Lesson at a Glance | He Tirohanga Whakamua
NgΔ WhΔinga Ako | Learning Intentions
Students will know
- That Level 1 Digital Technology Merit criteria require evidence that stakeholder feedback actively informed the selection and refinement of the final concept.
- How to record structured feedback without defensive bias.
- How to weigh conflicting stakeholder requirements (e.g. user wants cheapness vs kaitiaki requires zero landfill).
Students will demonstrate
- By executing a structured stakeholder presentation and recording feedback on both modelled concepts.
- By completing Portfolio Section 7: Stakeholder Critique & Selection Justification.
Do Now | TΔ«matanga Whakaaro (10 min)
NCEA Merit Criteria Prompt:
"An NCEA student selects Concept 1 because 'I like it better.' What grade do they get for idea selection?"
Unpack: Personal preference gets Not Achieved or low Achieved. Merit requires demonstrating that stakeholder feedback and brief specification testing forced the selection of the winning concept direction based on objective evidence.
Stakeholder Presentation & Critique Protocol (20 min)
Students present their Lesson 6 conceptual models to a peer acting as a primary user, a secondary maintainer, or a community kaitiaki:
π Presentation Structure (5 min per concept):
- Explain how the concept operates physically & digitally.
- Show disassembly/repair points.
- Show material selections and energy sources.
π Feedback Protocol Questions:
- 1. "Which concept best fits your daily needs?"
- 2. "What component looks most likely to break or leak?"
- 3. "How could the design be changed to improve kaitiakitanga?"
Evaluation Matrix: Selecting One Concept (10 min)
Lesson 5 screened four concepts down to two, on paper. This is a different judgement: the two survivors have since been modelled and put in front of stakeholders, so this matrix scores them on evidence that did not exist when they were first screened.
1. Build the rows from three sources (3 min)
The measurable requirements from Section 2, the two binding specifications from Section 4, and the issues stakeholders actually raised in the critique just completed. Keep the three sources visibly separate in the matrix β they do not carry the same weight.
2. Score, and let stakeholder rows outrank the rest (5 min)
A problem a stakeholder raised is observed; a problem the designer predicted is estimated. Where the two disagree, the observation wins, and the student writes one line saying so. The Section 4 specifications still eliminate rather than score β that has not changed since Lesson 5.
3. Select, then name what the loser did better (2 min)
One concept goes forward. Before moving on, write one sentence on the single thing the rejected concept did better than the winner. Lesson 9's trade-off defence needs it, and it is far harder to reconstruct from memory a fortnight later.
π Conceptual Design Portfolio β Section 7: Stakeholder Critique & Selection Justification
Students open their Level 1 Digital Technology Portfolio and complete Section 7:
Section 7 Requirements:
1. Stakeholder Feedback Log: Record exact quotes and observations from primary and secondary stakeholders.
2. Weighted Evaluation Matrix: Score Concept 1 vs Concept 2 against all 6 Lesson 2 requirements and Lesson 4 kaitiakitanga specifications.
3. Selection Justification: Write a 1-paragraph defence explaining why the chosen concept superiorly fulfils stakeholder needs and environmental constraints.
Exit Justification | Ka Mutu Hoki (5 min)
Exit Ticket:
"I selected [Concept Name] as my final design direction because stakeholder feedback confirmed it better satisfied [Key Specification] than Concept B."
Teacher Planning & NCEA Alignment
NCEA Level 1 Digital Technologies Alignment (6 Credits):
- Merit Criteria: Refine a conceptual design based on feedback from stakeholders to ensure fitness for purpose.
- Outcome Evaluation: Justify the selection of one conceptual design using empirical stakeholder data and brief specifications.
Vocabulary: Stakeholder feedback, weighted matrix, concept selection, justification, Merit criteria, fitness-for-purpose.