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) 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