Year 13 Examination feedback......

 I have just added the Year 13 blogs you had started working on in the summer term.....well some of you. I notice that there are no posts on Ms Shingfield's blog......? You should all have posts on the photoshop workshops you did with James as well as posts on what makes a good film short etc....

I have also uploaded the moderator's comments for unit G321 (Foundation) and G324 (advanced). Our centre marks were not changed - I will give you all an individual breakdown of your marks when I next see you. I will be referring to both of the reports in the first lesson I have with you in order for you to set clear targets for your Advanced Production Portfolio. On our youtube channel - wymondhamhighmedia I have started to add some of our commentaries which I've lifted from the front sheets we have to fill out.

G321 Foundation Portfolio in Media

Comments:
Thank you for the prompt submission of the centre’s entries for this series. The work was uploaded onto a central hub, which was fully accessible for the moderation process and was very ‘user friendly’. Work was clearly labelled and easy to navigate and the centre’s Youtube channel was insightful.
Candidates submitted work from the video brief which was presented on individual blogs. The centre’s comments were clear and referred to the appropriate mark descriptors. Comments also explained how marks had been allocated to individual candidates and included some personalised statements, which is encouraged. Marking was considered to be generally in line with the agreed national standard for this unit.
In research and planning, there was a range of evidence in place which suggested that they had embraced the spirit of the specification. I believe that candidates could have added more variety of presentation to their blogs with a more creative use of ICT, but is was still clear to see that the final artefacts were the products of detailed research and planning.The video work made good use of forms and conventions which made them clearly readable as openings to films within their chosen genre. There was some exemplary camera and editing with a close amount of detail give to sound and foley recording (candidate 3029), excellent to see at AS level. Representation was addressed particularly well through the careful use of camera work and there was a careful consideration of mise-en-scene across all the samples looked at. The marking commentary for this unit considered a range of marks across the levels and referenced the key areas. In the evaluation element, all candidates responded to the seven stipulated questions showing an understanding of key concepts and process of construction. It was disappointing to see that a limited range of technologies was employed, especially by the top candidates who posted lengthy written analyses instead. However, the marking accurately acknowledged this and the centre is encouraged to direct candidates to explore an even wider range of applications in future submissions, in order to demonstrate their understanding with more depth and creativity so that they can achieve the very highest marks.
Overall, it is clear that the candidates are well supported and that they respond positively to this. It was a pleasure to moderate a well-organised centre. Thank you.

G324 Advanced Portfolio in Media

Comments:
The Centre is to be thanked for the speedy submission of coursework. The Centre’s comments on the coversheets were detailed and referred to the assessment criteria. The blogs were clearly laid out and candidates had structured their blogs so that it was very straightforward finding the various elements of the unit, again facilitating moderation. In the main, candidates showed clear evidence of planning and research which examined all three elements of production –main production and ancillary materials. The Centre marked accordingly where such evidence lacked detail.The Centre is to be congratulated on submitting an interesting range of short films. To a greater or lesser degree of success candidates paid attention to pace of editing, mise en scene and choice of shots. There was good use of sound (e.g by candidate 2314) to help create atmosphere. Ancillary tasks were also competently handled with some excellent posters being produced. The review pages were less successful. The candidates’ evaluations were mixed in their quality and approach. The specification states that candidates should view their evaluation as a “creative task and the potential format chosen should be exploited through theuse of images, audio, video and links to online resources". Whilst some of the evaluations reflected the spirit of the specification as outlined above (for example those of candidates 2553 and 2318) other evaluations tended to rely on essay format.
The Centre should pay particular attention to this in future years and should encourage all of its candidates to
adopt a more creative use of technology in presenting their evaluations.
The Centre correctly applied the assessment criteria to all sections of the unit.