
EXAMINATION GUIDELINES
GRADE 12
2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS | Page |
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION | 3 |
CHAPTER 2: AIMS | 3 |
CHAPTER 3: ASSESSMENT 3.1 Assessment objectives 3.2 Overview of topics 3.3 Formal assessment for Grade 12 3.4 Schedule of school-based assessment (SBA) 3.5 Cognitive levels 3.6 External examinations | 4 4 4 6 6 7 7 |
CHAPTER 4: SUBJECT CONTENT 4.1 Paper 1: Design in context (Topic 3) 4.2 Paper 2: Practical (Topics 1 and 2) 4.3 Retrospective exhibition | 8 8 13 15 |
CHAPTER 5: GENERAL SUBJECT INFORMATION 5.1 Explanation of terminology 5.2 Resources | 17 17 18 |
CHAPTER 6: FORMS OF TESTING AND MARKING GUIDELINES 6.1 Forms of testing 6.2 General guidelines for marking | 20 20 20 |
ANNEXURE A: DECLARATION OF AUTHENTICITY ANNEXURE B: RETROSPECTIVE EXHIBITION RUBRIC | 21 22 |
1. INTRODUCTION
The Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS) for Engineering Graphics and Design outlines the nature and purpose of the subject Engineering Graphics and Design. This guides the philosophy underlying the teaching and assessment of the subject in Grade 12.
The purpose of these Examination Guidelines is to:
This document deals with the final Grade 12 external examinations. It does not deal in any depth with the School-based Assessment (SBA), Performance Assessment Tasks (PATs) or final external practical examinations as these are clarified in a separate PAT document which is updated annually.
These Examination Guidelines should be read in conjunction with:
CHAPTER 2: AIMS
This guideline is designed to shed more light on the content prescribed in the Design Curriculum and Assessment Policy Statement (CAPS). It also outlines the specific objectives of each topic mentioned in the syllabus. In addition to the Grade 12 material, candidates will be assumed to have knowledge and understanding of the content outlined for Grades 10 and 11.
In Grade 12, Design learners aim to:
CHAPTER 3: ASSESSMENT
3.1 Assessment objectives
As outlined in the CAPS document, assessment is meant to:
The attainment of these objectives will be determined through the assessment of certain minimum skills and competencies, such as those set out below, at the end of the Grade 12 Design course.
3.2 Overview of topics
Grade 12: Overview of topics |
Topic 1: Design process and influencing factors |
Process Demonstrate a sound understanding of the interrelated nature of the planning, action and reflection cycle which informs the design process:
Influencing factors
Design in a business context: Research
The content of this business context research in each Topic 1 task should include some or all of the content below:
|
Topic 2: Design production, time management and safe practice |
Design production – making the product and presenting it
Time management
Safe practice
|
Topic 3: Design theory:
|
SECTION A: DESIGN LITERACY
SECTION B: HISTORY OF DESIGN
Ten key Design History movements to study for Grade 12:
SECTION C: DESIGN IN A SOCIO-CULTURAL/ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABLE CONTEXT
|
3.3 Formal assessment for Grade 12
FORMAL ASSESSMENT FOR GRADE 12 | |||
SBA (25%) | External examination (75%) | ||
Retrospective exhibition | End-of-year examination (50%) | ||
25% | 25% | 25% | 25% |
400 converted to 100 (SBA) |
TOTAL EXHIBITION: 100 | Paper 1: Written Examination 3 hours 100 | Paper 2: Practical Examination Process: 50 Product 24 hours (estimate): 50 TOTAL P2 Practical Exam: 100 |
At the end of Grade 12, Design learners will be marked on the following:
3.4 Schedule for school-based assessment (SBA)
All SBA tasks must be moderated internally. Provincial and national moderation will be done by the Department of Basic Education (DBE) and/or the respective provincial education departments (PEDs). This process will be managed by the PEDs.
Term 1: 1 PAT (100) – includes 10 marks Business Task 1 Theory Test (50) | Term 2: 1 PAT (100) – includes 10 marks Business Task 1 Theory Examination (100) | Term 3: 1 Theory Trial Examination (100) (converted to 50) |
Consult the GUIDELINES FOR PRACTICAL ASSESSMENT TASKS for more information.
3.5 Cognitive levels
Cognitive level | Percentage |
Lower order: knowledge | 30 |
Middle order: comprehension and application | 40 |
Higher order: analysis, evaluation and synthesis | 30 |
KNOWLEDGE | COMPREHENSION | APPLICATION |
tell, list, write, find, describe, name, locate, etc. | explain, interpret, discuss, distinguish, outline, etc. | solve, show, use, illustrate, classify, construct, examine, etc. |
ANALYSIS | EVALUATION | SYNTHESIS |
analyse, compare, investigate, categorise, identify, explain, etc. | udge, decide, justify, debate, recommend, prioritise, argue, etc. | create, invent, plan, predict, design, propose, formulate, etc. |
Tests and examinations
3.6 External examinations
All Design candidates will complete two external papers as prescribed:
Paper | Type of paper | Duration | Total | Date | Marking |
1 | Theory | 3 hours | 100 | October/November | Externally |
2 | Practical | Process: Term 3 Product: Term 4: Maximum 24 hours | 100 | October/November | Externally |
CHAPTER 4: SUBJECT CONTENT
4.1 PAPER 1: DESIGN IN CONTEXT (Topic 3)
Guidelines
The DBE sets the written examination on designated content taught during the year.
The examination format will comprise the following:
SECTION A: DESIGN LITERACY [30]
QUESTION 1 (Choice between QUESTION 1.1 and QUESTION 1.2): Analysis of unseen examples – SOUTH AFRICAN AND/OR INTERNATIONAL
This question will test the learner's ability to analyse/critically engage with examples of design from any category or discipline by referring to:
QUESTION 2: Communication through design and comparison between South African and International design (unseen) – SOUTH AFRICAN AND/OR INTERNATIONAL
This question tests the learners' ability to understand messages that are conveyed by designs. Learners must be able to:
Recommended resources and LTSM:
QUESTION 3: Comparison between Classical Architecture and Contemporary Architecture OR comparison between Classical Architecture and Indigenous African Architecture (This body of study is COMPULSORY.)
Recommended resources and LTSM:
SECTION B: HISTORY OF DESIGN [30]
QUESTION 4: History of design
This question will be divided into TWO subsections:
Marks will be allocated to lower-order questions such as recalling of the AIMS, INFLUENCES and STYLISTIC CHARACTERISTICS of each of the design movements that need to be studied. A maximum of 3 out of 10 can be allocated for pure recall.
Learners must also be able to refer to at least ONE designer and their design for each movement in order to explain these aims, characteristics, etc. If they are able to explain these with reference to a work, they can be allocated more marks (a maximum of 7 out of 10 including 3 for recall) as this would fall into the middle cognitive order of questioning.
Higher-order questions will also be asked, e.g. candidates must be able to COMPARE two of these movements in order to show similarities and differences and must also be able to explain the value/contribution of each movement to the development of design. Questions that require of the learners to respond to a statement and to relate the statement to one or more movements can also be expected. The importance of directly relating the answer to the statement must be stressed and learners need practise in this. If a learner has not answered these higher-order questions adequately, a maximum of 7 marks out of 10 may be allocated.
Comparisons must be answered in essay form.
Unseen examples of South African design (past and present) can be given and learners must be able to recognise and explain the influence of design history movements on these designs.
Recommended resources and LTSM:
SECTION C: DESIGN IN A SOCIO-CULTURAL/ENVIRONMENTAL AND SUSTAINABLE CONTEXT [40]
QUESTION 5: Design and socio-cultural issues
This question may consist of TWO choices, namely QUESTION 5.1 and QUESTION 5.2.
This question requires of learners to know the AIMS, INFLUENCES/ORIGINS and CHARACTERISTICS of THREE contemporary South African DESIGNERS or DESIGN GROUPS, as well as at least ONE design by each that clearly reflects their style. It is recommended that ONE of these is a traditional/indigenous craftsperson or group, ONE is a contemporary designer or design group inspired by this traditional craft and ONE is a contemporary designer or group that shows SOCIAL/CULTURAL responsibility, e.g. using craft to empower. The work of at least ONE of these designers/groups must show SOCIAL/CULTURAL responsibility.
Learners need to understand the difference between craft and design and must be able to explain the value of INDIGENOUS KNOWLEDGE SYSTEMS in general and to South African contemporary design.
Learners also need to know ONE AWARD-WINNING CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL DESIGNER whose work shows SOCIAL/CULTURAL responsibility.
Learners must show an understanding of how design can be used to create awareness on concrete local, regional and national social issues, to uplift others and to convey socially responsible messages. They must understand concepts and know and be able to use relevant and appropriate terminology, such as empowerment, skills training, NGO, community consciousness, cultural identity, etc. Unseen examples can be given that need to be analysed for their level of environmental responsibility.
Recommended resources and LTSM:
QUESTION 6: Design and environmental/sustainability issues
This question requires of learners to be fully aware of current environmental issues and to also be aware of how design can be used to contribute to addressing these issues. They must be able to explain what designers' responsibilities are regarding choice of materials and production methods and must also be able to explain when irresponsible choices have been made. Unseen examples can be given that need to be analysed for their level of environmental responsibility.
Learners must have all the relevant vocabulary at their disposal to understand questions relating to environmental concerns and to be able to supply good answers, (e.g. eco-consciousness, green, sustainable, greenhouse effect, bio-degradable, toxic waste, landfills, carbon footprint, recycling, re-use, human centeredness).
Learners are expected to know the AIMS, INFLUENCES and CHARACTERISTICS of at least ONE CONTEMPORARY SOUTH AFRICAN designer and of at least ONE AWARD-WINNING CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL designer whose work addresses ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS. For each of these designers the learners must also know at least ONE design that clearly illustrates environmental responsibility.
Recommended resources and LTSM:
Previous question papers can be found on the following websites:
http://www.education.gov.za/Examinations/PastExamPapers/tabid/351/Default.aspx
www.ecexams.co.za
www.designvisualarts.co.za
Additional information on the examinations:
Assessing learners' ability to analyse and respond to examples of design:
ACHIEVEMENT RATING CODE | TOPIC 3: DESIGN IN CONTEXT | ✓ |
7 Outstanding 80–100% | Demonstrates exceptional ability to respond, articulate and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows outstanding ability in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates extremely well-developed writing and research skills in the study of design. Shows exceptional insight; understanding and uses divergent approaches. | |
6 Meritorious 70–79% | Demonstrates a well-developed ability to respond and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows excellent ability in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates highly developed writing and research skills in the study of design. Shows excellent insight and understanding. | |
5 Substantial 60–69% | Demonstrates substantial ability to respond to and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows substantial competence in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates well-developed writing and research skills in the study of design. Shows a good level of insight and understanding. | |
4 Moderate 50–59% | Demonstrates moderate ability to respond to and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows moderate competence in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates competent writing and research skills in the study of design. Shows a fair level of insight and understanding. | |
3 Adequate 40–49% | Demonstrates adequate ability to respond to and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows adequate competence in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates adequate writing and research skills in the study of design. | |
2 Elementary 30–39% | Demonstrates only basic ability to respond to and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows little ability in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates basic writing and research skills in the study of design. | |
Not achieved 0–29% | Demonstrates little or no ability to respond to and analyse designs in relation to their cultural, social, political and historical contexts. Shows extremely limited ability in the use of appropriate design terminology. Demonstrates limited writing and research skills in the study of design. Shows little or no understanding or insight. |
PRACTICAL:
4.2 PAPER 2: Practical Examinations (Topics 1 and 2)
TIME: Topic 1: Practical process/preparation at school and/or home in Term 3
Topic 2: Practical product done under controlled conditions only at school during an estimated 24 hours (at least 12 hours but no longer than 24 hours)
COMMENCEMENT: Will be stipulated by DBE.
DUE DATE: Will be stipulated by DBE.
This practical examination consists of ONE paper with two optional topics. Learners must choose ONE of the two topics. The theme will be a wide and open-ended theme to cater for diverse solutions in the different specialisation disciplines.
This paper comprises TWO parts:
The learner should choose from ONE of the following categories:
GUIDELINES (INSTRUCTIONS TO THE TEACHER)
SECTION A: PROCESS BOOK/WORKBOOK (Topic 1) [50]
SECTION B: PRODUCT (Topic 2) [50]
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA
SECTION A: PROCESS BOOK/WORKBOOK
CRITERIA | |
Expression of intention and rationale: Brainstorm or do a mind map of ideas to explore the theme and the intention of the brief. Develop a concept. A rationale should be provided to validate the design solution found. | 20 |
Evidence of research, experimentation: Research the brief and find relevant source materials (visual references). Show evidence of research by completing a few thumbnail sketches of ideas. Design a few different solutions that explore the brief. Evidence of experimentation, e.g. a mood board should be visible. | 20 |
Detailed planning: Generative drawings should explore a variety of solutions to the brief (different techniques and materials). Drawing skills development should be evident. | 20 |
Evidence of final drawing/collage/maquette/prototype: Shows evidence of the final design solution in the form of a detailed, annotated drawing/collage/ maquettes/prototype, etc. Exploration of different materials and techniques should be encouraged. Reflection of process must be evident. | 20 |
Presentation: Careful consideration is given to the presentation of the sourcebook. This process should be creatively presented. | 10 |
Research: Design in a Business Context | 10 |
TOTAL | 100 |
SECTION B: THE FINAL PRODUCT
CRITERIA | |
Creativity/Originality/Interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions that are relevant to the brief | 20 |
Evidence of design involvement: the appropriate use of design elements and principles | 20 |
Technique/Craftsmanship/Method | 20 |
Time management. Evidence of and utilisation of available time to complete the product | 20 |
Professional presentation and functionality of the design solution | 20 |
TOTAL | 100 |
NOTE: Refer to the PAT guidelines for a detailed summary.
4.3 Retrospective exhibition
NOTE:
This exhibition will be assessed by the teacher and then moderated by provincial moderators.
Refer to page 15 of PAT 2021: Rubrics and Descriptors for assessment.
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA FOR PRACTICAL WORK
Outstanding | 90-100 | Exceptional ability, richness, insightful, fluent, high skill, observation and knowledge powerfully expressed, supported by a highly original or unusual selection of relevant visual references: outstanding and original presentation. |
Excellent | 80–89 | Striking impact, most of the above, detailed, well organised and coherent, polished, skill evident, supported by an original/unusual/ relevant visual references, presentation original and considered: some minor flaws evident |
Very good | 70–79 | Well organised, as above, but lacks the 'glow and sparkle', good level of competence and selection of content, supported by a good selection of relevant visual references, obvious care and effort taken with original presentation: some obvious inconsistencies/flaws evident. |
Good | 60–69 | Interesting visual presentation, clear intent, convincing, simple direct use of medium, displays understanding but tends towards the pedestrian and stereotyped response at times, adequate selection of relevant visual references, reasonable effort taken with presentation: distracting/obvious inconsistencies. |
Average | 50–59 | Adequate, feels mechanical, derivative or copied, little insight, unimaginative, some visual references not always clearly identified, fair presentation: many distracting inconsistencies. |
Below average | 40–49 | Enough material/works to pass, not logically constructed, some flashes of insight, limited selection of information, poor technical skills might be a contributing factor, little use of visual information, clumsy or careless presentation: in need of support/motivation to pass. |
Weak | 30–39 | Visually uninteresting, uncreative, limited/poor technical skill used, little attempt to present information in an acceptable manner, little or no visual information/reference, general lack of commitment: in need of support/motivation to pass. |
Very weak: Fail | 20–29 | Very little information, jumbled, not easy to view with little or irrelevant work/visual information. No effort made to present work in an acceptable manner. General lack of commitment/cooperation. |
Unacceptable: Fail | 0–19 | Incoherent, irrelevant, very little or no work, lack of even limited skills being applied. No commitment/cooperation. |
CHAPTER 5: GENERAL SUBJECT INFORMATION
5.1 Explanation of terminology
Design literacy: The first level of design literacy is simple knowledge: basic identification of the elements and principles in a design. But, while accurate information is important, understanding what we see and comprehending visual relationships in hierarchy are at least as important. These higher-level literacy skills require critical thinking.
Formal analysis: A detailed and logical discussion of the formal elements of design such as line, shape, form, texture, tone and colour and principles such as unity and variety, contrast, balance, proportion, movement, etc. in a design.
The following are some of the key concepts that learners must understand and be able to identify and explain in unseen designs:
Elements of design:
Principles of design:
Different fields or categories of design (visual communication/information design and digital design, surface design and two-dimensional craft design, product design and three-dimensional craft design, environmental design)
NOTE: Any two- or three-dimensional craft design based merely on craft processes like decoupage, etc. for decorative purposes will NOT be accepted.
Other terminology:
Learners are expected to have an extensive design vocabulary at their disposal by the end of Grade 12. Teachers are encouraged to hand out a glossary and to ensure that learners know and understand these terms. Design terms that are related to the design history movements and that are used in contemporary design magazines must become part of the vocabulary that they use when writing about designs and when discussing their own designs. This terminology must also be used in the setting of tests and examinations.
5.2 Resources
5.2.1 LTSM
Textbooks approved by the DBE.
LTSM (subject to availability)
5.2.2 Useful websites
The following are some useful research websites for Design (many more can be found through search engines):
CHAPTER 6: FORMS OF TESTING AND MARKING GUIDELINES
6.1 Forms of testing
6.2 General guidelines for marking
ANNEXURE A
DECLARATION OF AUTHENTICITY This is to declare that this examination was done under the supervision of the Design teacher. This declaration certifies that all work submitted is original and the work of the learner. | ||
Learner | ||
School | ||
District | ||
Topic 1/Topic 2 (Select and encircle ONE only.) | ||
Signature | Date | |
Learner | ||
Teacher | ||
Principal | ||
School stamp |
ANNEXURE B
RETROSPECTIVE EXHIBITION RUBRIC
Retrospective exhibition descriptors to guide assessment | Assessment Criteria 1: Creativity/ Originality/ Interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the brief | Assessment Criteria 2: Design involvement in each PAT. Detailed planning in Process Book. Appropriate use of design elements and principles and materials. | Assessment Criteria 3: Technique/ Craftsmanship/ Method/ Competence showcased in each PAT, as well as in presenting the exhibition | Assessment Criteria 4: Time management/ Evidence of design development in presenting a substantial, cohesive body of work | Assessment Criteria 5: Holistic and professional presentation of the exhibition. Use and relevance of materials to the overall theme. Visual functionality and appeal to the viewer. |
90%–100% 1. Outstanding ability that shows richness, insightfulness and a fluent exhibition. High skill, observation and knowledge are powerfully expressed by showcasing outstanding, original design solutions into a cohesive body of work. | Outstanding creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to all the PATs. | Outstanding evidence of design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of detailed planning and appropriate use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Outstanding technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence showcased in each PAT as well as in presenting the exhibition. | Outstanding management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a substantial, cohesive body of work. The exhibition reads as an outstanding, cohesive body of work. ALL PATs are complete. | Outstanding, original and professional presentation of the Retrospective Exhibition. The exhibition showcases display materials that are relevant to the overall theme of the exhibition. Each PAT, together with the exhibition, is presented with outstanding visual functionality and appeal to the viewer. |
80%–89% 2. Excellent, striking, impactful body of work that shows most of the above with some minor flaws evident. Well-organised, detailed and coherent body of work that is polished with skill that is evident. The exhibition supported by an original/unusual/ relevant design solution. | Excellent creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Excellent evidence of design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of detailed planning and appropriate use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Excellent technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence used in presenting the exhibition. | Excellent management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a substantial, cohesive body of work. ALL PATs are complete. | Professional presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition reads as a cohesive body of work with little inconsistency. Excellent and original presentation of the Retrospective Exhibition. |
70%–79% 3. Very Good, well-organised, as above, but lacks the impact. Some obvious inconsistencies/flaws evident. Good level of competence and selection of content that is supported by relevant design processes and solutions. Good organisation and coherent body of work; skill is evident; supported by original/unusual/ relevant design solutions; presentation original and considered. | Very good creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Highly satisfactory design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of detailed planning and appropriate use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Very good technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition with flaws. | Very good management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a good, cohesive body of work that has minor inconsistencies. ALL PATs are complete with some inconsistencies. | Good presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition reads as a good body of work. Good presentation of the Retrospective Exhibition. |
60%–69% 4. Good, interesting presentation that shows clear intent that is convincing with simple design solutions. Distracting/Obvious inconsistencies. Adequate level of competence and selection of content that is supported by a relevant design processes and solutions. Obvious care and effort taken with adequate presentation. Adequate organisation and coherent body of work; skill is evident; supported by original/unusual/ relevant design solutions; presentation original and considered. | Good creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Less intense design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of detailed planning and appropriate use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Adequate technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition with flaws. | Good management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a cohesive body of work that has some inconsistencies. ALL PATs are complete with a few inconsistencies. | Adequate design process and solution that shows reasonable effort taken with the presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition reads as an adequate body of work. |
50%–59% 5. Average, satisfactory presentation that feels mechanical, derivative or copied with little insight that is unimaginative. The design process and solutions are not always clearly identified. Satisfactory level of competence and selection of content. Satisfactory organisation and coherent body of work; skill is evident; supported by original/unusual/relevant design solutions; presentation original and considered. Many distracting inconsistencies. | Average creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Satisfactory design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of planning and appropriate use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Satisfactory technique/ craftsmanship/method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition with some flaws. | Average management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a satisfactory body of work that has inconsistencies. ALL PATs are complete with some inconsistencies. | Satisfactory design process and solution that show reasonable effort taken with the presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition reads as a satisfactory cohesive body of work. |
40%–49% 6. Below average, clumsy or careless in presentation. The learner has done enough work to pass with an exhibition that is not logically constructed. The exhibition showcases some flashes of insight, limited selection of information, poor technical skills with limited design processes and solutions. Minimum level of competence and selection of content; supported by a relevant design process and solution; little care and effort taken with some presentation. In need of support/motivation to pass. | Minimal creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATS. | Very little design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of minimal planning and use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Minimal technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition that shows flaws. | Below average management/ evidence of design development in presenting an average body of work that has many inconsistencies. PATs are incomplete with major inconsistencies. | Minimal design process and solution that show minimal effort taken with the presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition reads as a satisfactory body of work that shows minimal effort. |
30%–39% 7. Weak, visually uninteresting presentation that lacks creativity with limited/poor technical skill. There is little attempt to present information in an acceptable manner with little or no design processes and solutions. It shows a general lack of commitment and skill. Poor level of competence and selection of content; supported by a weak design process and solution; little care and effort taken for the exhibition. Poor organisation and skill is evident; supported by poor design solutions; presentation is not well considered. In need of support/motivation to pass. | Very little sign of creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Very little design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of poor planning and use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Poor technique/ craftsmanship/method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition that shows major flaws. | Weak management/ evidence of progressive design development in presenting a poor body of work that has many inconsistencies. PATs are incomplete with some work missing. | Limited design processes and solutions that show little care taken with the presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition showcases a poor body of work that shows minimal effort. |
20%–29% 8. Very weak, FAIL. Very little information or irrelevant work/design process and solution. No effort made to present work in an acceptable manner. Weak level of competence and selection of content; little care and effort taken with little presentation. Poor organisation and skill is evident; supported by weak design solutions; presentation is not well considered. General lack of commitment and technical skill. | Very little sign of creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | Very little design involvement in each PAT. Evidence of weak planning and use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Weak technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition that shows major flaws. | Incomplete and poor time management that shows little evidence of progressive design development in presenting a weak body of work that has too many inconsistencies. PATs are incomplete with some tasks not done or missing. | Very little effort taken with presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition showcases a weak body of work that shows minimal effort. |
0%–19% 9. Unacceptable, FAIL. Incoherent; irrelevant, very little or no work; limited skills being applied. No commitment and technical skill. Weak level of competence and selection of content; no care and effort taken with weak/no presentation. Very poor organisation and skill is evident; supported by weak design solutions; presentation is not well considered. | No sign of creativity/ originality/ interpretation in terms of the concept and solutions relevant to the PATs. | No design involvement in each PAT. Almost no sign of planning and very weak use of design elements, principles and materials in presenting each PAT. | Very weak technique/ craftsmanship/ method/ competence utilised in presenting the exhibition that shows major flaws. | Incomplete PATs and poor time management that shows little/no evidence of progressive design development in presenting a very weak body of work. | Very little/no effort taken with presentation and functionality of the exhibition to the viewer. The exhibition showcases a weak body of work that shows no/minimal effort. |
Retrospective Exhibition TOTAL: 50 marks | 10 marks | 10 marks | 10 marks | 10 marks | 10 marks |
Name of Candidate | |||||
Examination Number | |||||
Centre Number | |||||
School Mark | Moderated mark | ||||
Retrospective Exhibition TOTAL: 50 marks | |||||
Name of teacher: | Name of moderator: | ||||
Date: | Date: | ||||
Signature: | Signature: |