Visual Communication and Design
Unit 3, Outcome 1
This assessment support material is provided in addition to
the VCE Visual Communication & Design Assessment
Handbook and should be used together with the handbook.
Unit 3, Outcome 1
Apply the design process to produce a final visual
communication presentation that satisfies a specified
communication need.
Outcome 1 is assessed by one task, a folio which includes
a description of the communication need/s, development
work and one or more finished presentation/s.
Students are not required to produce more than one final
presentation for this Unit 3, Outcome 1. Students who
choose to produce more than one final presentation
should not be considered as being more thorough in
applying the design process simply because of the
increased volume or effort any additional output
generates.
A student’s performance in Unit 3, Outcome 1 is
determined using an ‘on balance’ global assessment
procedure.
Initially, the class teacher matches each student’s
performance to one of the five ‘typical performance
descriptors’ for this outcome in the current VCE
Assessment Handbook.
The Assessment Handbook is published annually on the
VCAA website.
The performance descriptors represent the following mark
ranges:
60-49
48-37
36-25
24-13
12-1
Each performance descriptor reflects overall levels or
standards of performance relative to the dot points in the
key knowledge and key skills of the study design. Each
descriptor takes into consideration the demonstrated
quality and nature of the work submitted for
assessment.
Words and phrases used in each descriptor, rather than
any numeric weighting or assessment grid, should drive the
initial assessment process.
Teachers initially sort each folio into one of the five
categories.
A second comparative viewing is used to ensure:
• accuracy of the original assessment (if the first
decision is inappropriate, recategorise the folio)
• the actual mark for each folio within the mark
range
• rank order of folios across the class.
a closer look ………
• Collect folios on date provided at
beginning of Unit 3.
• Some teachers prefer to leave them
for a couple of days to separate the
assessment process from the
classroom scenario.
• Highlight key words in each
performance descriptor, noting
changes across the levels.
For example:
– ‘Highly competent and effective
decisions about the selection,
development and refinement of design
alternatives ………’
– ‘Competent and appropriate
decisions…’
– ‘Appropriate decisions ..’
– ‘Decisions about ……are evident in a
limited way’.
49-60
60-49
37-48
48-37
25-36
36-25
Mark Range Categories
Place each folio into the category with the
description that most accurately reflects its
qualities. Each folio needs to be considered
relative to the communication need/s
established in the brief/communication need
statement.
12-24
24-12
1-12
12-1
60-49
48-37
36-25
24-12
12-1
Grade folios for each category one range at a time to compare placement
across the mark range for that descriptor.
Ensure the overlap between each range reflects a fluid transition between
each category.
There may be gaps between grades or perhaps a category/s unused. This
system is designed to assist a clearer delineation in performance ability
levels.
Mark Range – 36-25
35
34
33
32
30
25-36
27
34
25
29
Finalise the rank order within each selected
mark range.
Providing student feedback ..
Student:
Task Description:
Unit 3, Outcome 1
Feedback may include
the mark awarded by the
teacher and/or comments
based on the descriptor
content. Alert students that
this mark may change as a
result of statistical
moderation processes.
The student’s score was determined to be
in the mark range: 36–25
Descriptor:
(refer page 23
2005 Assessment Handbook)
score awarded:
35
Teacher:
Date:
Feedback comment: This mark may
change as a result of statistical
moderation processes.
Each of the following red boxes contain sentences which
collectively form the basis of the ‘Very High’ performance
descriptor.
Excerpts from the student sample ‘Fly Spray’ are used
along with some text explanations, to place aspects of the
folio work in context for each part of the descriptor.
This sample should not to be taken literally as a ‘Very
High’ standard but rather as a set of visual reference
examples that typify the type of work to be considered for
assessment at this level.
Generation of design alternatives and development and refinement of
selected solutions comprehensively supported by evidence of thorough
understanding of the cyclical nature of the design process.
This requires tracking the generation of each design alternative, and reading
student annotations to determine the level of thinking behind decisions and
directions taken. The word ‘comprehensive’ indicates both the quality and
quantity and diversity of design alternatives explored.
This explanatory diagram tracks the design process through a number of
design alternatives for a logo.
cyclical review led to a rethink and eventual abandoning
of this design alternative
this design alternative went further
Precise description of communication need/s supported by detailed research
Highly
competent
and effective
decisions about the selection,
and analysis
of relevant
information.
development and refinement of design alternatives including ongoing
evaluation of design alternatives to meet the communication need/s.
This requires a global decision regarding the quality of thinking behind
decisions observed over the length of the design process evolution. Both
imagery and annotations are the source for this evaluation. As you review
the folio, ask yourself questions such as:
•Are decisions incidental?
•How thorough has the exploration been?
•How much thought/insight has gone into these design alternatives?
•How effective was the process? i.e. did it omit or barely attempt any
stage/s?
•Does the work lose focus of the need?
High level of skill and original imaginative thought in the design process
as well as ...
The skill level focuses on the level of quality established in the imagery and
underpinning visual concepts. While determining the level of imagination and
originality is subjective, there should be a genuine range of fresh ideas
explored and that these ideas should grab the attention of the identified
audience. The diversity of original ideas would further assist in ascertaining
performance levels.
High level of skill in the design process in the application of appropriate
materials, methods, media, design elements and
design principles in both the developmental work and the final presentation/s.
Students are expected to
take considered risks in
exploring materials,
methods, media,
throughout the generative
and production phases.
This experimentation can
extend an idea further.
The use of elements and
principles further
extends this potential.
The degree to which such
an expansion of quality
imagery emerges reflects
the level of skill
demonstrated.
Detailed technical knowledge and advanced skills in the use of
information and communications technology (ICT) applications and,
where applied, other method/s of image generation.
There is a significant difference in the technical
knowledge required to, for example simply test
fonts, from that required to construct an
advertisement as a well thought-out visual
communication.
Students who attempt to push ICT further than
font generation can demonstrate advanced
knowledge of computer generated image
building. A detailed technical knowledge of two
methods of production in this case combines
the drawing method and ICT by scanning
manual drawing and using digital photography
(2 cans spraying) to demonstrate advanced
computer skills and technical knowledge.
The final presentation reproduction quality
reflects genuine ability to build such a detailed
and effective visual solution.
Advanced application of drawing methods, including third-angle orthogonal
drawings observing Australian Standards conventions; paraline and perspective
drawings to demonstrate form, and where appropriate, function; and accurate
drawing from observation.
The communication need/s will determine the direction and strategy best
suited to demonstrate knowledge, as will student decisions made when
applying the design process. There are errors in the orthogonal drawing shown
here and convention is not always observed. The quantity of drawings required is
determined by the task, however quality is paramount when key words
such as ‘advanced’ and ‘accurate’ are used in the descriptor.
*Not all key points are shown in examples.
Keep in mind that:
• These descriptors are based on key knowledge and key
skills located in the VCE Visual Communication and
Design Study Design.
• There is further information provided in the Assessment
Handbook describing additional expectations and
constraints related to assessment.
• Performance assessment is not about placing a numeric
value on identified parts within the assessment task, but
in determining overall achievement against the expected
standards described in the performance descriptors.
• Now ‘performance descriptors’ collectively reflect
expected standards in student performance rather than
numerical values.