Description with references to your results from your survey/interviews etc.
Discuss the use of the micro:bit, sensors, digital inputs/outputs and analogue inputs/ouputs.
Students must show evidence of some form of an iterative design approach that reflects the process described in the LCCS specification (see Figure 1). Students should explain the rationale behind any adaptations to their design approach. The key stages in each iteration of their design process, for example Plan-Design-Create-Evaluate, should be clearly explained. There should be a concise description of how the artefact evolved through the iterative design approach. For example, students may have done one major iteration of the entire design cycle in Figure 1, but may have developed their artefact through various sub-process iterations, such as the Create-Evaluate element of the design process. Students should report how they managed their project, including a design timeline, indicating where key decisions were made in the creation of the artefact. The report should justify these key decisions.
There should be an overview of the overall algorithm and design structure and the archecture used. You should highlight the computational thinking skills you used. For example, for any Python or JavaScript code you could discuss:
There should be a clear description of how the operation of the artefact was developed to meet the
brief and to work well in an overall design sense. This section should be closely aligned to, and
consistent with, the video presentation of the final artefact in operation. Students should highlight
the degree to which the core concepts that are relevant to the design brief are addressed. The five
core concepts are Abstraction, Algorithms, Computer systems, Data, and Evaluation and testing. The
SEC brief may stipulate at this point additional sub-sections that are particularly relevant to the
requirements of the brief. For example, the level of robustness within the artefact to handle, where
relevant, a variety of operational environments and inputs. This will be reflected in an effective UI
design and an artefact that has been efficiently tested and evaluated.
In this section of the report, students should be aware of the key areas of assessment that are
addressed by the quality descriptors. Therefore, during the construction of their coursework digital
portfolio, students should be encouraged to consider how to report on the key criteria contained in
the quality descriptors. The key areas of assessment addressed by the quality descriptors are as
follows:
For further info on the 4 headings here see p7 and p8 of the coursework brief. A lot of you have caused me a lot of headaches in submitting your projects due to poor file structure, so make sure you improve that before you submit it. Marks will be lost if it is not easy to navigate.