A2 G324: Advanced Portfolio in Media
The purpose of this unit is firstly to assess candidates’ ability to plan and construct media products using appropriate technical and creative skills (AO3); secondly to assess candidates’ application of knowledge and understanding in evaluating their own work, showing how meanings and responses are created (AO2); and finally to assess candidates’ ability to undertake, apply and present appropriate research (AO4).
The unit requires candidates to engage with contemporary media technologies, giving them the opportunity to develop their own skills in these technologies. It also enables them to develop the skills of presentation that are required for further study at higher levels and in the workplace.
This is a coursework unit. Centres must set the brief from the menu below, though they may define more precise details in negotiation with candidates.
From these brief, candidates will produce:
A media portfolio, comprising a main and ancillary texts;
· A presentation of their research, planning and evaluation in electronic format(s).
The media portfolio will be produced through a combination of two or more of the following media:
Video
Print
In all cases, candidates should be discouraged from seeing the evaluation as simply a written essay and the potential of the format chosen should be exploited through the use of images, audio, video and links to online resources. Marks should be supported by teacher comments and may be supported by other forms such as audio or videotaped presentations.
G324 is marked and internally standardised by the centre and marks are submitted to OCR by a specified date, a sample is then selected for external moderation.
The unit is marked out of a total of 100 marks: 20 marks for the planning and research and its presentation; 60 marks for the construction; 20 marks for the evaluation.
1. In the evaluation the following questions must be answered:
2. In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real media products?
3. How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
4. What have you learned from your audience feedback?
5. How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
Briefs
1. A promotion package for the release of an album, to include a music promo video, together with two of the following three options:
· A cover for its release as part of a digipak (CD/DVD package);
· A magazine advertisement for the digipak (CD/DVD package).
2. A promotion package for a new film, to include a teaser trailer, together with two of the following three options:
· A poster for the film.
3. An extract from a new documentary TV programme, lasting approximately five minutes, together with two of the following three options:
· A double-page spread from a listings magazine focused on the documentary
· A newspaper advertisement for the documentary
· A newspaper advertisement for the documentary
4. A short film in its entirety, lasting approximately five minutes, which may be live action or animated or a combination of both, together with two of the following three options:
· A poster for the film
· A film magazine review page featuring the film.
Acceptable formats for production texts and research presentations
Video work must be in DVD format and must be playable on standard domestic DVD players for moderation purposes. Audio work must be in CD format. No print item should be larger than A3 size
Web pages and blogs must be accessible on line to the moderator for the duration of the moderation period. The moderator must receive notification of the URL when the work is sent.
Slideshows and podcasts should be burnt to CD. All CDs and DVDs must be checked before despatch to ensure that the files are accessible. No hard copy printouts of online material will be accepted. Research, planning and evaluation MUST be presented in electronic format.
Marking of work
The centre will be expected to allocate marks according to four levels for each of three categories:
· Research and Planning
· Construction
· Evaluation
In arriving at a level for each category, teachers are advised to look for evidence of ‘best fit’. It is possible both for a candidate to be placed in different levels for each of the three categories and to receive quite different marks from other members of the same group responsible for producing an artefact, according to his/her contribution. Teachers are asked to support marks with written comments under the three categories on the assessment sheet.
In centres where there is more than one teacher involved in the marking, there must be evidence that internal standardisation has taken place to ensure a consistent rank order.
No comments:
Post a Comment