2. Understanding Standards: Nominee Training Event
Engineering Science
National 5, Higher and Advanced Higher

3. Aims of the day
To support Nominees in their understanding of national standards by:
reviewing candidate evidence
discussing this evidence and associated assessment standards with colleagues
asking questions and seeking clarification about national standards

4. Agenda Registration, Tea & Coffee 9.30
Welcome and Recap Session 2015/
Workshop 1 (National 5 IACCA)
Worksop 2 (Higher IACCA)
Lunch
Workshop 3 (Advanced Higher IACCA)
Plenary
Close

5. Review of 2016 1st year of all three levels
2nd year of visiting verification
20 centres verified (approximately 20% of those presenting)
Higher – All using Moving Bridge or Building Maintenance
National 5 – All using CCTV
Advanced Higher – Not Verified

6. Review of 2016
Both levels (National 5 and Higher) - 60% within national standards
Majority of rest (at both National 5 and Higher) were lenient in their assessment judgements
New marking instructions – move away from Band Descriptors
Some centres using templates
Some centres providing too much support
Some centres using pre-built models

7. Average Component Marks
Question Paper IACCA
National (61%) (76%)
Higher (54%) 45.2 (75%)
Advanced Higher 27.2 (45.3%) 63.6 (71%)

8. As a Guide National 5 and Higher: 42 marks/60 marks is 70%
Advanced Higher:
63 marks/90 marks is 70%
54 marks/90 marks is 60%
45 marks/90 marks is 50%

9. The IACCA is a Course Assessment
It is the equivalent of the written examination paper and is one of two assessment components.
Centres should be mindful of the assessment conditions set out in the Course Assessment Specification (CAS).

10. From the National 5 Course Assessment Specification:
Conducted under some supervision and control.
The assignment will be carried out under open book conditions, but supervised to ensure that the work presented is the learner’s own work.
The assessor may give learners support and guidance to help them progress through each stage of the assignment; where any significant amount of support is provided, this should be reflected in the marks awarded.

11. From the National 5 Course Assessment Specification:
The assignment is designed to discriminate between learners, and therefore would be expected to provide a wide range of marks. Stronger learners should be able to complete the assignment successfully with minimal support and guidance. Weaker learners may not be able to complete all aspects of the assignment within a reasonable time, or may require significant assistance, and so would achieve a lower total mark.
Once the assignment has been completed and assessed, it should not be returned to the learner for further work to improve their mark.

12. Advanced Higher IACCA
Higher IACCA
National 5 IACCA
Reduction in
permissible
support
National 4 Added Value Unit (AVU)

13. Workshop 1
National 5 IACCA

14. Workshop 2
Higher IACCA

15. Advanced Higher IACCA – 90 marks (60% of the course award)
Stage 1: Research and analysis of the chosen problem
Stage 2: Producing a specification
Stage 3: Producing a detailed project plan
Stage 4: Mathematical modelling / analysis
Stage 5: Constructing / simulating a solution
Stage 6: Evaluating the development process and solution, and identifying possible further developments
Stage 7: Presenting / communicating the solution, including its possible uses and its implications

16. Advanced Higher IACCA – 90 marks (60% of the course award)
Stage 1: Research and analysis of the chosen problem
Stage 2: Producing a specification
Stage 3: Producing a detailed project plan
Stage 4: Mathematical modelling / analysis
Stage 5: Constructing / simulating a solution
Stage 6: Evaluating the development process and solution,
and identifying possible further developments
Stage 7: Presenting / communicating the solution, including its possible uses and its implications

17. Stage 1: Research and analysis of the chosen problem (10 marks)
At this stage, candidates should research and analyse the problem / need in order to produce a project proposal plan. Candidates should:
Analyse the problem and identify what factors they are going to research. In fact, at this stage, they should identify the information (research questions) that they require answering.
Produce a research strategy - identifying how they intend to carry out the research in order to answer each question. A detailed response should have information on every research question identified. Possible strategies could include site visits, face-to-face and telephone interviews, internet searches, book reviews, review of technical literature, questionnaires, reverse engineering of products, etc.
Produce evidence of the completed research, drawing meaningful conclusions. It is not enough to simply copy and paste information from a website. There must be a point to the research and, as a result, meaningful conclusions should be drawn from the research, indicating how it answers the original research questions. Pre-prepared scripts of interviews, collated questionnaire responses, etc may be included as appendices, but should be referred to in the main body of text.

18. Stage 2: Producing a specification (10 marks)
At this stage, candidates should complete a detailed specification for the project
proposal.
Although no marks are allocated for the production of system / control
diagrams, it would be good practice to produce them prior to completing a specification,
simplifying the process of the identification of all sub-systems.
The specification should:
Identify all sub-systems and demonstrate an understanding of how they inter-relate.
Be complete and detailed - covering all sub-systems.
Include numerical values - identified through research. If estimates are used, they
must be justified to demonstrate that they are reasonable.
NB:- The specification must be based on conclusions drawn from the candidate's
research.

19. Stage 3: Producing a detailed project plan (10 marks)
At this stage, candidates should produce a detailed project plan. The plan should
include:
Gannt Chart, Critical Path Analysis (or both) including detail on intermediate and
final targets.
A resource plan, detailing what resources are required, when they are required and
how they will be sourced.
Evidence of regular auditing of progress through the project plan, including
adjustments, refinements, a detailed reflective commentary, etc. This may be in
the main body of the report, in the Record of Progress, or in both. Credit should be
given, regardless of where this is evidenced.

20. Stage 4: Mathematical modelling / analysis (20 marks)
This section should be systematic and thorough and include mathematics appropriate
to the level of AH Engineering Science, such as quadratic equations, calculus, etc.
It should be noted that this section not only involves mathematical calculations, but could
also include developing complex control programs, etc. A more detailed list of
possibilities is given on page 30 of the Candidates' Guide.
At this stage, candidates should ensure that:
a range of different mathematical modelling techniques are used, appropriate to
the level of the course.
the results are applied to several aspects (sub-systems) of the project solution.
all numerical values are realistic (bourn from the research), or from fully
justified and realistic estimates.
the modelling / analysis process makes sense by including a reflective
commentary throughout. It does not just include a number of isolated
calculations, but it notes assumptions, intermediate results, etc.

21. Stage 5: Constructing / simulating a solution (20 marks)
At this stage, candidates should be:
constructing and/or simulating each of the individual sub-systems.
including a detailed description of how a fully integrated solution could be
implemented.
providing clear evidence of the application of knowledge and skills, drawn from
the course content and related to their own research and specification.
providing fully justified decisions on materials and components.

22. Stage 6: Evaluating the development process and solution,
Stage 6: Evaluating the development process and solution, and identifying possible further developments (10 marks)
At this stage, candidates should produce:
a complete and detailed qualitative evaluation of the solution, with valid, relevant and clear conclusions.
a complete and detailed quantitative evaluation of the solution, with valid, relevant and clear conclusions.
relevant and justified evaluative commentary on the development process on the candidate's own performance, referring to entries in the candidate's record of progress and project plan.
detailed descriptions of possible further developments.
N.B.:- Evaluative comments may appear at any point in the project. Credit should be given for comments made throughout.

23. uses and its implications (10 marks)
Stage 7:Presenting / communicating the solution, including its possible
uses and its implications (10 marks)
At this stage, candidates should produce:
A detailed Record of Progress which is updated throughout the project. The
Record of Progress should be detailed, including a lesson-by-lesson log of tasks
undertaken, resources used, lessons learned, teacher input required, reflection
of progress against the project plan, plans for the next lesson, etc. Templates
must not be used and candidates should structure and present their Record of
Progress individually.
In addition, marks are allocated for:
An appropriate structure and presentation of the final report, including
appropriate technical terminology, logical order, section headings, page numbers,
headings for diagrams, sketches, etc.

24. Workshop 3
Advanced Higher IACCA