[Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice
- tertiarylinks (MarkKelly)
Adrian Janson
janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Fri Apr 25 08:23:56 EST 2008
Jack,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply to this thread.
Can I ask - as a courtesy - that you attach a signature to your email? It
may only be a gripe of mine - but I like to know who I am speaking to - and
this list is potentially open to students, teachers, stakeholders and well.
anyone! It is not a judgement - merely a courtesy.
>I have been following this topic for a while and it is similar to a
complaint I posted about the course when I was teaching it (Not teaching it
anymore or in Australia but will return someday so it is still of concern).
I was teaching just before SD was introduced but having a look at the
document it seemed only slightly different from the existing course.
I presume you are teaching IT O/S? It would be interesting to hear about
your experiences in this regard - and it could help enrich what we currently
do. Yes - the course is similar to the previous one. This was done for a
number of reasons. Firstly, the course as it stood was quite successful.
Few teachers had complaints about it of the major variety. Secondly, by
retaining most of the previous structure, it was hoped that the
understanding that teachers had developed would then carry over and allow
them to teach the new course without too many problems. In that regard, I
feel that the new course has been very successful.
>This is how I felt about the course:
STRESSFUL - It was so difficult (especially being a new teacher) to decipher
what was important for the exam and what was not. I think any good teacher
wants to give their students the best chance during the exam and the lack of
definite structure really caused huge stress and difficulties.
The first year of any course is a stressful one for teachers as there are no
past exam papers to use as a resource. However, the areas of study clearly
outline what the course contains - and everything within them is examinable.
Granted - there are always things that need to be clarified - and that is
where communities such as this one and VITTA give support to teachers. I am
not disagreeing with you - but I do think that the structure and content of
the exam has always been well defined. There are always things that can be
done better - true!
>HOW TO FIX THIS - One way might be to separate the course into specific
topics such as 'programming', 'Legal issues' etc. Then distribute this
document outlining the percentage of the exam allocated to each area at the
beginning of the year. This would really help teachers for class
preparation and the amount of time to spend on each topic.
Hmmm.. The separate sections are called 'Areas of Study' and each has an
equal weighting on the exam. I understand what you are saying - but I think
that this exists (but with more rigour). For example, 'Programming' is
spread across two areas of study: Unit 3 - aos2 and Unit 4 - aos1. Now I
know that you are saying that 'Programming' should be under one banner - but
the reason this was done was in fact to make the course easier to understand
and implement. Each aos relates to its own SAC - so that it is easier for
teachers to see what key knowledge they need to assess internally. If the
areas of study were mixed up into the broad headings that you propose, then
similar complaints would be made by teachers in regards to the internal
assessment. For example:
U3, aos2
Software development
While area of study 1 focuses on the analysis and design phases of the
systems development life cycle
(SDLC), the focus of this area of study is on the development phase, in
particular, the development
of the software. Students develop knowledge, skills and understanding of the
tools and techniques for
developing the software to meet the specifications identified in the design
phase of the SDLC.
Students focus on the designing, developing and testing stages of software
development. When
expressing software designs students become familiar with methods such as
flow charts, pseudocode
and Nassi-Shneiderman diagrams, and develop a detailed understanding of one
of them. The solutions
developed by the students should be modules that meet a part of software
design specifications. These
design specifications will be provided in scenarios, which include a brief
description of the organisations,
their information-processing practices or needs and the activities of
relevant personnel.
When producing solutions, students develop knowledge and understanding of
the legal obligations
and ethical responsibilities of programmers.
U4, aos1
Software engineering
This area of study focuses on the range of tools and techniques to produce
purpose-designed software.
All stages of software development are studied: analysis, design,
development, testing, documentation,
implementation and evaluation. Students prepare documentation intended for
the end-users. Students
continue to use the programming language studied in Unit 3.
Students respond to design briefs, which briefly describe the organisations,
including a statement of
the networked information system objectives and the needs of the end-users.
This are the 'programming' areas of study. These preambles are then broken
down into key knowledge dot points which describe precisely what is
required. Now there are some references to legal issues and there are also
some references to design, etc. - but ultimately when you are writing a
course, you need to pick a focus. It is not always possible to separate
concepts from the practice without making the process trivial. The course
designers have done an excellent job of writing these areas of study - and
programming (or software development is the focus). In starting on a
programming course, how can you not first talk about design, user
interfaces, validation, algorithms and the limitations of the system? Once
the program is complete, how can you not discuss testing, user documentation
and evaluating whether the program is actually any good?
>BORING (for me and the students)- The course had good points and bad
points but generally the lack of depth - especially in programming - was
really frustrating. By the end of the course the students that could not
already program a computer still could not program a computer. The main
reason for this was the time taken up by these mundane rote learning add on
tasks. I can remember at university that it was only when I understood how
to create simple computer programs that I actually understood "Systems
Development". Incidentally, this was a second year University course that
covered DFDs, SDLC and other large scale development tools. I really think
this stuff can be dropped at high school level.
I have trouble with this one. SD is my favourite class and every topic is
interesting from my perspective and that of my students.
You can do as much programming as you like really - in fact, I give my class
a lot of programming time - it's simply a matter of organisation. There is
nothing in the study design that mandates a certain percentage spent
programming. If you are suggesting that they should be programming 100% of
the time - then that is simply not realistic.
None of my theory classes are 'mundane rote learning add on tasks'.
An argument could be made for dropping some of the theory topics - but it
all comes down to rigour. A course based 100% on programming is not
suitable as a VCE level course (years 7-10 certainly! - my year 9 and 10
courses are 100% programming courses and the students love them! )
>The argument that "When a student enters the workforce the languages will
be different so there is no point teaching a specific language," does not
really hold up I'm afraid.
I didn't say this. What I said was that focussing on learning a specific
language is not really the point of what we are doing. It is the process
and the understanding of the structures that will allow a student to
transfer their skills and adapt them in the future. I said this is
response to the assertion that the course should be focussed purely on
programming.
>Animators need to know programming basics for scripting such as particle
systems, Web designers should have a very good knowledge of programming
especially with technologies such as JavaScript, ASP, PHP etc. True, a
project manager may not need these skills but this guy is going to seriously
get rolled when the programmer tells him that the email functionality is
going to take a weeks work. I think a good knowledge of programming is
useful for anyone in the computer field.
You make a good point. But programming is not for everyone - and I didn't
list all the possible IT careers paths.
You know - it is ironic that I am having this discussion - as many know - I
am a big advocate for programming within the current course. As a member of
the course writing team for the current course - I represented this view and
in fact - we increased the amount of internal assessment based purely on
programming from the last course to this one. However, and despite the fact
that we are basically on the 'same side' so to speak, I will never advocate
the removal of the theoretical underpinnings of the course or the legal and
ethical aspects. The aim of the course is develop students with a good
understanding of the software development process - and I believe the course
achieves this.
Cheers,
Adrian
Adrian Janson,
VITTA President
Director of ICT,
Melbourne High School,
Forrest Hill, South Yarra 3141 Australia.
Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au
Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of Jack Matthews
Sent: Friday, 25 April 2008 2:14 AM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: RE: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
Hi
I have been following this topic for a while and it is similar to a
complaint I posted about the course when I was teaching it (Not teaching it
anymore or in Australia but will return someday so it is still of concern).
I was teaching just before SD was introduced but having a look at the
document it seemed only slightly different from the existing course.
This is how I felt about the course:
STRESSFUL - It was so difficult (especially being a new teacher) to decipher
what was important for the exam and what was not. I think any good teacher
wants to give their students the best chance during the exam and the lack of
definite structure really caused huge stress and difficulties.
HOW TO FIX THIS - One way might be to separate the course into specific
topics such as 'programming', 'Legal issues' etc. Then distribute this
document outlining the percentage of the exam allocated to each area at the
beginning of the year. This would really help teachers for class
preparation and the amount of time to spend on each topic.
BORING (for me and the students)- The course had good points and bad points
but generally the lack of depth - especially in programming - was really
frustrating. By the end of the course the students that could not already
program a computer still could not program a computer. The main reason for
this was the time taken up by these mundane rote learning add on tasks. I
can remember at university that it was only when I understood how to create
simple computer programs that I actually understood "Systems Development".
Incidentally, this was a second year University course that covered DFDs,
SDLC and other large scale development tools. I really think this stuff can
be dropped at high school level.
HOW TO FIX THIS - Preferably introduce a course called 'Computer
Programming' where the main emphasis is programming or alternatively cut
down on the existing theory so that students can further develop their
skills and come out of the course with confidence and a feeling they have
achieved something.
I agree with Andrew that once you learn one programming language well it is
much easier to then transfer these skills to a different one. The argument
that "When a student enters the workforce the languages will be different so
there is no point teaching a specific language," does not really hold up I'm
afraid. As long as the student has a good grasp on one language (including
syntax) they will be able to adapt to another one - if they have no computer
language skills you can be darn sure they will not be able to pick up a new
one.
"The IT industry is not made up entirely of programmers. There are
animators, web designers, systems analysts and project managers just to name
a few - none of whom necessarily have any knowledge of programming"
Animators need to know programming basics for scripting such as particle
systems, Web designers should have a very good knowledge of programming
especially with technologies such as JavaScript, ASP, PHP etc. True, a
project manager may not need these skills but this guy is going to seriously
get rolled when the programmer tells him that the email functionality is
going to take a weeks work. I think a good knowledge of programming is
useful for anyone in the computer field.
-Jack
_____
From: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
To: sofdev at edulists.com.au
Subject: RE: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:17:48 +1000
Hi Andrew,
The social implications of the various Physics topics probably takes up 5%
of the course - which is comparable to the amount of the IT course that it
takes up. It certainly doesn't take up 50% of the course. However, at
least 50% of the SD course is theory - and this is where you and I differ in
opinion. I would not change this percentage - although my students would.
Does this mean that I/we 'should' change how much theory we change - at the
whim of our students? Do our students have many years experience of the IT
industry? Do our students really understand the challenges that they will
face? No and No. In this respect - we do. I know most of my students
would rather sit around during my classes and play computer games. Perhaps
we should change the course - because this is what the students want???
Our enrolments will go up - and they will be attaining skills!!! But I am
being sarcastic clearly..
>I certainly dont agree. I haven't heard this argument for a while but
computer language basics never change . All you do is add on to what we
know eg OOP /c++. We also have event driven GUI programs now instead of
bottom up approach like VB.
Precisely my argument! Computer language basics never change - so why focus
so much on pure syntax???
>NO programming is a creative ability and you need time to do this. This is
my whole argument is that being creative with programming requires knowledge
you get from programming . You cant learn to make a space invaders game by
doing DFD/pert charts and legal issues , you learn by knowing basics and
building upon them. Programming is time consuming and it takes patience and
practice.
OK. We agree that programming is a creative ability. To say that you can't
learn to program Space Invaders by doing DFDs / Pert charts and developing
an understanding or legal issues is also quite correct. However - you are
making a rather big assumption about our clientele. They don't all want to
be programmers. The IT industry is not made up entirely of programmers.
There are animators, web designers, systems analysts and project managers
just to name a few - none of whom necessarily have any knowledge of
programming. I would suggest that if you want to develop programming skills
amongst your clientele - you do it at Years 7-10 - design / write a course
that will attract students to undertake the subject and meet their needs.
VCE is the pointy end of the secondary school experience and we have a
responsibility to give our students a well rounded experience that will
allow them to undertake further study (or not). I must confess that I
cannot get my head around the notion that you think the legal and ethical
components of the course are irrelevant. What does the average 17 year old
understand about the law? In fact, the typical IT student has already
accepted a number of illegal practices and regards them as being 'OK'. How
as educators can we ignore this?
Andrew, take my comments in the spirit in which they were intended - debate
of all sorts is healthy!
BTW: Did you receive my email off-list? A reply as soon as possible would
be appreciated.
Cheers,
Adrian
Adrian Janson,
VITTA President
Director of ICT,
Melbourne High School,
Forrest Hill, South Yarra 3141 Australia.
Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au
Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of andrew barry
Sent: Thursday, 24 April 2008 9:19 PM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
As a teacher of physics - I have to say that the implications of the uses of
nuclear energy is actually part of the course - and is a very important part
of the course! Otherwise we are delivering content and not 'teaching'. In
effect, I feel that teaching without this reflection creates students (- in
fact, young people) without the skills to critically evaluate a topic. In
the nuclear physics topic, I teach students the basics of building a nuclear
bomb. Is this even ethical on it's own and in isolation?
does it make up 50% of the physics course? there is nothing wrong with this
but IT has much time devoted to theory when they could be learning skills.
So are you saying we should spend less time developing skills because we
need to know theory?
>Here is where your argument is flawed - especially in a subject like IT.
The skills that you are teaching are really a focus on process. The
software and programming languages will have evolved by the time that your
students enter the workforce - and they will then be relying upon the
processes behind the creation of the software. If you have focused purely
on skills - your students will not have the creative ability (and
programming IS a creative process and not a mechanical one).
I certainly dont agree. I haven't heard this argument for a while but
computer language basics never change . All you do is add on to what we
know eg OOP /c++. We also have event driven GUI programs now instead of
bottom up approach like VB.
NO programming is a creative ability and you need time to do this. This is
my whole argument is that being creative with programming requires knowledge
you get from programming . You cant learn to make a space invaders game by
doing DFD/pert charts and legal issues , you learn by knowing basics and
building upon them. Programming is time consuming and it takes patience and
practice.
Being creative is my goal and only programming skills can help. Design
theory comes in use here of course.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 9:29 AM, Adrian Janson
<janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
The numbers of students taking IT subjects needs to increase as we have a
demand for IT professionals in this country. Students are not undertaking
IT courses for a variety of reasons - but I don't think that one of them is
the course content - as students do not know much about this until they
start the actual course.
>Students can be aware of such issues in earlier years but not VCE. If I do
physics do i do a SAC on the social implications of devising nuclear
energy? or how splitting the atom cuses more harm than good or in yr12
biology to we write essays on global warming?
As a teacher of physics - I have to say that the implications of the uses of
nuclear energy is actually part of the course - and is a very important part
of the course! Otherwise we are delivering content and not 'teaching'. In
effect, I feel that teaching without this reflection creates students (- in
fact, young people) without the skills to critically evaluate a topic. In
the nuclear physics topic, I teach students the basics of building a nuclear
bomb. Is this even ethical on it's own and in isolation?
>This type of thinking with IT is harming it because students are confused
about what we think IT is. I used to teach at Tafe and Uni IT and It was
mostly hands on or if it was theory they just did a theory subject. You
don't get employed with weak skills and it is skills i want to teach and not
social issues in VCE IT. That is just my opinion and maybe others agree or
disagree.
Here is where your argument is flawed - especially in a subject like IT.
The skills that you are teaching are really a focus on process. The
software and programming languages will have evolved by the time that your
students enter the workforce - and they will then be relying upon the
processes behind the creation of the software. If you have focused purely
on skills - your students will not have the creative ability (and
programming IS a creative process and not a mechanical one).
In regards to the social issues of IT (and I take it you didn't catch the
excellent - but highly disturbing report on 60 minutes two weeks ago?) - I
feel it would socially irresponsible of us as educational leaders and the
ones towards which our students look for guidance - to simply ignore social
issues in this day and age.
Cheers,
Adrian
Adrian Janson,
VITTA President
Director of ICT,
Melbourne High School,
Forrest Hill, South Yarra 3141 Australia.
Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au
Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of andrew barry
Sent: Wednesday, 23 April 2008 7:58 PM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
Hi Adrian,
Well I can see forced change on the horizon by outside factors.
You shouldn't try to devise a plan to just bulk up numbers but the numbers
need to increase. IF people are voting with their feet and then we need to
listen.
>In maths you teach maths and in english you teach english. What maths sac
asks you to explain a legal consideration for the calculations or asks to
list any business considerations and document elaborate plans to reach an
answer?
>Here is where I must strongly disagree with the stance that I (think) you
are making. Our
students need to be aware of the legal issues and considerations involved in
this subject. Watch the news almost any night of the week for evidence of
this. If our SD students are to be the ICT leaders of tomorrow - then they
need to be properly equipped in this regard.
Students can be aware of such issues in earlier years but not VCE. If I do
physics do i do a SAC on the social implications of devising nuclear
energy? or how splitting the atom cuses more harm than good or in yr12
biology to we write essays on global warming?
This type of thinking with IT is harming it because students are confused
about what we think IT is. I used to teach at Tafe and Uni IT and It was
mostly hands on or if it was theory they just did a theory subject. You
don't get employed with weak skills and it is skills i want to teach and not
social issues in VCE IT. That is just my opinion and maybe others agree or
disagree.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Adrian Janson
<janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
>The issue here is how to improve SD enrollment and relevance. The
government is itching for change and even the adopt a schools policy sees IT
as a major area .
Agreed - however, I am not prepared to concede to a plan in which we design
curriculum merely to bulk up our numbers.
>Who is going to decide what we teach? business!
Business is a driver certainly - but the 'tail does not wag the dog'. How
does business know what it needs? Are the needs of business driven by the
'now' rather the 'future'?
>In maths you teach maths and in english you teach english. What maths sac
asks you to explain a legal consideration for the calculations or asks to
list any business considerations and document elaborate plans to reach an
answer?
Here is where I must strongly disagree with the stance that I (think) you
are making. Our students need to be aware of the legal issues and
considerations involved in this subject. Watch the news almost any night of
the week for evidence of this. If our SD students are to be the ICT leaders
of tomorrow - then they need to be properly equipped in this regard.
>IT subjects should just teach programming and some design theory.
There is a lot more than programming in IT *(did I just say that!!??!). The
SD course has a good balance between programming and design elements - and I
personally feel that that balance should be maintained.
Cheers,
Adrian
Adrian Janson,
VITTA President
Director of ICT,
Melbourne High School,
Forrest Hill, South Yarra 3141 Australia.
Phone: 03 9826 0711 International: +61 3 9826 0711
Fax: 03 9826 8767 International: +61 3 9826 8767
E-mail: janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au
Website: http://www.mhs.vic.edu.au
Blog: http://jansona.edublogs.org <http://jansona.edublogs.org/>
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of andrew barry
Sent: Wednesday, 23 April 2008 5:25 PM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
The issue here is how to improve SD enrollment and relevance. The government
is itching for change and even the adopt a schools policy sees IT as a major
area .
Who is going to decide what we teach? business!
In maths you teach maths and in english you teach english. What maths sac
asks you to explain a legal consideration for the calculations or asks to
list any business considerations and document elaborate plans to reach an
answer?
Maths teaches maths and IT should teach IT and not IT/business models. Does
a maths sac ask for any historical q's about where the formulas come from?
Is maths well rounded ?
IT subjects should just teach programming and some design theory.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:42 PM, Adrian Janson
<janson.adrian.a at edumail.vic.gov.au> wrote:
Hi everyone,
"Teachers are NOT curriculum materials developers."
I have to say that this statement goes against everything that I believe. I
have designed the Year 9 and Year 10 courses that I teach for IT - and I
revise and update them each year so that they are well suited to the cohort
that I teach. Who best understands the needs of our students? We each
do... and when it comes to VCE - each one of us is passionate about what
content is best suited to the future prospects of our VCE students and the
discipline of ICT as a whole. I for one and passionate about ICT and have
very definite views about what core skills ICT students need moving forward
- into a career path or their lives.
My 2c
Cheers,
Adrian
-----Original Message-----
From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
On Behalf Of Timmer-Arends
Sent: Tuesday, 22 April 2008 6:25 PM
To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
>> Teachers are NOT curriculum materials developers.
Stephen, I can't agree with this statement either, simply because I believe
that is one of the crafts of being a teacher; ie being able to develop
material which will help convey concepts and skills to students (and that
might include dipping into whatever resources are available out there)
I had thought from earlier posts on this topic that you originally meant
that teachers should not be developing 'content'; ie deciding what skills
and knowledge students should have by the end of a year. And I have some
sympathy for this view - but maybe it's not what you meant in the first
place???
Anyway, I have come to the view that SDs need to be far more explicit and
specific about what knowledge/skills students should have by the end of Year
12. It is the final year of secondary enducation and I cannot see any other
way of guaranteeing any sort of standard. Providing flexibility in a course
so that teachers can meet the needs of their students is one thing (and
important), but allowing teachers to decide the depth themselves is
problematic, and I suspect leads to the exam becoming the standard setter,
and I don't know that that is a good thing.
Regards
Robert T-A
Brighton SC
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark Kelly" <kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au>
To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
<sofdev at edulists.com.au>
Sent: Tuesday, April 22, 2008 1:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiarylinks
(MarkKelly)
>
> Stephen Digby wrote:
>> Here here !!!
>> I say again.....
>>
>
> Oooh - I think we are. But we often rely on textbook writers to save us
> doing it ourselves. We still have to choose which materials we use.
>
>> It is the curriculum design authorities responsibility to provide
>> classroom teaching materials to teachers (preferably with a range of
>> options !).
>
> Is it? This would come as a surprise to most curriculum design
> authorities - except the ones in China, perhaps. If they DID provide
> anything more than sample teaching materials, I would be deeply worried
> about government interference.
>
>> It is teachers responsibility to understand the content and their
>> students so that they can use these materials to plan, prep, teach,
>> correct, and communicate
>> Inevitably teachers will tweak for their own class and discover
>> possibilities, alternatives, improvements.
>> The second responsibility of the curriculum design authority should be to
>> systematically collect and utilise this field testing to improve the
>> curriculum design.
>> Two examples to show how simple these processes are:
>> - give the curriculum design to all publishers and ask for draft
>> responses in terms of classroom material support. Choose a single
>> publisher as the recommended support material for a definite period e.g
>> 3 years so that they have the chance to profit from their recommended
>> status.
>
> I can already hear the screaming about this one. One vital feature of
> education is the freedom to use a variety of suitable resources at the
> discretion of the student and teacher.
> Choosing a "preferred" publisher would cause sales of other 'unapproved'
> texts to evaporate, and considering the already-precarious IT textbook
> sales figures most other publishers would not bother releasing a text at
> all.
>
> This would, in effect, result in a single textbook and stifle the richness
> of available opinion and pedagogical style. Publishers would be in
> revolt - quite justifiably.
>
> And how will the 'approved' text be chosen? Do you expect VCAA to choose
> a publisher on the basis of a proposal and a sample chapter from
> publishers? For that would be the only way it could work: VCAA would have
> no finished textbook to base its judgement on because NO publisher is
> going to pay authors to create a full text and submit it in the hope of
> being picked. It just would not happen!
>
> And if the preferred text was later found to be flawed in some way, the
> VCAA would be partially culpable. I don't think they want such problems
> being beaten to death on the nightly current affairs shows.
>
> The only 'DEECD preferred' suppliers are, and should remain to be, related
> to the supply of software, hardware and leasing services. They must not
> extend to educational resources. If the VCAA started down this path they
> would be in a world of trouble. I think this is why they are so chary
> about recommending any resources apart from their own - the exception
> being the last 2 pages of the study design.
>
>
>> Of course, a recommendation is not a compulsion, and schools may choose
>> not to use the recommended resources. The likelihood that they be chosen
>> again will of course depend on the ongoing feedback re. the quality of
>> their resources and their continued support through the 3 years.
>> - require all teachers in all govt schools to provide copies of their sac
>> tasks with a sample answer from the teacher. (No cost. No copyright as
>> the work is owned by the government). Select the best 50 and publish on
>> line (No Cost) as exemplars to assist teachers in Year 2.
>
> I bet VCAA is quite busy enough assessing the few tasks they call for
> during subject auditing. If every SAC had to be independently judged, the
> VCAA would either collapse under the weight, or grow to rival the size of
> the public service sector of Bulgaria. :-)
>> etc etc etc
>
> But thanks for the interesting post, Stephen. I'm sure it will stimulate
> discussion.
>> ====================================================
>> Stephen Digby, Learning Technology Manager
>> mailto: digby.stephen.p at edumail.vic.gov.au
>> <mailto:digby.stephen.p at edumail.vic.gov.au> Cheltenham Secondary College
>> www.cheltsec.vic.edu.au <http://www.cheltsec.vic.edu.au/>
>> Ph: 613 955 55 955 Fx: 9555 8617 Mb: 0431-701-028
>> ====================================================
>> The other day somebody stole everything in my apartment and replaced it
>> with an exact replica... When my roommate came home I said, "Roommate,
>> someone stole everything in our apartment and replaced it with an exact
>> replica." He looked at me and said, "Do I know you?" Steven Wright
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au
>> [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au] *On Behalf Of *Russell Quinn
>> *Sent:* Monday, 21 April 2008 10:33 AM
>> *To:* sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> *Subject:* [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiary
>> links (MarkKelly)
>>
>> Hi again,
>> I am really sorry to be so negative all of the time but
>> I find
>> this an appalling situation and I cannot stay silent.
>> What I have been constantly hearing through the mail
>> is that we have SD teachers who don't know
>> what to teach and don't know why they are teaching it.
>> Rest assured, it is not the teaching staff I hold to account.
>> Consider all of the wasted time, sleep and worry by teaching
>> staff who should be devoting their time and energy into how to
>> teach it, preparing great materials and assessing the students work.
>> Instead we have people running around in circles trying to work
>> out what to do.
>> No wonder people are not keen to write their own SAC's.
>> Apparently the VCAA is quite happy with the status quo. I look
>> forward to making a positive contribution soon.
>> Russell Quinn
>> Mailto: qn at boxhillhs.vic.edu.au <mailto:qn at boxhillhs.vic.edu.au>
>>
>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* sofdev-request at edulists.com.au
>> *Sent:* Fri 18/04/2008 10:06 PM
>> *To:* sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> *Subject:* sofdev Digest, Vol 38, Issue 26
>>
>> Send sofdev mailing list submissions to
>> sofdev at edulists.com.au
>>
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/sofdev
>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> sofdev-request at edulists.com.au
>>
>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>> sofdev-owner at edulists.com.au
>>
>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> than "Re: Contents of sofdev digest..."
>>
>>
>> Today's Topics:
>>
>> 1. Re: Re: Industry practice - tertiary links (Mark Kelly)
>> 2. RE: Re: Industry practice - tertiary links (Meadows, Roslyn M)
>>
>>
>>
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:40:09 +1000
>> From: Mark Kelly <kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au>
>> Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Industry practice - tertiary links
>> To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
>> <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> Message-ID: <48088899.8050808 at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>>
>> Maybe the first thing to do is to decide what VCE SD is for.
>>
>> What is it meant to achieve?
>>
>> Is it meant to be a preparation for tertiary study?
>> Is it meant to be a skills-based preparation for work?
>> Is it meant to be a fun 12 months until uni begins?
>> Is it meant to give hope to kids who are unqualified for any other
>> VCE
>> subject?
>>
>> I'm sure the VCAA has a good answer to this. It would be interesting
>> to
>> hear it. Then, maybe, we can start re-defining SD - and ITA.
>>
>> That's assuming VCE IT NEEDS to be redefined...
>>
>> Which is maybe a good place for the review of the VCE IT Study Design
>> to
>> begin...
>>
>> And when it does, Paula, I hope it's virtual rather than with
>> meetings
>> in the city. I'd much rather sit at home with a glass of Cab Sav and
>> take time to ponder the intricacies of an argument, do research, and
>> fast-forward through the boring people - rather than commute to the
>> big
>> smoke and sit with a dozen passionate people all determined to get a
>> word in edgewise within an hour so no-one's argument can get fully
>> thought-out, crafted and developed in its entirety.
>>
>> Oooh! Saint Kilda's winning. Must go...
>>
>> Russell Quinn wrote:
>> > The first thing would be inclined to do is throw out all of the
>> > networking -
>> > which is totally irrelevant to software development (except to a
>> small and
>> > select few specialists) and replace it with actual software
>> development.
>> >
>> > I also think the obsession with the business models should be
>> downplayed,
>> > and the scenario's broadened to something far more interesting.
>> After
>> > all, business
>> > is just one of the reasons for writing software, and not a very
>> > interesting one at that.
>> >
>> > It appears that students are voting with their feet, and I can see
>> their
>> > point.
>> > The only way to plug the leak is to make the courses software based
>> and
>> > interesting.
>> >
>> > Russell Quinn
>> >
>> > Mailto: qn at boxhillhs.vic.edu.au <mailto:qn at boxhillhs.vic.edu.au>
>> >
>> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > *From:* sofdev-request at edulists.com.au
>> > *Sent:* Fri 18/04/2008 12:00 PM
>> > *To:* sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> > *Subject:* sofdev Digest, Vol 38, Issue 24
>> >
>> > Send sofdev mailing list submissions to
>> > sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> >
>> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>> > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/sofdev
>> > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>> > sofdev-request at edulists.com.au
>> >
>> > You can reach the person managing the list at
>> > sofdev-owner at edulists.com.au
>> >
>> > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>> > than "Re: Contents of sofdev digest..."
>> >
>> >
>> > Today's Topics:
>> >
>> > 1. Re: Industry practice - tertiary links (Steven Bird)
>> > 2. RE: Industry practice - tertiary links (Selina Dennis)
>> > 3. Re: Industry practice - tertiary links (Mark Kelly)
>> >
>> >
>> >
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 1
>> > Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 07:00:37 +1000
>> > From: "Steven Bird" <sb at csse.unimelb.edu.au>
>> > Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Industry practice - tertiary links
>> > To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
>> > <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> > Message-ID:
>> > <97e4e62e0804171400q6bf98a9fq3acd059906fe980 at mail.gmail.com>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Timmer-Arends
>> <timmer at melbpc.org.au> wrote:
>> >> I have to say that this discussion is heading to Comp Sci circa
>> 1990 (which
>> >> is not necessarily a bad thing)
>> >
>> > Well, CS an obvious source of theory for an IT subject. The theory
>> on
>> > which VCE Physics and Chemistry is based is older still, but no-one
>> > considers that dated.
>> >
>> >> but it seems to me that a couple of
>> >> questions need to be answered first:
>> >> 1. what do we want students to get out of a technically-oriented
>> Y12 IT course?
>> >> 2. is the course primarily intended to prepare students for
>> teritary, work, or both?
>> >
>> > Another conceivable answer to q2 is that it is foundational study,
>> > preparing students for whatever they choose to do in future, even
>> if
>> > it involves no formal IT study or employment.
>> >
>> > For the students continuing from VCE Software Development to a
>> degree
>> > in Software Engineering, we would prefer students to have a solid
>> > grounding in algorithmic problem solving and the associated
>> > programming skills. (The SDLC follows naturally once they're ready
>> to
>> > scale up.)
>> >
>> > -Steven
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 2
>> > Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:09:16 +1000
>> > From: "Selina Dennis" <selina at dennis.net.au>
>> > Subject: RE: [Year 12 SofDev] Industry practice - tertiary links
>> > To: "'Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List'"
>> > <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> > Message-ID: <003801c8a0d7$aed8dd80$0c8a9880$@net.au>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>> >
>> > I am both a Year 12 Software Development teacher and a Computer
>> Science
>> > graduate - I completed my CS degree late in life, circa 2005 - and
>> as
>> > someone who has worked in the IT industry since 1996, I must say
>> that I
>> > concur with Steven Bird's view that there is a chasm between
>> secondary
>> > school teaching of IT and tertiary teaching of IT. For students in
>> Year 12,
>> > the key components of software development that they will "get the
>> most out
>> > of", is the theory behind algorithms, problem solving, and also the
>> > development of their basic thinking skills. I've been teaching
>> PHP/mySQL to
>> > my students this year and while most have come into the course
>> having
>> > completed Year 10 and 11 IT, they still did not have a basic
>> understanding
>> > of fundamental programming concepts at the start of the year.
>> >
>> > Perhaps this is more of a "theological" discussion on how to teach
>> > programming to teenagers, but it's also relevant to note that much
>> of the
>> > theory that is being taught in Year 12 is rarely used or developed
>> in either
>> > tertiary study or in industry. One such example is diagrams - N-S
>> Diagrams,
>> > DFDs, etc have long been superseded by UML, both at a university
>> level and
>> > in industry - as an aside, I had never heard of NS diagrams until I
>> had to
>> > teach it in IPM, and I had worked with ISO-9000 compliant
>> corporations
>> > developing major software products.
>> >
>> > Similarly, the SDLC, as Steven has raised, is most useful for
>> large-scale
>> > projects. Students will rarely experience the benefit, nor the
>> relevance, of
>> > the SDLC, in a secondary school curriculum. More useful theory
>> would be a
>> > more focused look at iterative design, extreme programming (or any
>> other
>> > kind of agile software development), etc, and move away from the
>> excessive
>> > documentation requirements that the SDLC brings to the table.
>> >
>> > As a teacher, I would prefer to bring in key aspects of the SDLC
>> without
>> > having to formally teach every part of it. For example, a
>> concentration on
>> > testing and debugging of software - this is a twofold benefit, as
>> it teaches
>> > students to be aware of how they choose to implement functionality,
>> and also
>> > develops their analytical and observational skills when they are
>> debugging
>> > an error. Bringing in Use Case Diagrams instead of DFDs would be
>> fantastic,
>> > also, as it conceptually allows a student to think through what
>> they are
>> > providing in their system before they develop it.
>> >
>> > In general, however, I have to say I am currently much happier with
>> the core
>> > content of the Software Development course than I was with the IT:
>> > Applications course, but I still believe that it is, at its core,
>> dated and
>> > at times irrelevant. In a perfect world, we would be teaching our
>> students
>> > "good practice" programming while also preparing them for a future
>> path in
>> > IT if they so choose - both at the tertiary level and in industry.
>> >
>> > </soapbox>
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Selina Dennis
>> > Strathmore Secondary College
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au
>> [mailto:sofdev-bounces at edulists.com.au]
>> > On Behalf Of Steven Bird
>> > Sent: Friday, April 18, 2008 7:01 AM
>> > To: Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List
>> > Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Industry practice - tertiary links
>> >
>> > On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Timmer-Arends
>> <timmer at melbpc.org.au> wrote:
>> >> I have to say that this discussion is heading to Comp Sci circa
>> 1990
>> > (which
>> >> is not necessarily a bad thing)
>> >
>> > Well, CS an obvious source of theory for an IT subject. The theory
>> on
>> > which VCE Physics and Chemistry is based is older still, but no-one
>> > considers that dated.
>> >
>> >> but it seems to me that a couple of
>> >> questions need to be answered first:
>> >> 1. what do we want students to get out of a technically-oriented
>> Y12 IT
>> > course?
>> >> 2. is the course primarily intended to prepare students for
>> teritary,
>> > work, or both?
>> >
>> > Another conceivable answer to q2 is that it is foundational study,
>> > preparing students for whatever they choose to do in future, even
>> if
>> > it involves no formal IT study or employment.
>> >
>> > For the students continuing from VCE Software Development to a
>> degree
>> > in Software Engineering, we would prefer students to have a solid
>> > grounding in algorithmic problem solving and the associated
>> > programming skills. (The SDLC follows naturally once they're ready
>> to
>> > scale up.)
>> >
>> > -Steven
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > http://www.edulists.com.au
>> > IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> > http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
>> Authority
>> > and
>> >
>> ttp://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html -
>> VITTA
>> > Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > Message: 3
>> > Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 08:20:04 +1000
>> > From: Mark Kelly <kel at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au>
>> > Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Industry practice - tertiary links
>> > To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
>> > <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> > Message-ID: <4807CD14.8060002 at mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au>
>> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>> >
>> > Yes - and we have to position VCE against VET, which is the more
>> > practical, work-oriented stream.
>> >
>> > Frankly, I can't see SD being directly useful in providing students
>> with
>> > workplace skills. It's simply not deep enough in programming
>> skills -
>> > and it could never be in the time available. And by the time the
>> kids
>> > took the tram from school to their first job, the entire IT
>> industry
>> > would have had three technological revolutions in the meantime, so
>> any
>> > language they learned would have been superseded.
>> >
>> > I see SD as giving students a taste of the mindset of software
>> > development, to be developed later at uni or TAFE.
>> >
>> > 2.2c worth, and falling against the Yen.
>> >
>> > Timmer-Arends wrote:
>> >> I have to say that this discussion is heading to Comp Sci circa
>> 1990 (which
>> >> is not necessarily a bad thing) but it seems to me that a couple
>> of
>> >> questions need to be answered first:
>> >> 1. what do we want students to get out of a technically-oriented
>> Y12 IT
>> >> course?
>> >> 2. is the course primarily intended to prepare students for
>> teritary,
>> >> work, or both?
>> >>
>> >> Regards
>> >> Robert T-A
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steven Bird"
>> <sb at csse.unimelb.edu.au>
>> >> To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
>> >> <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> >> Sent: Thursday, April 17, 2008 10:41 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: [Year 12 SofDev] Industry practice - tertiary links
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>> [Adrian -- thanks for picking a more appropriate subject line now
>> that
>> >>> discussion has moved away from data flow diagrams.]
>> >>>
>> >>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2008 at 7:28 PM, andrew barry
>> <jagguy999 at gmail.com>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>>> I prefer to just teach an IT subject which is just programming
>> and some
>> >>>> programming design eg psuedo code.
>> >>>
>> >>> I agree. Students should learn how to walk before learning how
>> to
>> >>> run, i.e. they should be competent with "programming
>> in-the-small"
>> >>> before they spend much time on "programming in-the-large" (incl
>> SDLC).
>> >>>
>> >>>> Including so much theory doesn't get any student excited about
>> learning
>> >>>> IT
>> >>>> at Uni. After all we are trying to promote IT beyond yr12 are we
>> not?
>> >>>> Are
>> >>>> we
>> >>>> not trying to get more people to do it?
>> >>>
>> >>> I agree with Adrian that rigour is important, and this cuts
>> across
>> >>> analysis, design, implementation, documentation, etc. The SDLC
>> is one
>> >>> source of theory but I question its suitability at this level.
>> It's
>> >>> intended for software engineering projects where you have to
>> manage
>> >>> whole teams of developers, client relationships, project
>> deliverables,
>> >>> etc. When students aren't already experienced at small-scale
>> >>> programming the emphasis often falls on a rather heavy document
>> >>> process, which has to be one of the least exciting aspects of
>> software
>> >>> development.
>> >>>
>> >>> Another issue I have with the emphasis on SDLC as a major source
>> of
>> >>> theoretical content is that it focusses too much on the software
>> >>> development process. Of course that's entirely appropriate given
>> the
>> >>> title of the subject, but there's some other areas of computing
>> theory
>> >>> that would be useful and accessible at this level, including
>> >>> algorithmic problem solving and the limits of computing. Here's
>> a
>> >>> couple of introductory books that cover these topics in a
>> >>> non-mathematical yet rigorous and intellectually stimulating way:
>> >>>
>> >>> Algorithmics: The Spirit of Computing (3rd Ed, David Harel,
>> Addison
>> >>> Wesley, 2004)
>> >>>
>> >>> Computers Ltd: What They Really Can't Do (David Harel, Oxford
>> >>> University Press, 2000)
>> >>>
>> >>> -Steven Bird
>> >>> http://www.csse.unimelb.edu.au/~sb/
<http://www.csse.unimelb.edu.au/%7Esb/>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> http://www.edulists.com.au
>> >>> IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> >>> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment
>> >>> Authority
>> >>> and
>> >>>
>> http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html -
>> >>> VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mark Kelly
>> > Manager - Information Systems
>> > McKinnon Secondary College
>> > McKinnon Rd McKinnon 3204, Victoria, Australia
>> > Direct line / Voicemail: 8520 9085
>> > School Phone +613 8520 9000
>> > School Fax +613 95789253
>> > kel AT mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
>> >
>> > Webmaster - http://www.mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
>> > IT Lecture notes: http://vceit.com
>> > Moderator: IT Applications Mailing List
>> >
>> > A conclusion is the place where you got sick of thinking.
>> > If you Declare War - is it integer or boolean?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > sofdev mailing list
>> > sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> > http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/sofdev
>> >
>> >
>> > End of sofdev Digest, Vol 38, Issue 24
>> > **************************************
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au> IT Software
>> > Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> > http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> > <http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> > -
>> > Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
>> > http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
>> > Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
>> >
>> >
>> >
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > No virus found in this incoming message.
>> > Checked by AVG.
>> > Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.13/1375 - Release Date:
>> 12/04/2008 11:32 AM
>>
>> --
>> Mark Kelly
>> Manager - Information Systems
>> McKinnon Secondary College
>> kel AT mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
>> McKinnon Rd, McKinnon 3204, Victoria, Australia
>> Direct line / Voicemail: 8520 9085 Fax +613 9578 9253
>>
>> Webmaster - http://www.mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
>> IT Lecture notes: http://vceit.com
>> Moderator: IT Applications Mailing List
>>
>> Only those who swim against the current know the current is there.
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> Message: 2
>> Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 22:04:52 +1000
>> From: "Meadows, Roslyn M" <Meadows.Roslyn.M at edumail.vic.gov.au>
>> Subject: RE: [Year 12 SofDev] Re: Industry practice - tertiary links
>> To: "Year 12 Software Development Teachers' Mailing List"
>> <sofdev at edulists.com.au>
>> Message-ID:
>>
>> <93564D1B69FCEC47BB2D847F7B0888DA0187937C at EDUSM03.education.vic.gov.au>
>>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>
>> Skipped content of type multipart/alternative-------------- next
>> part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> Type: image/jpeg
>> Size: 1381 bytes
>> Desc: image001.jpg
>> Url :
>>
http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20080418/0b541aa2/at
tachment.jpe
>> -------------- next part --------------
>> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
>> Name: not available
>> Type: image/jpeg
>> Size: 1316 bytes
>> Desc: image002.jpg
>> Url :
>>
http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20080418/0b541aa2/at
<http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20080418/0b541aa2/a
ttachment-0001.jpe>
tachment-0001.jpe
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sofdev mailing list
>> sofdev at edulists.com.au
>> http://www.edulists.com.au/mailman/listinfo/sofdev
>>
>>
>> End of sofdev Digest, Vol 38, Issue 26
>> **************************************
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au>IT Software
>> Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> <http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> > - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
>> http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au>- VITTA Victorian
>> Information Technology Teachers Association Inc *Important - *This
>> email and any attachments may be confidential. If received in error,
>> please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using
>> attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss,
>> damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or
>> not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files
>> our liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
>> representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
>> and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early
>> Childhood Development.
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au> IT Software
>> Development Mailing List kindly supported by
>> http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
>> <http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html > -
>> Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
>> http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
>> Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>> Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1387 -
>> Release Date: 19/04/2008 11:31 AM
>
> --
> Mark Kelly
> Manager - Information Systems
> McKinnon Secondary College
> kel AT mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
> McKinnon Rd, McKinnon 3204, Victoria, Australia
> Direct line / Voicemail: 8520 9085 Fax +613 9578 9253
>
> Webmaster - http://www.mckinnonsc.vic.edu.au
> IT Lecture notes: http://vceit.com
> Moderator: IT Applications Mailing List
>
> Only those who swim against the current know the current is there.
> _______________________________________________
> http://www.edulists.com.au
> IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
> http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
> and
> http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html -
> VITTA Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au
IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
and
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html - VITTA
Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au
IT Software Development Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vcaa.vic.edu.au - Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority
and
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html - VITTA
Victorian Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au> IT Software
Development Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
<http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html%20%20>
- Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received
in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using
attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss,
damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or
not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our
liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
Development.
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au> IT Software
Development Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html -
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au IT Software Development Mailing List kindly
supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
<http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html%20%20>
- Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
Important - This email and any attachments may be confidential. If received
in error, please contact us and delete all copies. Before opening or using
attachments check them for viruses and defects. Regardless of any loss,
damage or consequence, whether caused by the negligence of the sender or
not, resulting directly or indirectly from the use of any attached files our
liability is limited to resupplying any affected attachments. Any
representations or opinions expressed are those of the individual sender,
and not necessarily those of the Department of Education and Early Childhood
Development.
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au IT Software Development Mailing List kindly
supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html -
Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au IT Software Development Mailing List kindly
supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
<http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html%20%20>
- Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au IT Software Development Mailing List kindly
supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
<http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html%20%20>
- Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
_____
Find out: SEEK Salary Centre Are you paid what you're worth?
<http://a.ninemsn.com.au/b.aspx?URL=http%3A%2F%2Fninemsn%2Eseek%2Ecom%2Eau%2
Fcareer%2Dresources%2Fsalary%2Dcentre%2F%3Ftracking%3Dsk%3Ahet%3Asc%3Anine%3
A0%3Ahot%3Atext&_t=764565661&_r=OCT07_endtext_salary&_m=EXT>
_______________________________________________
http://www.edulists.com.au <http://www.edulists.com.au> IT Software
Development Mailing List kindly supported by
http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html
<http://www.vitta.org.au/vce/studies/infotech/softwaredevel3-4.html%20%20>
- Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority and
http://www.vitta.org.au <http://www.vitta.org.au> - VITTA Victorian
Information Technology Teachers Association Inc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.edulists.com.au/pipermail/sofdev/attachments/20080425/e88c4083/attachment-0001.html
More information about the sofdev
mailing list