Technical Question 3

Table 5.14 Percentage distribution of students of different school types for each score of Q3 (Integrate) of Technical PA

Score Primary (%) Secondary (%) Special (%) IL Competence

Level

0.00 63.93 63.93 33.51 33.51 45.45 45.45 Novice

0.50 7.68 4.47 13.64

1.00 8.12 9.69 9.09

1.50 5.02 11.55 4.55

2.00 5.12

25.94

9.58

35.29

9.09

36.37 Basic

2.50 3.36 7.18 0.00

3.00 2.93 8.25 9.09

3.50 1.55 5.51 0.00

4.00 1.29

9.13

4.30

25.24

4.55

13.64 Proficient

4.50 0.46 2.25 0.00

5.00 0.55 3.09 4.55

5.50 0.00 0.44 0.00

6.00 0.00

1.01

0.16

5.94

0.00

4.55 Advanced

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00

Mean 0.62 1.57 1.09

(SD) (1.06) (1.51) (1.48)

N 830 823 22

N.B. - N listed in the table is the unweighted number of students.

- “Score (%)”, “Mean Score” and “SD” of both primary and secondary schools are weighted statistics.

- Figures may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

For primary school students, this task was poorly done. The mean score was 0.62 and the standard deviation was 1.06. There were 53.21% of the students who did not reach the question or showed no response. Including those “not-reached” and “non-response” students, 63.93% of the students got 0 mark in this task. It was observed that quite a number of the students spent too much time in Q2 and therefore could not reach Q3. Besides, 25.94% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks and attained the basic level. 10.14% of the students got 2.5 to 5 marks and reached at least the proficient level in this task.

For secondary school students, their performance in this task was not good. The mean score was 1.57, which implied that students could reach the basic level on average. There were 30.24% of the students who either did not reach the question or made no response to this question. Including those

“not-reached” and “non-response” students, 33.51% of the students got no mark in this task.

Therefore, only 3.27% of the students who had done this task got 0 mark. The majority of the score distribution was at the basic level. 35.29% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks. Besides, 25.24% of the students got 2.5 to 4 marks and 5.94% of the students got 4.5 to 6 marks. In other words, over 30% of the students could meet at least the proficient level.

For special school students, the task was poorly performed but slightly better than that of the primary school students. The mean score was 1.09 and the standard deviation was 1.48. There were 31.82% of the students who did not reach the question or showed no response. Including those

“not-reached” and “non-response” students, 45.45% of the students got 0 mark. The majority of the score distribution was at the basic level. 36.37% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks. Besides, 13.64% of the students got 2.5 to 4 marks whereas 4.55% of the students got 5 marks in this task.

When comparing across the three school types, secondary school students performed much better than that of the primary and special school students in this task. Over 30% of the secondary school students attained at least the proficient level, whereas only 10.14% and 18.19% of the primary and special school students could reach at least the proficient level respectively. Furthermore, it was observed that there was a great difference among school levels in terms of the percentage of students who did not attempt the question. 53.21% of the primary school students made no response to this task or did not reach the question, whereas the percentages for the secondary and special school students were 30.24% and 31.82% respectively.

Here are some examples of students’ answers at the advanced level.

Advanced level

(Student: 124031)

(Student: 203041)

Q3 Evaluate (6 marks)

For “evaluate”, students were asked to evaluate and retrieve appropriate information found on the Internet. Their overall performance in this task was also bad. It was observed that most students were used to copy a large amount of information from the Internet and paste it as their answers.

Such information normally contained much irrelevant materials such as the history of or the time schedule of the scenic spots. Therefore, marks were deducted. Besides, some students might misunderstand the question and provided information of scenic spots outside Hong Kong, such as places in Japan or in Mainland China. Furthermore, it was found that the characteristics of scenic spots suggested by the students were commonly very simple, such as “It is a funny places” or “It is very large”. This would be another area to lose marks for this indicator.

Table 5.15 Percentage distribution of students of different school types for each score of Q3 (Evaluate) of Technical PA

Score Primary School (%) Secondary School (%) Special School (%) IL Competence Level

0.00 66.19 66.19 35.03 35.03 45.45 45.45 Novice

0.50 9.00 6.49 13.64

1.00 6.52 11.80 9.09

1.50 3.97 9.45 4.55

2.00 5.55

25.04

9.33

37.07

13.64

40.92 Basic

2.50 2.78 7.00 0.00

3.00 2.47 8.49 4.55

3.50 1.46 4.11 0.00

4.00 1.05

7.76

3.05

22.65

9.09

13.64 Proficient

4.50 0.46 2.47 0.00

5.00 0.55 2.32 0.00

5.50 0.00 0.28 0.00

6.00 0.00

1.01

0.16

5.23

0.00

0.00 Advanced

Total 100.00 100.00 100.00

Mean Score 0.57 1.43 1.00

(SD) (1.03) (1.45) (1.31)

N 830 823 22

N.B. - N listed in the table is the unweighted number of students.

- “Score (%)”, “Mean Score” and “SD” of both primary and secondary schools are weighted statistics.

- Figures may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

For primary school students, this task was poorly performed. The mean score was only 0.57 and the standard deviation was 1.03. There were 53.21% of the students who did not reach or made no response to this task. Including those “not-reached” and “non-response” students, 66.19% of the students got 0 mark. It implied that quite a lot of the primary school students did not have enough

time to complete this task. Besides, 25.04% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks and only 8.77% of the students got 2.5 to 5 marks in this task.

For secondary school students, their performance in this task was not good although the performance was the highest amongst the three school types. The mean score was 1.43 and the standard deviation was 1.45. 30.24% of them made no response or did not reach this question.

Including those “not-reached” and “non-response” students, 35.03% of the students got 0 mark, 37.07% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks and 27.88% of the students attained at least the proficient level and got 2.5 to 6 marks in this question. The majority of score for this task was at the basic level.

For special school students, their performance in this task was also bad, although it was slightly better than that of the primary school students. The mean score was 1 and the standard deviation was 1.31. 31.82% did not reach or made no response to this task. Including those “not-reached” and

“non-response” students, 45.45% of the students got 0 mark. 40.92% of the students got 0.5 to 2 marks. Besides, 13.64% of the students got 2.5 to 4 marks and reached the proficient level. The majority of students were at the basic level. No student attained the advanced level.

Here are some examples of students’ answers at the advanced level.

Advanced level

(Student: 106022)

(Student: 203025)

Q3 Create (6 marks)

For “create”, students were asked to use their own idea to design the layout of the slides in order to enhance the presentation. Their overall performance in this task was poor. The full marks should be 6 but the highest mark attained for this task was only 3 marks. It was observed that most students did not pay much effort into the layout of the PowerPoint, but only concentrated on the basic requirements of this question. Some students reported that they did not have enough time to finish Q3 and so they only focused on doing the basic requirements.

Table 5.16 Percentage distribution of students of different school types for each score of Q3 (Create) of Technical PA

Score (%) School

Type N

.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00

Total (%) Mean Score (SD)

Primary 830 86.70 11.69 1.41 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.15 (0.41) Secondary 823 76.74 18.89 3.94 0.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.28 (0.55) Special 22 77.27 18.18 4.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 0.27 (0.55) N.B. - N listed in the table is the unweighted number of students.

- “Score (%)”, “Mean Score” and “SD” of both primary and secondary schools are weighted statistics.

- Figures may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

For primary school students, the performance was even worse when compared with that of the secondary school students. The mean score was 0.15 and the standard deviation was 0.41. 86.70%

of the students got 0 mark, although amongst which, 53.21% either did not reach or made no response to this task. 13.1% of the students reached the basic level and got 1 to 2 marks. Only 0.21% of the students got 3 marks in this task.

For secondary school students, this task was poorly performed. The mean score was 0.28 and the standard deviation was 0.55. 76.74% of the students got 0 mark and around 30.24% of the students did not reach or showed no response to this task. 22.83% of the students reached the basic level and got 1 to 2 marks and only 0.43% of the students got 3 marks.

For special school students, the result was similar to that of the secondary school students. The mean score was 0.27 and the standard deviation was 0.55. 31.82% either did not reach or made no response to this task. Including those “not-reached” and “non-response” students, 77.27% of the students got 0 mark. 22.73% of the student got 1 to 2 marks and attained the basic level. No student got 3 marks or higher in this question.

Here are some examples of students’ answers at the proficient level.

Proficient level

(Student: 137018)

(Student: 229023)

(Student: 229023)

Q3 Manage (1 mark)

For “manage”, students were asked to save the PowerPoint file into a proper folder. Their overall performance in this task was good.

Table 5.17 Percentage distribution of students of different school types for each score of Q3 (Manage) of Technical PA

Score (%) School Type N

0.00 1.00

Total (%) Mean Score (SD)

Primary 830 59.94 40.06 100.00 0.40 (0.49)

Secondary 823 31.53 68.47 100.00 0.68 (0.46)

Special 22 31.82 68.18 100.00 0.68 (0.48)

N.B. - N listed in the table is the unweighted number of students.

- “Score (%)”, “Mean Score” and “SD” of both primary and secondary schools are weighted statistics.

- Figures may not sum to 100 percent because of rounding.

For primary school students, their performance in this task was not bad, although there were only 40.06% of the students got full marks in this task. The reason was that a number of students could not reach or finish this question. If only students who could finish the task were counted, over 80%

of the students could get full marks.

For secondary and special school students, the performances of this task were very good. 68.47% of the secondary school students and 68.18% of the special school students got full marks. Besides, quite a number of the students missed or did not reach this task (For details, please refer to Appendices 5.2 and 5.3). Therefore, apart from those who showed no response or did not reach this task, nearly 100% of the secondary and special school students could get full marks and save their files in to a correct folder.