1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. 2010 HSC Exam papers
  5. 2010 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Metal and Engineering
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

2010 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Metal and Engineering

Contents

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Metal and Engineering. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2010 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.

This document should be read along with the relevant syllabus, the 2010 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Metal and Engineering.

Teachers and candidates are reminded that if candidates are undertaking the 240 hour VET Industry Curriculum Framework in Metal and Engineering and they want to undertake the HSC examination in Metal and Engineering, they need to be entered separately for the examination through Schools Online (Administration) by the due date that is published in the Higher School Certificate Events Timetable.

General comments

Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating their knowledge, understanding and skills developed through studying the course.

Candidates need to be aware that the marks allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper), are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far in excess of the space alloated may reduce the time available for answering other questions.

Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs may be used which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.

Section II

Question 16

  1. Most candidates were aware of the purpose of a pictorial drawing.
  2. This question involved three stages of interpreting the drawing and title block. In better responses, candidates identified that the item was the leg and that the length had changed. In weaker responses, candidates were aware that there was a change in length but did not indicate what item was changed, or did not interpret the amendments part of the title block.
  3. The most important reasons for section planes/views are to show details not able to be seen from any other view, internal details, and the arrangement of hidden parts but many candidates did not know this. In better responses, candidates indicated two reasons for the use of section planes and related it to the Tank Support Frame drawing. Candidates could have drawn from their specific training or referred to the Tank Support Frame drawing to assist in answering this question.
  4. Most candidates identified the features of the welding symbol. In better responses, candidates identified and described all three features, including that the weld type is a fillet weld which is a weld between two perpendicular pieces, or the four (4) indicates the size of the root length of the weld.
  5. In better responses, candidates calculated the correct lengths of all pieces from the cutting list as 388, 588 and 84 mm. In weaker responses, candidates incorrectly identified 600, 400 and 90 mm as overall dimensions from the drawing.

Many candidates used a logical sequence of steps to calculate the cost. Some candidates tabulated their calculations.

In weaker responses, candidates only extracted minimal relevant data and used irrelevant or incorrect calculations.

Question 17

  1. Most students interpreted the drawing of the footpad and identified the dimensions correctly from the Tank Support Frame drawing. Some candidates did not include an answer for P.
  2. In better responses, candidates provided a clear and logical sequence of steps to mark out and manufacture the Foot Pad. Most of the hand and machine tools were correctly identified and the correct use of industry terminology provided. From these responses, the reader would be able to mark out and manufacture the foot pad. These candidates included important steps such as datums, pilot drilling, clamping the machine vice when drilling and deburring throughout the manufacturing process.

    Mid-range responses allowed the reader to logically follow the sequence, although not all steps were given. Candidates often neglected to include datums when marking out, pilot drilling or clamping the job when drilling. Most of the marking out and cutting out tools were correctly identified. These responses used general industry terminology.

    In weaker responses, candidates provided an incomplete sequence of steps or had steps in the incorrect order. The reader could not follow the steps provided to complete the marking out and the manufacture of the Foot Pad. Few tools were mentioned and some were incorrectly named.

Question 18

  1. Most candidates correctly identified the drilling machine as a pedestal drill or drill press.
  2. Candidates were generally well informed of the safety aspects of drilling machines.

    In better responses, candidates correctly proposed a list of checks for the drilling machine before use. These substantial checklists included the correct names for parts of the drilling machine and where necessary provided appropriate detail.

    In weaker responses, candidates included a short list of checks without specifying the details of the check. For example, ‘check the chuck’ rather than ‘check the chuck to ensure the drill is secure’ or ‘check the chuck to see if the chuck key has been removed’. In some of these weaker responses, candidates referred to the safety of the operator rather the drilling machine.

  3. Most candidates were able to list or describe several strategies to prevent drills from overheating and performing poorly when being used.

    In better responses, candidates explained how these strategies worked to prevent the stated problems. These candidates used appropriate technical language to provide a clear, succinct explanation. Most of these responses mentioned the appropriate application of a lubricant/coolant, the selection of a correct drill speed and feed, and the use of pilot holes.

    In weaker responses, candidates simply described or listed some preventative strategies with little or no explanation.

Question 19

  1. Most candidates either correctly identified an error using a precise name, or provided a limited description to that effect.
  2. In better responses, candidates provided either a general or specific use for each of the tools mentioned. In some weaker responses, candidates were not aware of the use of the feeler gauge.

    In better responses, candidates qualified through the addition of a relative scale or degree of accuracy. For example, an outside micrometer is used to measure the outside diameter of a rod to an accuracy of 0.01mm.

  3. In better responses, candidates included a sound explanation, described the practice, then indicated the overall effect its implementation might have on quality production by providing pertinent examples.

    In weaker responses, candidates related the practice to double-checking, or listed a series of quality outcomes if this practice was adopted. These answers were very general, for example, ‘saves time and money’, and in most cases used incorrect terminology.

Section III

Question 20

In better responses, candidates provided logical, well-structured and cohesive answers. They considered a variety of employee responsibilities in relation to occupational health and safety and described the effect they had on others in the workplace. They used precise terminology and included examples such as systematic housekeeping, SOPs (standard operating procedures), training, induction, awareness of signage, use of PPE (personal protective equipment) and reference to OHS legislation.

In mid-range responses, candidates mentioned several common OHS responsibilities such as wearing PPE, following signage and cleaning up the work area. These responses only used general terminology, such as reference to cleaning up without specifically identifying it as housekeeping. Brief mention was made of the impact of their responsibilities and its effect on the health and safety of others in the workplace.

In weaker responses, candidates briefly listed some OHS issues and used limited industry terminology. They demonstrated limited or no knowledge of the effect that individual employees contribute to the health and safety of others in the workplace. They focused on the impact of following occupational health and safety procedures and its effect on them rather than others.

Section IV

Question 21

  1. In better responses, candidates cited how a worker’s skill set has to change in response to the introduction of a specific emerging technology.

    In mid-range responses, candidates named an older existing technology and added some information regarding the newer skills required or provided a statement regarding the training that might be needed for the newer technology.

    In weaker responses, candidates struggled with the term ‘emerging technology’, and rarely stated how skills had changed.

  2. In better responses, candidates provided a wide range of well-outlined and relevant ‘on-the-job’ training strategies. In general, candidates had a sound grasp of strategies, with many citing demonstrations and mentoring as effective techniques.

    In mid-range responses, candidates typically outlined some relevant strategies. The strategies were often very basic, such as ‘being shown a skill’ with no additional information.

    In weaker responses, candidates simply named a possible training strategy.

  3. In better responses, candidates clearly articulated and understood the similarities and differences between apprenticeships and traineeships. They used appropriate terminology to describe many aspects of vocational training. Good examples indicated descriptions of training options, plans, delivery methods, lengths of contract and supervision.

    In mid-range responses, candidates indicated a more basic understanding of the requirements of trainees and apprentices. Knowledge of both ‘on-the-job’ and ‘off-the-job’ training, the length of training, together with some relevant additional information was demonstrated. Candidates are reminded that these types of questions are best served through the use of specific, rather than generic examples.

    In weaker responses, candidates demonstrated a very limited knowledge of vocational training. They indicated that training might involve going to TAFE, and included some general knowledge concerning rates of pay and/or the working environment. These responses were often poorly organised.

20110139

Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size