1. Home
  2. HSC
  3. HSC Exams
  4. Pre-2016 HSC exam papers
  5. 2009 HSC Notes from the marking centre
  6. 2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Textiles and Design
Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size

2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Textiles and Design

Contents

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 2009 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 2009 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 Textiles and Design.

Teachers and students are advised that, in December 2008, the Board of Studies approved changes to the examination specifications and assessment requirements for a number of courses. These changes will be implemented for the 2010 HSC cohort. Information on a course-by-course basis is available on the Board’s website.

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 a guide 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.

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’.

Major textiles project

General comments

A diverse range of approaches in all of the five focus areas was demonstrated across the Textiles and Design projects. The most popular focus area was Apparel followed by Textile Arts, Costume, 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. Regardless of the selected focus area, the textile item needs to be finished in a proficient and appropriate manner. 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 influences, world events, personal identity, environmental concern 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. In better projects, candidates had identified a strong design concept for the textile project that was explored in depth through a historical/cultural or contemporary perspective.

A number of projects had pins holding incomplete sections. It is recommended that these be tacked and dressmaking pins removed. Supportive materials such as wire need to be correctly managed to leave no sharp edges. In some projects, non-textile materials were used which did not relate to the end use and this limited the depth of information that could be documented. Some candidates used dangerous materials in the textile item. Supervising teachers should refer to the list specified in the ACE Manual page 153, Section 9.3.15.

Works should not be framed under glass or rigid plastic sheeting as specified in the ACE Manual, page 153, Section 9.3.15. Markers require full access to all parts of the item in order to consider the proficiency of manufacture. This is not possible if the item is framed under glass or rigid plastic sheeting. A small number of projects were oversize and over weight limits.

Manufacturing techniques that are outsourced for the textile item/s such as quilting, pleating and printing should be fully acknowledged in the supporting documentation.

Supporting documentation must adhere strictly to the page limits and present as either the standard size A3 or A4 as stipulated in the syllabus. Title pages, content pages, photo pages, evaluation and bibliographies are not required and impact on the page limit.

Textile item/s

Better textile item/s were characterised by:

  • well-developed designs that clearly demonstrated appropriateness to the intended purpose. Functional and aesthetic features were successfully incorporated
  • highly creative and/or innovative designs that made a clear link to the overall purpose and demonstrated considered choices in the decision-making process for the selection of fabric/ design feature/construction techniques
  • degree of difficulty appropriate to the item/s and displayed complex design features and/or use of specialised fabrics and/or application of specialised or advanced construction techniques and/or application of decorative techniques
  • manufactured item/s that were of a high quality, demonstrating proficiency in manufacture. Techniques used in the construction and/or design were appropriate and completed to a high standard
  • completed textile item/s that reflected efficient time management.

Weaker textile item/s:

  • were characterised by designs which showed little relevance or appropriateness to the purpose. Some items consisted entirely of non-textile materials such as beads. A significant number were partially glued rather than sewn. Careful consideration needs to be given to the selection of design features and the choice of textile materials to ensure they are appropriate for the end use
  • demonstrated little proficiency in the manufacture of the textile item/s, often choosing inappropriate manufacturing techniques. Some items included techniques inappropriate for the end use such as glueing, painting and the application of sequins as the only manufacturing techniques
  • repeated only one technique throughout the item or used a technique that demonstrated little proficiency in textile manufacture
  • were incomplete and reflected poor time management.

Supporting documentation

General comments

Many outstanding contemporary presentations of the supporting documentation included well-labelled sketches and drawings, interesting and relevant annotated collages and appropriate samples. They also used a combination of appropriate colour schemes, fonts and themes. The majority of 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 folio. Some candidates’ work was difficult to read. Many candidates spent time decorating boxes and folders. These areas do not contribute to the mark of the project.

Support documentation should be presented following the order and headings used in the marking guidelines.

Design inspiration

Better responses:

  • clearly explained the relationship of the design inspiration to the focus area
  • linked and justified particular creative and/or innovative design ideas or techniques developed from the design inspiration
  • identified a historical/cultural and/or contemporary factor that influenced the design of the item/s and critically analysed the relationship of the design inspiration to the factors that influenced the design of the item/s
  • presented in a contemporary manner and used annotated collages of pictures and samples and/or graphical techniques to demonstrate a thorough understanding of the design inspiration.

Weaker responses:

  • provided a collage of pictures with no link to the design of the item/s
  • included too many sources of inspiration making justification difficult
  • attempted to make a link to each of the factors (historical/cultural and contemporary) which resulted in repetition of information with no analysis of the relationship to the design inspiration
  • presented inspiration in a chart form without linking their inspiration to the focus area or justifying their choices
  • did not identify the focus area.

Visual design development

Better responses:

  • used appropriately labelled, high-quality sketches/drawings that clearly indicated the link between the inspiration and the design ideas
  • described the inspiration and showed the development of design ideas for the item/s
  • provided the functional or aesthetic features of the design
  • critically evaluated the functional and aesthetic aspects of the final design, considering its strengths and weaknesses and making reference to the elements and principles of design
  • provided evidence of creativity throughout the development of the design ideas
  • created a visual flow of the design development which clearly presented the development of design ideas and concepts sequentially and in a thorough and logical way.

Weaker responses:

  • provided the final design without considering the development and evaluation of the design ideas. Some responses provided three of the best ideas with one being the final design, showing no evidence of how the final design was developed
  • attempted to critically analyse the functional and aesthetic aspects of all sketches in the design development, reducing space available to final design selection and analysis of functional and aesthetic aspects
  • used poor quality sketches with little or no labelling
  • listed aesthetic or functional requirements.

Manufacturing specification

Better responses:

  • provided a detailed and accurate written description of the textile item/s. High quality production drawings showed the front and back views, the grain line, pattern markings and full dimensioning, and were to scale and in proportion
  • included excellent quality technical production plans with well-labelled swatches and a logical and sequential order of construction
  • product labels were done well by the majority of candidates.

Weaker responses:

  • did not indicate the use of a commercial pattern or the modifications made to them, and failed to identify out-sourcing
  • confused presentation and production drawings and placed production drawings on a figure
  • had production drawings of a poor standard and often neglected to show pattern pieces with grain lines, pattern markings and dimensions
  • did not include a key to explain pattern markings or refer to the scale of the pattern shapes or production drawings.

Investigation, experimentation and evaluation

This area continues to be the weakest, with documentation incomplete, limited or with no justification of the use of materials, equipment and manufacturing processes. Moreover, little evidence of experimentation and evaluation of the properties and performance of fabric, yarn and fibre was shown.

Better responses:

  • showed extensive experimentation, investigations and justification of materials and equipment and techniques that were appropriate to the manufacture and function of the item/s
  • justified their choice of fibre, yarn and fabric in relation to their item’s end use
  • demonstrated how the results of experimentation were used to modify design and/or construction and included experiments relevant to the intended use.

Weaker responses:

  • did not link experimentation to the intended use, and many experiments were inappropriate, such as drape tests for swimwear
  • included samples rather than experiments – this was evident in increasing numbers this year. The expectation is that experimentation will provide evidence to support and justify the materials, equipment and processes used in the item/s
  • omitted to evaluate the properties and performance of the fabric, yarn and fibre used in relation to the end use. They provided textbook-type responses on fabric structure, such as plain weave or fibre content, without reference to the intended use.

Written examination

Section II

Question 11 – Australian textile, clothing, footwear and allied industries

  1. Most candidates identified a promotional strategy which included items endorsed by celebrities and advertising on television, in catalogues or billboards.

    Most candidates identified a pricing structure which included price penetration, price skimming, buy two and get one free, pricing based on quality, and suitability of price to target market.

    Weaker responses did not display an understanding of a pricing structure.

  2. The question required students to identify one practice adopted by Australian textile manufacturers to use environmentally sustainable resources and to describe the advantages for the environment of this method of manufacture.

    Better responses identified ONE appropriate practice relevant to Australian textile manufacturers and then succinctly described the advantages of this practice for the environment. Appropriate practices included cold pad batch dyeing and the production of bamboo or organic cotton. Responses to the advantages for the environment included water usage, energy usage and water recycling.

    Weaker responses did not identify a practice that was relevant to textile manufacture, eg biodegradable plastic bags, or identified several practices without then detailing their impact on the environment.

Question 12 – Design

  1. Better responses identified a traditional skill and provided an outline of the technique as well as showing a direct link to the production of a textile item. For example, Shibori used in kimonos involves tying the fabric into small sections to create a pattern and then immersing the fabric into a dye.

    Weaker responses only named a technique or a textile item. Many simply provided the name of a general culture such as ‘Asia’ or ‘Africa’ or did not name the technique.

  2. Better responses identified design features of a traditional textile item such as the wrap-around design in a kimono, the adaptation of the obi sash as a table runner and in tied wrap dresses as seen in contemporary design.

    Weaker responses continued on from part (a) and discussed a technique rather than a design feature. They did not say how this had been adapted into contemporary textile items.

  3. Better responses identified a focus area such as apparel, eg swimwear. They provided a clear progression of change. For example, in fibres used in swimwear, candidates discussed the transition from wool to sun-safe fabrics and recent developments with Olympic high-performance swimwear. They made a clear distinction between design features and production.

    Weaker responses continued on from parts (a) and (b) and discussed a culture. Other responses discussed subcultures such as ‘Punk Culture’ or discussed a designer, and were therefore unable to make reference to how the textile design and textile production had changed over time.

Question 13 – Properties and performance of textiles

    1. Better responses provided appropriate end uses for the given fabric, eg shirt, sheets, school uniform cushion cover.

      Weaker responses often named a knitted garment, eg T-shirt, or other inappropriate end uses, eg towel, tents. Some responses were totally inappropriate, such as zipper or overlocked seam

    2. Better responses identified the beneficial properties of the fibre and/or yarn and/or fabric and clearly linked them to the stated end use in (i).

      Weaker responses listed properties of the fibre content only and made no reference to the yarn and/or fabric structure.

  1. Better responses described the characteristics of microfibres and clearly explained how these were suited to the performance of protective outerwear.

    Weaker responses did not address all parts of the question. These responses often described a microfibre OR listed general properties of microfibres OR listed the requirements of protective outerwear. These responses often included inaccurate information about the application of protective finishes.

    1. Better responses clearly described bicomponent yarns as two different filaments extruded simultaneously.

      Weaker responses were confused with the term ‘bicomponent’ and referred to blended yarns or plied yarns.

    2. Better responses named an appropriate textile item and clearly explained how the properties of the item were enhanced by being constructed of bicomponent yarns. They often named both filaments in the yarn and briefly described how they were extruded. Their explanation included the beneficial properties of each of the filaments.

      Weaker responses often named a textile item and listed the relevant properties of it but made no link to bicomponent yarns. They did not demonstrate an understanding of the term ‘bicomponent yarns’. These students often referred to polyester/cotton blended yarns and did not name a specific textile item.

Section III

Question 14 – Design

  1. Better responses used technical language to name the majority of processes beginning with preparation of the dyeing solution and wetting out of the fibre, yarn or fabric through to the removal of excess dye and fixation.

    Weaker responses described how a specific dyeing technique observed or undertaken in class was carried out, eg tie-dyeing. In these responses there was no relationship between the dyeing technique used and the principles of dyeing involved. The language in weaker responses was informal and written as a recount rather than a procedure.

  2. Most students selected a method of printing that they had experimented with in class, eg block printing, screen printing or digital printing. Very few students chose a commercial method of printing.

    Better responses fully described the steps in logical order, giving characteristic and features of their chosen method. This included setting up the necessary equipment, the procedure, features and limitations. They explained the preparation of the fabric or garment, how the print image was obtained, eg carving a block, cutting a stencil, digitally producing an image, then how the image was transferred to the fabric, eg inking the block, printer settings, finishing with fixing the print.

    Candidates justified their choice of method by relating it to the end use, eg block print or stencil for a simple single shape or border, digital printing for detailed, multi-coloured images.

    Weaker responses provided simplistic responses that lacked detail, eg ‘get a picture and press print.’ Many candidates did not understand the limits of their chosen printing process believing that they could put a T-shirt into an ink-jet printer or recognise the need for separate screens for a multi-coloured print.

    There was no suitable justification related to the end use. These candidates often stated advantages and disadvantages of their printing process for the consumer, manufacturer and environment.

Question 15 – Properties and performance of textiles

  1. Better responses named an example/s of a textile machine technology. These answers included technical details and precise terminology. Better responses explained the significance of the machine technology on the construction of textile products, eg seamless technology created on Santoni™ Seamfree machines used to create fully fashioned undergarments such as the body shaper range, ‘Side Seamfree Shapers’, produced by Bonds in 2009.

    Weaker responses talked about machinery in general, providing little, if any, explanation of how the textile machine technology has changed the way textile products are constructed. Weaker responses did not identify an advanced textile machine technology. The language in weaker responses was informal and included lists which were often inaccurate and incomplete.

  2. Better responses related in detail the implications of the advantages and disadvantages of their chosen innovation for both the consumer and the environment, eg CAD CAM, SYMCAD 3D Optifit, Gerber cutter, laser cutter, seamless technology, computer-linked sewing machines. Candidates clearly and precisely justified their choice of innovation using examples and explicit technical terminology.

    Weaker responses were simplistic and lacked detail, simply listing one or two points without linking to the consumer and environment. These responses selected inappropriate textile machinery innovations that had little relevance to the question and did not define advantages and disadvantages for the consumer and the environment.

2010049

Print this page Reduce font size Increase font size