Lesson Plan — "What Excellence actually adds"

Year 11 Digital Technologies · Level 1 HCI external (AS92006) · exam preparation. Written onto the EDPRAC 612 handbook template (Section 8, pp. 24–25).

My own lesson, re-expressed on the required template. For a senior NCEA class the achievement standard is the operative frame, so AS92006 stands where my two Social Sciences plans quote curriculum objectives. The grade progression below is taken from the standard's own verbs rather than paraphrased.
Year 11 Digital Technologies
NCEA Level 1 (NZC Level 6) · Year 11
What Excellence actually adds
Human–Computer Interaction — external exam preparation (60 min)
AS92006 — Level 1 Digital Technologies, Human–Computer Interaction (external). The grade progression is taken straight from the standard's own verbs: demonstrates understanding → examines → evaluates.
Thinking — diagnosing which link in an analytical chain a piece of writing stops at.
Using language, symbols and texts — writing to a specified grade, and naming a mechanism instead of reaching for an adjective.
Relating to others — peer marking against a shared chain rather than against taste.
Lesson Design Dimensions
  • State what separates the grades: Excellence adds exactly two things — a comparison and a principle-grounded improvement.
  • Locate any paragraph on the six-link chain and name the link at which it stopped.
  • Write one paragraph to an assigned grade, and mark a peer's against the same chain.
feature → principle → evidence → effect on user/task → effect on purpose → judgement

Excellence is not "the same answer, longer." The grades map onto links in the chain, not onto word count.

Links 1–2 (feature, principle) = Achieved. Links 3–5 (evidence, effect on the task, effect on purpose) = Merit. Link 6 plus a comparison and an improvement = Excellence. Get links 1–2 wrong and everything above is wrong too, however well written.

The standard's three verbs as a progression · naming a mechanism versus applying an adjective · the difference between defining a principle and pointing at its use.

Mātāpono Māori: teach both moves — test the claim and supply an example. A student trained only to test claims can freeze in the exam and score nothing. A mātāpono is not a renamed heuristic: comparison is legitimate, conflation is not.

Writing to a specified grade on demand; peer-marking against explicit criteria; diagnosing the exact point at which an argument stops; converting an evaluative adjective into a named mechanism with a user, a step and a comparison.

The three verbs from the standard; the six-link chain and where the grade boundaries sit; the same feature written three ways at three grades; independent writing at an assigned grade followed by partner marking; an exit ticket.

The three ways they fall short — say these aloud when they appear:

  • Achieved: writing the definition of a principle instead of its use. → "Point at it. What would I see on the screen?"
  • Merit: replacing the mechanism with an adjective — "easier", "more user-friendly". → "Easier for whom, at which exact step, compared with what?"
  • Excellence: writing more rather than differently; comparing unlike things; proposing an "improvement" the interface already has. → "Same action in both. What would you change that isn't already there?"

Follows: the Task 11 practice pack, which supplies the CityLink Events A and B screens used here. Students have met the interfaces; this lesson is about the writing, not new content.

Leads to: the external examination. This is exam preparation, so the measure of success is transfer to unseen interfaces rather than recall of these two.

  • One written paragraph per student, at a grade I assigned, marked against the chain — the primary evidence.
  • The partner's diagnosis: which link did the paragraph stop at? Disagreement between partners is itself useful data.
  • The exit sentence — "the two things Excellence adds are ____ and ____" — a fast check on whether the core idea landed.
  • During 20–40 min, what students say changed between the Achieved, Merit and Excellence versions. I ask; I do not tell.
The chain written on the board and left up all period · the CityLink Events A and B screens from the Task 11 practice pack, projected so everyone examines the same evidence · the three worked paragraphs (Achieved / Merit / Excellence) for the same feature, same user, same task.
Lesson Pedagogy Dimensions

Select, sequence, and pace the lesson considering priming, transitions, cognitive strengthening, and assessment for learning.

Timing Concept(s) / Skills Content and Learning Activities Assessment for Learning
0–10 min The standard's verbs The three verbs. Straight from the standard: demonstrates understanding → examines → evaluates. Write them up. Everything today hangs off that progression. Can they say what each verb demands that the previous one did not?
10–20 min Chain → grade mapping The chain, and where the grades sit. Links 1–2 = Achieved; links 3–5 = Merit; link 6 plus a comparison and an improvement = Excellence. Say plainly: get links 1–2 wrong and everything above is wrong too, however well written. Whether students can place a grade boundary on the chain unprompted.
20–40 min Grade discrimination The same feature, written three ways. Same interface, same user (Sam, low vision, using a keyboard), same task (saving the Harbour workshop). Read Achieved, then Merit, then Excellence. After each, ask what changed — do not tell them. Their answers to "what changed" are the diagnostic. Holding the user and task constant isolates the writing as the only variable.
40–55 min Writing to a grade; peer marking They write. A different feature from the same two interfaces. Each student writes one paragraph at the grade I assign. Then swap and mark against the chain — which link did the partner stop at? The paragraph and the partner's diagnosis. Circulate for the three shortfalls above and use the scripted question for each.
55–60 min Retrieval of the core idea Exit ticket. One sentence: the two things Excellence adds are ____ and ____. A fast, whole-class check on the single idea the lesson exists to deliver.
Rewrite the paragraph at one grade higher than the one assigned in class, using the partner's diagnosis to decide which link to add.
Reflection / Evaluation

Template fields from University of Auckland, Faculty of Arts and Education. (2026). EDPRAC 612 GDTSE Practicum Handbook (updated 17 July 2026), Section 8, pp. 24–25. Lesson content is my own, from the run-sheet at HCI — lesson plan. Standard reference: AS92006, Level 1 Digital Technologies (NZQA).