BTEC Level 3 National in
Engineering
First teaching September 2016
Sample Marked Learner Work
External Assessment
In preparation for the first teaching from September 2016 and as a part of the on-going support that we offer to our centres, we have been developing support materials to help you better understand the application of Nationals BTEC Level 3 qualification.
What is Sample Marked Learner Work (SMLW)?
The following learner work has been prepared as guidance for centres and learners. It can be used as a helpful tool when teaching and preparing for external units.
Each question explores two responses; one good response, followed by a poor response. These responses demonstrate how marks can be both attained and lost.
The SMLW includes examples of real learners’ work, accompanied with examiner tips and comments based on the responses of how learners performed.
Below displays the format this booklet follows. Each question will show a learner
response, followed by comments on the command verbs and the content of the question. Tips may be offered where possible.
The appendix has attached a mark scheme showing all the possible responses that perhaps were not explored in the SMLW, but can still be attained.
Tips offer helpful hints that the learner may find useful. For example:
Recommended length of the answer
Reference to the amount of marks awarded
General advice for the learner when answering questions
The red box comments on the command verbs used in the question. Command typically means; to instruct or order for something to be done. Likewise, in assessments, learners are required to answer questions, with the help of a command verb which gives them a sense of direction when answering a
question.
This box may choose to highlight the command verb used and comments if the learner has successfully done this, or not.
The green box comments on the content words and phrases. Content makes reference to subject knowledge that originates from the specification. Learners are required to use subject specific knowledge to answer the questions in order
to gain maximum marks. The comments may include: Any key words/phrases used in the learner’s answer.
Why has the learner gained x amount of marks? And why/how have they not gained any further marks?
Any suggestions/ ideas regarding the structure of the answer.
If the answer meets full marks- why it is a strong answer? What part of the content has been mentioned to gain these marks?
Activity 1: At the start of the task create a short project time plan in your task book. During the development process you should also record in your task book:
o Why changes were made to the design during each session
o action points for the next session [Total marks for Act.1= 6 marks]
The focus for Activity 1 is three-fold:
Firstly, there is the planning aspect that should be carried out at the beginning of the task (‘create a short project time plan’);
Secondly, the record keeping that should be maintained during the other activities (2 to 5) in order to fully complete the task; and
Finally, during the other activities (2 to 5), learners should also record in the Activity 1 section of their task book evidence of justified reasons for making changes to designs and action points for future sessions and activities.
This approach broadly indicates how the learner planned to spend the ten hours allowed for the task and is appropriate as an initial plan.
The plan provides a structure around which the learner is able to focus their activities in the redesign of the product. There are some notes to explain the changes that have been made and how these will impact on the new design; as a result, this response achieved a mark in Band 2 (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 1). For a mark in Band 3, the learner would need to have thoroughly justified changes that may have been made, giving reasons for prioritising action points for subsequent sessions; in addition, the changes made must be relevant and linked to the requirements of the brief.
The use of a tabular approach for Activity 1 can be effective to show what is planned for each session and to provide
information about changes made; however, written justifications of decisions are required for a mark in Band 3.
Typically, lower achieving learners may submit a reflective log as shown.
Reflective logs such as this do not gain any credit for planning; nonetheless, it is possible that should such comments be justified with explanations for changes made during Activities 2 to 5, then they could gain some credit. The above example achieved 1 mark because it reflects a linear approach to the design process (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 1) and there is little evidence of justification of changes made to fulfil the requirements of the brief or any further action points.
Planning should be completed before learners begin to address the other Activities - this aspect should not be written
retrospectively.
As Activity 1 is worth 6 marks overall, the time spent on initial planning should reflect this. Learners should also revisit the Activity 1 section of their task book on completion of each subsequent Activity (2 to 5) to add succinct and pertinent notes to justify relevant changes.
Activity 2: Interpret the brief into operational requirement, to include:
o product requirement
o opportunities and constraints o interpretation of numerical data
o key health and safety, regulatory and sustainability factors.
The command word used in this activity is ‘interpret’. Learners are required to identify clearly the key features of the client brief, and to use the aforesaid and the other information available (including the numerical data and drawings), to
produce a set of suitable operational and product requirements. In doing so, they must also consider and make relevant comments on opportunities and constraints and key health and safety, regulatory and sustainability factors.
This response achieved a mark in Band 3, as there is evidence of suitable and relevant interpretation/consideration of each of the aspects required (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 2). The initial comments accurately reflect the contents of the client brief and then consider the statistical information to identify reasons for failure of the existing bracket. To achieve a mark in Band 3, learners are expected to interpret any given data effectively, and to complete related calculations accurately, in order to provide validation for the operational requirements that they have identified. In the above response, this has been achieved by calculating the mean time to failure (MTTF) for each bracket (based on location) and summarising/interpreting the results.
There is evidence of opportunities being identified, such as the possibility of reducing the amount of materials required and the scope to use materials that are more sustainable. There is also some consideration of safety factors, such as the requirement for the bracket not to fail in service or damage the cable. In addition, there is some reference to the possibility of enhanced performance, with some feasible opportunities (for example, ‘...to design a bracket that can be replaced without removing the cable’) and constraints identified.
To achieve a mark in Band 3, learners must include content that refers to each of the four bullet points in Activity 2. This could be addressed using sub-headings in the response.
References to sustainability, regulatory and health and safety considerations should not be generic in nature. Any consideration of health and safety, regulatory and sustainability factors should relate directly to the context.
This response achieves a mark in Band 1 as there is only a limited consideration of each of the aspects required. There is some evidence of opportunities being
identified, such as using less materials to reduce the cost sustainable materials. There is also some consideration of safety requirements, linked to the weight of the cable. The only evidence of calculations relates to the weight of the cable, with no consideration of the statistics.
There should be evidence of the interpretation of the provided numerical data being used to identify product requirements.
Activity 3: Produce a range of initial ideas design based on the client brief, to include:
o sketches
o annotations. [Total marks for Act. 3= 9 marks]
Activity 3 requires learners to produce a range of design ideas based on the client brief. The unit specification (‘Key terms typically used in assessment’) states that a design is ‘a drawing and/or specification to communicate the form, function and/or operational workings of a product prior to it being made or maintained’. Activity 3 directs learners to use a combination of sketches and annotations; as a result, both must be present in order for learners to be able to achieve all of the marks available.
To achieve marks in Band 2 or Band 3, learners are expected to generate a range of pocket sketches that offer a variety of possible approaches to solve the design problem (client brief).
This response shows two ideas that are both different to each other and different in their design approach to addressing the brief. Both of the ideas also address the brief in a comprehensive fashion and are communicated with clarity. There are concise and sensible annotations evident that use technical terms with accuracy, and materials, manufacturing processes and features are all considered. The above has attributes that are typical of a Band 3 response (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 3).
Activity 3 requires a range of initial design ideas; learners need to produce more than one initial idea if they are to access marks from Band 2 or Band 3.
Research notes (from Part A) are not submitted to Pearson with the Part B task book; therefore, any pertinent information from research/preparatory work must be replicated within the Part B task book if learners are to gain any credit for it. It is not necessary for sketches to be drawn as 3D
representations if there is sufficient detail to be gained from a front, plan or side elevation (for example), as shown above. This response also has two ideas, although there is some similarity in the
concept/approach to addressing the brief. There are no annotations evident that refer to, for example, materials, possible manufacturing processes or features. This response has attributes that are typical of a high Band 1/low Band 2 response. This learner has not achieved Band 3 due to a combination of reasons that include producing ideas which are fundamentally similar in approach; however, the ideas are feasible. In addition, there is a lack of clarity with one of the ideas and technical annotations that link to the brief are not evident (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 3).
Activity 4: Develop a modified product proposal with relevant design documentation. The proposal must consider:
o a solution o existing products o materials o manufacturing processes o sustainability o safety
Activity 4 requires learners to develop a modified product proposal. There is clear guidance as to what is required for a fully developed proposal (‘The proposal must consider: a solution, existing products, materials, manufacturing processes, sustainability, safety and other relevant factors’), and each of these should be addressed in the response.
Learners should include a range of relevant design documentation to support their proposals. These are exemplified in section C2 of the Unit 3 specification. As with Activity 3, learners should use appropriate sketching and graphical techniques along with written content to articulate fully their modified product proposal. The above response makes use of a range of methods to communicate the design proposal, including sketches and written information, but others could also have been used (parts/materials list, production plan, flowchart etc).
The above response includes a range of drawings and sketches supported by written information that not only shows clearly the proposed product solution, but also provides content that helps to justify the decisions made in arriving at the given solution. The drawings clearly indicate the features of the design, with appropriate consideration of materials and manufacturing processes evident. The modified proposal is an improvement when considering the original product and the brief.
The response shows a range of views of the solution, with accurate but brief technical annotations indicating the materials to be used and the majority of
dimensions. Whilst some features are missing, it would be possible for a competent third party to effectively interpret the proposal and to be able to manufacture the modified bracket. This is required to access Band 4 marks. There is evidence of some justification of the materials and manufacturing processes suggested, with some consideration of alternatives; in addition, there are some references to sustainability and the ‘designing out’ of risks. As a result, this response has
attributes that are typical of a Band 3 response (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 4).
In order to achieve marks from Band 4, learners should provide a justification for the features of their designs, the materials used and the suggested manufacturing processes with explicit references to existing products (in the form of sketches and/or written content). In this response the justification of processes is limited. In order to improve the response, the learner would need to explain why casting and aluminium-magnesium alloy are suitable to be used for the modified bracket, providing a justification that considers the possible alternatives. The response is also missing some detail with reference to the consideration of sustainability at all stages of the product life cycle (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 4).
This response has been awarded a mark in Band 2. The solution provided is feasible and shows some variation in form to the original bracket, with the redesign being more of a ‘hook’. The design itself does represent a probable improvement but the use of materials is not significantly reduced.
The written ‘justification’ associated with the design is very descriptive in parts and refers to an alternative proposal (seen in the diagram) for use with multiple cables; this is not required given the client brief and thus gains no credit.
Learners should make sure that their modified proposal addresses the client brief, as this is what their solution will be judged against.
The learner has briefly considered existing products in their response, has noted that polycarbonate could be a suitable material given that it is not affected by humidity and has referred to the use of injection moulding. There is evidence of some consideration of sustainability and the designing out of risk.
The learner has not considered alternative materials or manufacturing processes which limits the opportunity to move into the higher bands.
There is one drawing submitted with annotation identifying some key features, and this allows a competent third party to understand the purpose of the solution. This, along with the limited but accurate use of technical terminology has allowed the learner to be awarded marks from Band 2 for their
solution/design documentation (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 4).
The modified proposal should be optimised and be a justified variation in form from the original design.
The design documentation should have enough information to allow a competent third party to manufacture the solution. Selection of materials and manufacturing processes should be fully justified and include comparisons with alternatives. Descriptions of the processes will not gain marks.
It is important that learners consider each of the points raised in the brief during Activity 4 and are able to relate their
justifications back to them.
Learners should spend more time on this Activity than any other, as detail is required for high marks.
To achieve marks from the higher bands, learners should use technical terminology accurately in their design work,
Activity 5: Your final task book entry should evaluate:
o success and limitations of the completed solutions
o indirect benefits and opportunities o constraints
o opportunities for technology-led modifications.
Activity 5 requires learners to evaluate their design proposal. To achieve marks from Band 3 it is important that learners consider their own solution in relation to the brief and the original design, in this case the bracket, providing a sound rationale for why their solution is more effective.
The evaluation needs to consider several factors: the success and limitations of the solution; the indirect benefits and opportunities of the solution; and any constraints related to the solution.
The evaluation should be balanced, and should also consider the possibility of how technology-led modifications could optimise the solution suggested.
The response above considers each of the points referred to in Activity 5. There are explanations of how the redesigned bracket meets the requirements of the brief. There is some indication of limitations/constraints, such as the expense of die casting and high energy use when compared to machining. There is a sound rationale as to why the redesigned bracket is more effective than the original; for example: as it is manufactured from an aluminium-magnesium alloy it will have consistent strength across the operating temperatures, be corrosion resistant and thus not need any finishes to be applied (as stated above).
There is also some consideration of indirect benefits/opportunities and further technology-led modifications, such as the potential to use polymers or additive manufacture to optimise the solution in terms of manufacturing and the service life of the bracket.
As a result, this response has attributes that are typical of a Band 3 response (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 5).
Learners should make sure that their evaluation is balanced.
They also need to make sure that they cover each of the four headings from Activity 5 (success and limitations of the completed solutions, indirect benefits and opportunities, constraints and opportunities for technology-led modifications). To achieve a mark from Band 3, each aspect must be balanced and offer a full appraisal of the solution. This response achieved a mark from Band 1. The brief comments are not evaluative and are primarily related to the success/benefits of the learner’s solution, with some basic limitations stated. The failure to include reference to, for example, further technology-led modifications, along with the lack of detail in the written response (especially in relation to the brief and the original design), restricts the learner to low marks (please refer to the Marking Grid for Activity 5).
Learners should make sure that their evaluation is of the solution that they have suggested as opposed to the process of redesigning the bracket.
Unit 3: Engineering Product Design and
Manufacture - Sample marking grid
General marking guidance
All learners must receive the same treatment. Examiners must mark the first learner in exactly the same way as they mark the last.
Marking grids should be applied positively. Learners must be rewarded for what they have shown they can do rather than penalised for omissions.
Examiners should mark according to the marking grid not according to their perception of where the grade boundaries may lie.
All marks on the marking grid should be used appropriately.
All the marks on the marking grid are designed to be awarded. Examiners should always award full marks if deserved. Examiners should also be prepared to award zero marks if the learner’s response is not rewardable according to the marking grid.
Where judgement is required, a marking grid will provide the principles by which marks will be awarded.
When examiners are in doubt regarding the application of the marking grid to a learner’s response, a senior examiner should be consulted.
Specific marking guidance
The marking grids have been designed to assess learner work holistically.
Rows within the grids identify the assessment focus/outcome being targeted. When using a marking grid, the ‘best fit’ approach should be used.
● Examiners should first make a holistic judgement on which band most closely matches the learner response and place it within that band. Learners will be placed in the band that best describes their answer.
● The mark awarded within the band will be decided based on the quality of the answer in response to the assessment focus/outcome and will be modified according to how securely all bullet points are displayed at that band. ● Marks will be awarded towards the top or bottom of that band depending on
© Pearson Education Limited 2015
Activity 1: Planning and design changes made during the development process Assessment
focus Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
Carry out an iterative development process 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 n/a Level of response not worthy of credit Entries demonstrate an unstructured or linear approach to the design process.
Development activities lead to design
refinements that may not be relevant to the brief.
A limited justification of the changes made in order to fulfil the requirements of the brief.
Action points are vague, incomplete or not present.
Entries demonstrate some evidence of an iterative approach to the design process.
Development activities lead to design
refinements that are partially linked to the requirements of the brief.
Some justification of the changes made throughout the development process to fulfil the
requirements of the brief.
Action points for the next external
assessment session are identified but not well defined or prioritised.
Entries demonstrate a logical and iterative approach to the design process.
Development activities lead to design
refinements that are coherently linked to research and the requirements of the brief. Thorough justification of changes made throughout the development process to fulfil the requirements of the brief.
Well defined, logical and prioritised action points for the next external assessment session are identified.
Pearson BTEC Level 3 Nationals in Business - Unit 2- Final Sample Assessment Materials - version 1.0 - Pre-publication document - August 2015 © Pearson Education Limited 2015
Activity 2: Interpret the brief into operational requirements Assessment
focus Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
Interpreting brief into operational requirements 0 1-2 3-4 5-6 n/a Level of response not worthy of credit
Interpret the brief into some key product requirements, opportunities and/or constraints that partially meet the brief and are not cohesively linked.
Limited calculation and interpretation of
numerical data that may include some errors.
Consideration of some health and safety, regulatory and/or sustainability factors with limited relevance to the given context.
Interpret the brief into a cohesive set of product requirements,
opportunities and constraints that meets the brief.
Mostly accurate calculation and interpretation of
numerical data that may include minor errors.
Consideration of key health and safety, regulatory and sustainability factors with some relevance to the given context.
Interpret the brief into a cohesive and
comprehensive set of product requirements, feasible opportunities and constraints that meets the brief and considers enhanced product performance.
Accurate calculation and interpretation of
numerical data.
Consideration of key health and safety, regulatory and sustainability factors with relevance to the given context.
Pearson BTEC Level 3 Nationals in Business - Unit 2- Final Sample Assessment Materials - version 1.0 - Pre-publication document - August 2015 © Pearson Education Limited 2015
Activity 3: Produce a range of initial design ideas based on the client brief Assessment
focus Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
Initial design
ideas Level of 0 1-3 4-6 7-9 n/a
response not worthy of credit
Limited range of basic ideas that address some aspects of the brief.
Ideas communicated at a simplistic level with limited technical terms.
Ideas that have limited feasibility and may not be fit for purpose.
A range of appropriate ideas that address most aspects of the brief.
Ideas communicated clearly and suitable use of technical terms that mostly link to the brief.
Ideas that are mostly feasible and fit for purpose, but may include some unrealistic design elements.
A range of appropriate ideas that
comprehensively address the brief.
Ideas communicated with clarity and concisely and appropriate use of technical terms that link to the brief.
Ideas that are feasible and fit for purpose.
Pearson BTEC Level 3 Nationals in Business - Unit 2- Final Sample Assessment Materials - version 1.0 - Pre-publication document - August 2015 © Pearson Education Limited 2015
Activity 4: Develop a modified product proposal with relevant design documentation
Assessment
focus Subtask Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
Develop a modified product proposal (form, materials and/or manufacturin g processes) Solution 0 1-6 7-12 13-18 19-24 Level of response not worthy of credit
The solution shows a simple variation in form and/or approach from the brief.
The design proposal shows little or no reference to existing alternative products.
Appropriate
material/s selected that meet the requirements of the brief. Limited investigation of options. Appropriate selection of manufacturing process/es that meet the requirements of the brief. Limited investigation of options. Design proposal show a limited consideration of sustainability at some stages of the
The solution is feasible but doesn’t represent an improvement from the original product and shows variation in form and/or approach from the brief.
The design proposal shows some reference to existing alternative products.
Material/s selection is appropriate to the brief and partially justified by an investigation that considers limited options. Selection of manufacturing process/es is appropriate to the brief and partially justified by an
investigation that considers limited options.
Design proposal show some consideration of sustainability at most stages of the product life
The solution is an improvement from the original product,
showing a clear variation in form and/or approach from the brief.
The design proposal is informed, based on some understanding of existing alternative products.
Material/s selection is appropriate to the brief and mostly justified by an investigation of options.
Selection of manufacturing
process/es is appropriate to the brief and mostly justified by an
investigation of options.
Design proposal show some consideration of sustainability at most stages of the product life
The solution is optimised, demonstrating a justified variation in form and/or approach from the brief.
The design proposal is informed, based on a thorough understanding of existing alternative
products.
Material/s selection is appropriate to the brief and fully justified by balanced investigation of options.
Selection of manufacturing process/es is appropriate to the brief and fully justified by balanced investigation of options.
Design proposal considers sustainability at all stages of the product life cycle.
Pearson BTEC Level 3 Nationals in Business - Unit 2- Final Sample Assessment Materials - version 1.0 - Pre-publication document - August 2015 © Pearson Education Limited 2015
Assessment
focus Subtask Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
product life cycle.
Ideas have little or no reference to the safety of the design and/or designing out risks.
cycle.
Ideas show some reference to the safety of the design and designing out risks.
cycle.
Ideas show some reference to the safety of the design and designing out risks.
Ideas clearly reference the safety of the design and designing out risks.
Design Docume ntation 0 1 2-3 4-5 6 Level of response not worthy of credit Limited formal documentation used to communicate the solution. Little or no annotation used.
The use of technical terminology is attempted but it is largely inaccurate. Formal documentation used to communicate the solution. Annotation used to identify some key features of the solution which would allow a competent third party to understand the purpose of the solution.
Technical terminology is limited and accurate.
An appropriate range of formal documentation used to communicate the solution effectively.
Sufficient annotation of the key features of the solution which would allow a competent third party to interpret how to manufacture the
solution.
Some accurate technical terminology is used.
A comprehensive range of relevant formal
documentation to
communicate the solution effectively.
Concise annotation of the solution which would allow a competent third party to effectively interpret how to manufacture the solution.
Technical terminology is used accurately throughout.
Pearson BTEC Level 3 Nationals in Business - Unit 2- Final Sample Assessment Materials - version 1.0 - Pre-publication document - August 2015 © Pearson Education Limited 2015
Activity 5: Evaluate the design proposal Assessment
focus Band 0 Band 1 Band 2 Band 3 Band 4
Validating the design proposal 0 1-3 4-6 7-9 n/a Level of response not worthy of credit
Superficial appraisal of:
Success and limitations of
completed solutions
Indirect benefits and opportunities
Constraints.
Provides a limited rationale for the design solution, which may not relate directly to the brief.
Little or no further technology-led modifications communicated.
Some appraisal, which may be unbalanced or incomplete, of:
Success and limitations of
completed solutions
Indirect benefits and opportunities
Constraints.
Provides a partial rationale for why the design solution is more effective in relation to some aspects of the brief.
Further technology-led modifications are communicated with some evidence of how they could improve the effectiveness of the solution.
Balanced and thorough appraisal of:
Success and limitations of completed solutions
Indirect benefits and opportunities
Constraints.
Provides a sound rationale for why the design solution is more effective in relation to the brief.
Further technology-led modifications are communicated with detailed evidence of how they could optimise the solution.
