1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. 2011 HSC Exam papers
5. 2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Textile Design

2011 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Textiles and Design

Contents

• Introduction
• Major textiles project
• Written examination
• Section II
• Section III

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Textiles and Design. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2011 Higher School Certificate Textiles and Design 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 2011 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Textiles and Design.

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 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 that are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.

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 beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.

Major textiles project

General comments

Candidates demonstrated a variety of skills and approaches over all five focus areas in the Textiles and Design projects. Apparel and Costume were the most popular focus areas, followed by Textile Arts, Furnishings and Non-Apparel.

Most candidates submitted textile item(s) and supporting documentation for an identified focus area and clearly explained the relationship of their work to that focus area. There was a range of creative and innovative items completed to a high standard, accompanied by supporting documentation that was contemporary in presentation. A range of concepts and themes using textiles was explored across the focus areas and included cultural and historical influences, current issues, personal identity, and popular culture. For the majority of projects, candidates had considered the textile materials and the end-use of the items when selecting the most appropriate manufacturing techniques.

A number of candidates achieved full marks by creating simple well-constructed items that demonstrated highly proficient skills and creativity, without extravagance and excessive use of time or budget. These candidates also made direct/obvious links between their design inspiration; the visual design development; manufacturing specifications; investigation, experimentation and evaluation; and the textile item.

An increasing number of candidates used traditional textile techniques, such as smocking and hand embroidery, in a creative, innovative and contemporary manner. A number of candidates used other traditional techniques, such as origami, and applied them to textiles in a creative, innovative and contemporary manner.

Some candidates need to give greater attention to the specific seam, facing and hem finishes used to ensure they are appropriate to the fabric. Zipper insertion should be appropriate to the zipper used and the fabric choice. Fasteners, such as buttons and buttonholes, hook and loop tape, hooks and eyes or press studs, should be used as appropriate to complete the item(s) to a high standard of manufacture.

Some projects are still contravening specifications in the Board of Studies document Assessment and Reporting in Textiles and Design Stage 6, p 9, regarding presentation:

• Projects should not be framed under glass or rigid plastic sheeting, as the expertise and proficiency of a candidate’s skills in manufacture cannot be assessed adequately if the work is inaccessible under the glass or plastic.
  
• A small number of projects were oversized. Overweight items must be able to be safely and reasonably handled by one person.
  
• Dangerous materials must not be used. Materials considered dangerous include those that have very sharp points or cutting edges, such as glass, mirror fragments, barbed wire, electronic components, pins, hypodermic syringes and needles.
  
• Textile items do not need to be submitted on a mannequin for display and packaging should be of a lightweight material.

A few students have submitted projects that obviously have been worn and that are stained and potentially dangerous to health or safety during the marking process. Any HSC item that might be considered dangerous to health or safety may not be marked and will be returned to the relevant school.

All textile items need to be finished and complete. Some projects were submitted with incomplete work, and a number of projects had pins fastening incomplete sections. Some projects used recycled materials, aluminium cans, exposed wire ends and electronic components, which are considered non-textile materials and are potentially dangerous during the marking process. Supervising teachers should refer to the list specified in the ACE Manual, section 9.3.15 Textiles and Design Major Textiles Project.

All processes and manufacturing techniques that are outsourced for the Textiles and Design Major Textiles Project, such as scanning, computer-generated images, quilting, pleating and printing, should be fully acknowledged in the supporting documentation. All components of the Major Textiles Project must be certified, on the appropriate form provided by the Board, as the original work of the candidate (see ACE Manual, section 9.3.4).

Supporting documentation must adhere strictly to the page limits and be presented as either of the standard sizes A3 or A4, as stipulated in Assessment and Reporting in Textiles and Design Stage 6, p 10. Many students are adding additional pages for a title, photos, reference material or evaluations that are not required. Some supporting documentation, such as printed text on vellum overlays, metallic paper and other shiny surfaces, was difficult to read. Candidates are reminded that marks are awarded for the quality of the response and not for decorative detail. All pages should be contained in a folder or securely tied together.

Fonts should be clear and easily read in a size equivalent to Times New Roman 12.

There has been an overall improvement in the Investigation, Experimentation and Evaluation section, and candidates are addressing the criteria more closely. It is acceptable for candidates to use computer technology to assist them in the presentation of their design work.

Textile item(s)

In better textile items, candidates:

• created a textile item(s) clearly related to the intended end-use, with attention to both aesthetic and functional features
  
• ensured that all aspects of the item(s) were complete
  
• demonstrated a high level of proficiency in the techniques and manufacture of the item(s)
  
• manufactured a quality textile item(s) within a limited budget
  
• manufactured a quality textile item(s) with a level of creativity/innovation, degree of difficulty and degree of proficiency using a limited number of quality techniques.

In weaker textile items, candidates:

• showed little relevance of the item(s) to end purpose, often with inappropriate design features to the end-use
  
• showed little or no innovation/creativity in fabric, design or construction methods
  
• used basic techniques and style features and/or a poor choice of fabrics in the construction of the item(s)
  
• contained sections of manufactured items with incomplete sections.

Supporting documentation

General comments

Many excellent examples of supporting documentation included well-labelled sketches and drawings (some computer generated), inspiring and relevant annotated collages, and appropriate samples. Candidates used a combination of relevant themes, colour schemes, readable fonts and presentation techniques. Most candidates adhered to size and page limit requirements and used a variety of communication techniques.

Consideration should be given to the font size, text style and background when developing the supporting documentation. Some candidates’ work was very difficult to read. Many candidates spent time decorating boxes and folders, which do not contribute to the mark of the project.

Presentation of the support documentation should follow the order and headings used in the marking guidelines.

Design inspiration

In better responses, candidates:

• clearly identified and explained the relationship of the design inspiration to one focus area
  
• clearly linked and showed a thorough understanding of the design inspiration and the visual imagery/collage
  
• related a direct link to the historical/cultural/contemporary inspiration factors.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• used a table format for their information but did not justify its relationship to the inspiration in detail
  
• mixed up some aesthetic/functional aspects
  
• lacked critical analysis of the functional and aesthetic aspects of designs
  
• presented the visual imagery/collage without a link to the inspiration or textile item
  
• identified numerous sources of inspiration with insufficient detail to justify.

Visual design development

In better responses, candidates:

• included labelled high-quality sketches/drawings that showed a direct link from their inspiration to their developing design ideas
  
• described in detail the aesthetic and functional design features of their final design
  
• identified the strengths and weaknesses of their developing designs
  
• described the inspiration and showed the development of design ideas for the item(s)
  
• created a visual flow of the design development that clearly presented the evolution of design ideas and concepts sequentially and in a thorough and logical way.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• presented sketches that often were poorly labelled or were not labelled at all
  
• presented sketches that did not necessarily relate to the focus area selected or reflect the inspiration
  
• listed aesthetic or functional design features without relating them to the end-use of the intended textile item
  
• produced sketches that lacked labelling and construction techniques appropriate to the design development process
  
• produced sketches that lacked a visual flow of ideas from initial to final design development.

Manufacturing specification

In better responses, candidates:

• provided a detailed and accurate written description of the textile item
  
• included high-quality production drawings to scale with front and back views, along with appropriate measurements and labelling
  
• provided clear pattern pieces to scale with appropriate labelling, such as grain line, number to cut and other relevant markings
  
• included a key to explain pattern markings or indicate the scale of the pattern shapes or production drawings
  
• presented clearly labelled fabric swatches
  
• included a product label with all information relevant to the textile item
  
• included a sequential and logical order of construction.

In weaker responses, candidates:

• provided limited detail in the written description of the textile item
  
• did not indicate the use of a commercial pattern or the modifications made, and failed to identify outsourcing
  
• included production drawings of an elementary standard without relevant labelling or measurements
  
• included poorly drawn pattern pieces, which lacked the required information
  
• included some fabric swatches, often without any labelling
  
• included a product label with some basic information
  
• did not include a key to explain pattern markings or indicate the scale of the pattern shapes or production drawings
  
• added some decoration to commercially produced items, in some cases without acknowledging their origin.

Investigation, experimentation and evaluation

This area continues to be the weakest, with documentation often incomplete, limited or with no justification of the use of materials, equipment and manufacturing processes. Additionally, evidence of experimentation and evaluation of the properties and performance of fabric, yarn and fibre sometimes lacked detail in each section or did not relate to the end-use of the textile item.

In better responses, candidates:

• provided relevant experiments for the most significant techniques used in the textile item(s)
  
• provided clear evidence of current and extensive experimentation in materials, equipment and manufacturing processes that led to modifications to design/processes
  
• provided control samples and evidence samples of appropriate experimentation throughout the manufacturing process to justify the use of materials, equipment and manufacturing processes
  
• clearly justified the use of fibre, yarn and fabric to the textile item(s).

In weaker responses, candidates:

• included experiments not relevant or of limited importance to the textile item(s)
  
• lacked evidence of experimentation or included samples of techniques not relevant to the textile item(s)
  
• often reiterated information from texts and failed to understand or relate the properties of fibre, yarn and fabric to the end-use of their textile item(s)
  
• often included a personal evaluation of their textile item(s).

Written examination

Section II

Question 11 – Australian Textiles, Clothing, Footwear and Allied Industries

1. In better responses, candidates named and clearly described design considerations, such as the demand for UV protection and the use of SPF-rated fabrics and garments, with style modifications that provide more cover for the body to suit the Australian lifestyle. Some candidates concentrated on a specific sport in detail, with relevant examples.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates referred to fibre, yarn and fabric properties with no link to the Australian lifestyle, design features and the need for sun protection.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates named an organic fibre source and provided specific examples of why organic fibres are increasingly used in textile production, such as environmental concerns, pollution, economically viable substitutes, consumer demands and designers appealing to a niche market.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates provided limited information on an organic fibre source or referred to fibre, yarn and fabric properties without a link to an organic fibre source.

Question 12 – Design

1. In better responses, candidates provided characteristics of embroidery, such as surface decorative stitching, and gave examples of relevant types of embroidery.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates nominated examples of types of embroidery rather than providing the characteristics.
   
   
2. 1. In better responses, candidates nominated a contemporary textile designer, and then clearly described how two specific style features of the designer’s work were influenced by a relevant source of inspiration.
      
      
   2. In weaker responses, candidates outlined the designer’s work in general terms with little or no reference to their inspiration.
      
      
   3. In better responses, candidates demonstrated a comprehensive understanding of how expertise, facilities and financial factors have contributed to the success or failure of the designer named.
      
      In weaker responses, candidates listed all three factors without any justification for the contribution of each, or described the designer without any reference to expertise, facilities and financial factors.

Question 13 – Properties and Performance of Textiles

1. In better responses, candidates correctly described bicomponent yarns as having two different filaments that are chemically and physically different, or produced by three different methods. Some candidates used simple diagrams to describe the production of bicomponent yarns and gave relevant fibre examples.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates were confused by the term ‘bicomponent’ and referred to blended yarns or plied yarns.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates gave comprehensive answers that outlined the manufacturing process and at least two properties of washable webs, and justified how those properties contributed to the extensive end-use of the washable web.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates did not demonstrate an understanding of washable webs or how their specific properties related to end-use. Candidates named woven and knitted fabrics and their properties rather than washable webs.
   
   
3. In better responses, candidates clearly provided detail of one innovative finishing technique that affects the end-use of the fabric, how the finish is applied to the specific fabric, the purpose of the finish, and how effectively the finish works. They then justified how the finish enhances the fabric performance.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates lacked detail and tended to name one finish and list broad end-uses or inappropriate end-uses. Candidates confused sewing and decorative finishes, such as hems, quilting and overlocking, with the finishes applied to enhance fabric performance and the specific end-use.

Section III

Question 14 – Design

1. In better responses, candidates identified a specific textile item, such as a kimono or sari, for their identified culture. A detailed description of the design features, fabrics and decorative techniques used on the item was given. Each feature/characteristic was clearly linked to a contemporary design or item and this was often across a range of focus areas. Specific examples of designs or designers may also have been included.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates either named a textile item from their chosen culture or did not identify a textile item but mentioned a technique, such as dyeing, with a general link to contemporary items such as T-shirts, or in very general terms mentioned how a technique had changed in contemporary practice.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates gave a logical well-structured response referring to both technological developments and religious practices. Candidates linked their knowledge of advances in technology to the culture chosen in a specific way, providing positive and negative impacts on design (such as more intricate design, consistency of design/quality, and loss of cultural meaning of a design) and production (such as faster production, more suited to tourism, better value, and higher value placed on traditional skills). The religious practices of the culture were clearly identified and a range of specific examples of the impact was provided, such as symbolism of motifs and designs, or ceremonial dress.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates gave general impacts of technological development, such as speed and loss of jobs, without relating this to a specific culture or textile items. General information relating to a religion was included with limited examples ­­– for example, the colour and style of wedding garments. Some candidates stated that the culture is not affected by technology and/or religion, or wrote about the culture they had studied in general terms, including areas such as geographic location, which was not required by the question.

Question 15 – Properties and Performance of Textiles

1. In better responses, candidates named detailed characteristics and features of the properties of microfibres and explained how these properties enhance fabric performance. Candidates showed a thorough understanding by providing example(s) of textile end-uses with justification of the specific properties of microfibres.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates listed properties(s) and/or provided incomplete answers and/or outlined in general terms how microfibres enhance fabric performance. These responses generally showed little knowledge of microfibres. Candidates listed general characteristics of fibres, some of which would be accurate for microfibres, and/or gave features of positive fabric performance without any link between fibre characteristics and fabric performance. Some candidates focused on what they knew about fabrics without relating this to the properties of microfibres.
   
   
2. In better responses, candidates provided clear detail of the influence of computer-aided design (CAD) and computer-aided manufacture (CAM) on current design and manufacture of textile products. These candidates provided examples to justify their responses. Candidates related in detail the impact of CAM and CAD on current design and manufacture of textile products, including positive and negative impacts. They provided specific details of some CAD systems, including digital sketching, direct digital printing, SYMCAD and seamless technology, and how these affect design and manufacture and also how designs are portable and stored.
   
   In weaker responses, candidates lacked detail and tended to outline computer-aided design and/or computer-aided manufacture. Candidates listed some general uses of CAD and CAM and their impacts on current design and manufacture.