Download Presentation - Question Paper (ppt)

Understanding Standards:
Advanced Higher Event
Computing Science
Aims of the day
To support teachers, lecturers and assessors in their
understanding of national standards by:
 reviewing candidate evidence
 discussing this evidence and associated Marking
Instructions with colleagues
 asking questions and seeking clarification about
national standards
Question Paper Analysis
Overall candidate performance in the question paper
was poorer than expected
 average mark 22.8 out of 60
 higher than expected no response, indicating that
candidates were unfamiliar with several areas of
content
 stronger performance in questions associated with
the predecessor Advanced Higher Computing
qualification
 weaker performance in questions associated with the
predecessor Advanced Higher Information Systems
qualification
Question Paper Analysis
 Candidates appeared to find the ‘write-on’ style of the
question paper challenging
 This was especially evident in Question 4 where
candidates were expected to decompose a problem
and retain their train of thought across several parts
of the question
 As a result, the decision was taken to revert to use of
answer booklets with a separate question paper
Question Paper: Strengths
Content associated with the predecessor Advanced
Higher Computing
 Scope and constraints (question 2a)
 Stack operations (question 3d part i)
 Bubble sort (question 4c and 4d)
New Computing Science content
 Big data analytics (question 3e)
Question Paper: Weaknesses
Content associated with predecessor Advanced Higher
Information Systems
 HTML form tags (question 1c part i)
– Online Database Systems: Section II Part B
 Server-side form processing (question 1c part ii)
– Online Database Systems: Section II Part B
 Usability/accessibility testing (question 2b part ii)
– Information Systems Interfaces: Section II Part A
Question Paper: Weaknesses
Content associated with predecessor Advanced Higher
Computing
 Queue operations (question 2d)
 Binary Search (question 4a part ii)
Question Paper: Weaknesses
New Computing Science content
 UML diagrams (question 1a and question 3a part i)
 Insertion sort (question 1b part ii)
 Intellectual Property Rights (question 2b part i)
 SQL CREATE statement (question 2c part i)
 Linked lists (question 3d part i)
 Problem decomposition (question 4a part i)
 Reading/writing to a database file (question 4b)
UML Use Case Diagrams
UML Use Case Diagrams
Expectation
 UML use case diagram that uses standard
symbols for actors, use cases and relationships
Reality
 No knowledge of UML use case diagrams
 Many candidates did not respond to this
question
UML Class Diagrams
UML Class Diagrams
Expectation
 Accurate description of OO terminology: class,
object, encapsulation and inheritance …
accompanied by relevant examples from the
UML class diagram
Reality
 Rote learned descriptions that made no
reference to the scenario or UML class diagram
 Inaccurate interpretation of class diagram
Insert Sort
Insert Sort
Expectation
 Accurate description of insertion sort as it
applies to data provided in the scenario
Reality
 Poor knowledge of insertion sort algorithm
 the majority of candidates failed to notice that
the required order was chronological, even
though a statement explaining this had been
provided
Intellectual Property Rights
Intellectual Property Rights
Expectation
 Discussion of Intellectual Property Rights
 Mention of relevant aspects of IPR including
patents, copyright and trademarks
 Application of IPR to scenario
Reality
 Vague description of Copyright, Design and
Patents Act
 Responses referred to scenario
SQL CREATE Statement
SQL CREATE Statement
Expectation
 Use of CREATE statement to indicate –
 Fields and appropriate data types
 Primary key
 Foreign key
Reality
 Few candidates indicated primary or
foreign key
 Correct list of fields and data types
Linked Lists
Linked Lists
Expectation
 Description that indicated use of node to
store details of Russia
 Description indicates how the pointer
needs to be updated
Reality
 Most candidates failed to mention use
made of a node to store details in a linked
list
 Accurate description of pointer updates
Problem Decomposition
Problem Decomposition
Expectation
 Top level design that indicates –
 record structure
 Declaration of array of records
 Required procedure calls
Reality
 Data structure not defined
 Import and search procedure calls
identified by most candidates
Reading/writing to Database File
Question Paper Changes
Expectation
 Pseudocode indicates sub-tasks to be
performed:
 Connect to/ lose connection with
database server
 Use of SQL UPDATE statement
Reality
 No attention paid to database file with
responses using sequential file handling
Reading/writing to Database File
Expectation
 Pseudocode indicates sub-tasks to be
performed
 Connect to/ lose connection with
database server
 Use of SQL UPDATE statement
Reality
 No attention paid to database file with
responses using sequential file handling
Workshop 1
 Review the scripts for candidates 1- 4 against the
Marking Instructions and award the appropriate
mark
 Discuss marks awarded with members of your
group
 Did everyone in the group give the same mark for
each candidate?
 If there were differences, what were the reasons for
these?
 If you all gave the same mark, did everyone do so
for the same reasons?
WWW.sqa.org.uk│0303 333 0330