Pete ([info]pjc50) wrote,
@ 2009-07-01 15:20:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
BBC electronics fail
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8128133.stm shows some multiple choice questions on GCSE design & technology. Question 4 the answer is given as "inverter", to which the BBC have helpfully added the explanation "which is an electrical device that converts direct current (DC) to alternating current (AC)." Unfortunately that's the wrong sort of inverter! Lesson: Google is not a substitute for knowing the answer because terms may be ambiguous.

My thoughts on the other questions:
1) I've always wondered that myself but never bothered to find out
2) Shouldn't you reword this as "which of the following 5 items does not ..."?
3) Transistor. Got one!
4) see above
5) Can't remember. The colour code has just enough items to be fiddly to learn and like the times tables you don't really need to know it either, there's always another way to the answer.
6) see below
7) Never heard of it.

6) is the sort of question that really put me off GCSE CDT. What is this question really trying to discover? Is it the recall of some physical fact that may be useful? Is it checking that you've absorbed the official national curriculum approved process of thought for design? Not even that - it's asking about some trivial classification of research methods (no doubt from the list of allowed thought modes compiled in Whitehall).

I remember that we weren't allowed to come up with designs based on our judgement and then make an ex post facto explanation of why it was a good idea; there was a process to be followed. Very alienating.



(18 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]like_a_swallow
2009-07-01 03:26 pm UTC (link)
I got 6 wrong, too, but I got the others. 6 was a bit of a "don't know, don't care" for me.

The resistor colour code is easy because there's a pattern. Imagine going up in a vaguely monochrome way from hell to the heaven: black (hellish) -> brown (soily) -> grey (skyey) -> white (heavenly), only in between is the earth, with a rainbow red, orange, ... blue, violet.

I didn't notice the inverter explanation, very silly! The BBC seems largely devoid of people who care much about science/engineering. It is constantly doing things like this: confusing viruses and bacteria, DNA and RNA, power and energy, etc. It's better than the newspapers, though, and it does at least separate science from technology. So it's kind of sad that it's still so rubbish.

People say that when you work in an area then you realise how rubbish the specialist supplements of that area are, so I try to ignore them all now. I like to think they can do news of foreign affairs, wars and rumours of wars, etc, because I've no other source of info, but I suspect that's as poor, :(.

(Reply to this)


[info]angoel
2009-07-01 03:37 pm UTC (link)
Six you could guess, based on interviews and questionnaires obviously being first hand. I suspect it's trying to discover whether people appreciate the difference between finding out from people and googling for stuff which people have already done, and it's relatively hard to get questions for that which are sensible.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]like_a_swallow
2009-07-01 03:40 pm UTC (link)
Ah, I see. I was trying to call those ones were secondary because they're only people reporting what they do, which is vulnerable to all kinds of reporting skew, sampling error, lying, cheating, etc.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]cartesiandaemon
2009-07-01 08:31 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. Primary/secondary never seemed as objective in real life as it was when the concept was first explained. I was nearly there, but agree with other people's complaints.

(It may be a fine question, assuming that knowing the answer isn't supposed to correlate with being a practicing professional physical scientist.)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]cartesiandaemon
2009-07-01 08:29 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. I deduced from context that interviews and questionnaires were first hand, so I really should have been able to induct the right answer, but all the others apparently contained technical terms I wasn't familiar with, so I didn't really put the effort in to working it out.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]rochvelleth
2009-07-01 03:47 pm UTC (link)
1) Got it, yay (slight guess).
2) Also got it (why isn't this biology though?).
3) Got it.
4) Cheated and got it from your answer, but knew it wasn't one of the others.
5) Got it (random guess).
6) Didn't get it (oh, so that's what they mean by image board - and I share your frustration with the question).
7) Didn't get it (well, it very much depends what you want from your jeans anyway, really!).

I did CDT up to third year but not for GCSE. Up to then, I never came across anything so restricted as these questions suggest the curriculum must be (but it was an independent school, so we probably weren't following the National Curriculum). So much for independent thought, etc.

(Reply to this)


[info]antinomy
2009-07-01 03:49 pm UTC (link)
Oh, good, I thought it was just me!

(Reply to this)


[info]sonicdrift
2009-07-01 04:38 pm UTC (link)
I mainly remember the curriculum being changed repeatedly, and having to come up with ideas that were clearly stupid to put on your 'design sheets' to show you gradually reaching the final design, even if the solution was obvious or you'd been told what to use anyway. Utterly Pointless. Were you the year it was compulsory too?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]cartesiandaemon
2009-07-01 08:49 pm UTC (link)
Yeah. I can see where it comes from -- when I met things in life I actually DID have to work things out with trial and error it came as quite a shock, because before that everything had been blindingly obvious from the beginning. But it needs some sort of "OK, so, in real life we do these SORTS of things to arrive at a solution" or "We've only got time to try one approved solution, but write down the two best alternatives you can think of, and if we were a real research lab we'd compare them" to motivate the idea.

Without that, it becomes a game of "agh, 4*2=8 is so ingrained I find it impossible to imagine guessing several values and then counting on my fingers to find out"... I became so used to retrofitting things into required boxes I was unable to think at first when I DID get opportunities...

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]sonicdrift
2009-07-02 05:16 pm UTC (link)
Er, no. It was utterly pointless and we were only made to do it so we could ticky box level n "displays evidence of weighing pros and cons" or alike, because you had to ticky box every level, rather than just level 9-10. Unfortuately there wasn't a box for "displays evidence of original thought"

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]cartesiandaemon
2009-07-01 08:36 pm UTC (link)
I was very pleased to see that I got them all (apart from 6), even the resistor colour one. I couldn't remember the exact resistor colour order, but I remembered it was rainbow with dark and light colours on each end, and the options given confirmed that brown=1, black=0.

Q2 was a bit wishy-washy. I guessed correctly in the end because the four options given were obviously the ones that made sense in context, in that "time" and "darkness" are sort of incoherent answers. But it felt strange saying "time" was a WRONG answer, since if you ask "does time affect the bacterial growth", the answer is "duh, exponentially!"

I got the jeans question from context. I don't know anything about the material or the drape, but IME jeans are not nonabsorbant, and I couldn't imagine why being rough would be desirable.

(Reply to this)


[info]like_a_swallow
2009-07-01 11:21 pm UTC (link)
Happy Birthday!

(Reply to this)


[info]vyvyan
2009-07-01 11:31 pm UTC (link)
1) Didn't know; guessed wrong.
2) More or less knew; got right.
3) As 2.
4) Didn't know; guessed wrong.
5) Didn't know; guessed right.
6) Didn't know; worked out by elimination.
7) Didn't know; worked out sensible-sounding answer which was wrong :-)

Their previous GCSE quizzes this year are similarly silly, with the exception of the maths one, which could be worked out completely from the information given (without assuming arbitrary memorized data).

(Reply to this)


[info]davefish
2009-07-02 07:12 am UTC (link)
Some random bits and pieces in there. 5 got me, I do quite a bit of work with electronics, but usually stuff is surface mounted, and codes aren't useful.

I agree with you on 6. I'd no idea what an image board was.

(Reply to this)

And on a completely unrelated note...
[info]weegoddess
2009-07-02 08:06 am UTC (link)
::points to the calendar and squees::

Have a fabulous, fabulous day!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: And on a completely unrelated note...
[info]pjc50
2009-07-02 04:24 pm UTC (link)
Thanks :D

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]beckyc
2009-07-02 05:43 pm UTC (link)
Happy birthday!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]pjc50
2009-07-04 10:09 am UTC (link)
Thankyou :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(18 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…