<div dir="ltr">[Apologies for the crossposts, but this is relevant (but maybe not interesting) to all 3 lists.]<div><br></div><div>Hi, unwashed masses,</div><div><br></div><div>I've just noticed an interesting change in the new study design. </div><div><br></div><div>In the current study design there is a rather awkward and messy prescription of which data types are relevant to each unit of study:<br clear="all"><div><br></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">yr 11: integer, floating point, character, string<br></font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">ITA: text (string), number, date/time, Boolean (true/false)</font></div><div><font face="monospace, monospace">SD: integer, floating point, Boolean, character, string</font></div><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Consolas">
<div><span style="font-size:10.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:Consolas"><br></span></div></span>In the new study design there is no mandated list of data types for each area of study; there is just the glossary entry:</div><div><br></div><div>"<i>Data types are the particular forms that an item of data can take including numeric, character and Boolean, and are characterised by the kind of operations that can be performed on it. </i></div><div><i>Depending on the software being used, these fundamental types can be divided into more specific types, for example integer and floating point are numeric</i><div><i>types. </i></div><div><i>More sophisticated types can be derived from them, for example a string of</i></div><div><i>characters or a date type and their names may vary, such as text data type versus string data type.</i>"</div><div><br></div><div>It's refreshing to remove yet one more more fiddly and artificial distinction that had to be memorised when teaching different units. </div><div><br></div><div>It's akin to recent sensible study design innovations such as standardising the 3 different versions of the SDLC into a common PSM.</div><div>And, in the new design, changing 'ease of use' from an efficiency criterion to an effectiveness criterion, where it belongs.</div><div><br></div><div>And there have been other welcome changes such as </div><div>- fixing the number of marks in the SD exam at 100</div><div>- expecting SD kids to write pseudocode.</div><div><br></div><div>Well, *I* thought it was interesting. Hmphh.<br></div><div><br></div><div>Cheers</div><div>Mark</div><div><br></div>
-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div><i><br></i></div><div><span style="font-size:12.6666669845581px"><i>I married an amplifier, but only because I hated to turn it down.</i></span><br></div><div><br></div><div>Mark Kelly</div><div><img src="https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZV04xVUpCaVJTbHc&revid=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZaG9iYzlkRTE2YkVkS2x0Mk4vM1Fja3BYdFYwPQ"><br></div><div><img src="https://docs.google.com/uc?export=download&id=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZN1ZEdkJ3aHdLUjA&revid=0B4DRNqu3Y8sZcENFZ21BMmczdy9FRzcvSmgrQ2w3d2M4Nkl3PQ"><br></div><div><a href="http://vceit.com" target="_blank">http://vceit.com</a></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div></div>