7. An extract from a new documentary TV programme, lasting approximately five minutes,
together with two of the following three options:
a radio trailer for the documentary;
a double-page spread from a listings magazine focused on the documentary;
a newspaper advertisement for the documentary.
Friday 24 September 2010
Tuesday 21 September 2010
Examiner's Report on Advanced Portfolio Jan 10
The best film trailers did not attempt to tell the plot of the film in narrative order and included a
great variety of shots, using fast cuts to create an effective and atmospheric trailer. However the
majority followed the narrative of the film and were overlong and would have benefited from a
greater variety of shots and tighter editing. Some of the weakest looked more like submissions
for the short film brief!
Film posters were the most successful aspect of the ancillary tasks submitted and showed good
understanding of conventions. Magazine front covers were the most inconsistent. The weakest
showed little understanding of generic conventions.
There were some informed and effective TV documentaries, that demonstrated understanding of
the appropriate conventions, explored with technical skill and which had succeeded largely
because they had been built on genuine stories and featured real interviewees and mise en
scene and used thoughtful cutaways, relevant to what was being talked about. These
productions also clearly demonstrated a detailed level of planning. Some Centres submitted
much weaker TV documentary productions, where candidates had clearly fabricated the content
of their documentaries using people to play characters in the documentary who were clearly
reading a script when being ‘interviewed’. Sound was a real problem with a large number of
productions, with inconsistent sound levels and background noise under the voiceover. The
ancillaries for this brief were met with different levels of success: newspaper adverts were
generally well produced but a number of candidates used found images in their construction.
Double page spreads of listings magazines were the weakest element, with most of the DPS
being taken up with listings for TV channels and only a small amount of space being used for the
original production. The best created a full DPS about the programme with still images from the
programme and detailed and creative text. Few candidates produced radio adverts and those
that did tended to be weak with just a voiceover outlining the programme and little variety of
content, such as clips from the programme. The best productions had clearly been planned with
consideration of the channel it was to be broadcast on and target audience. This was evident in
the style and content of the programme and the ancillary texts with clear channel identity and
scheduling. There was only one candidate who appeared ‘confused’ producing a documentary
extract with the Channel 4 ident before the production started then producing ancillary texts
indicating the programme was to be broadcast on BBC1.
A few candidates worked to the short film brief and these were largely successful with clear
narrative and characterisation, careful construction of mise en scene, titling and camerawork.
Centres need to be more careful about originality in soundtracks, however. The posters for these
films were generally effective although the film magazine review pages were less successful.
There were very few radio trailers for the films. Evaluation
The best Evaluations took a multi-media approach. Whether as a presentation, a blog entry, or
as a DVD extra, an effective evaluation used clips and stills from the production work, feedback
from the audience - often as video or audio clips - and reflective analysis. Of particular note are
those candidates who created video-based evaluations which included talking heads, clips from
production work (often paused and annotated), and interviews with the audience. The direct
addressing of the four set questions was also a characteristic of a focused evaluation.
However, the Evaluation more generally tended to be the weakest element of candidates’ work
and the most over-marked. The worst evaluations were those on blogs or presentations that
consisted entirely of text, especially when responses to the set questions were either very short
or difficult to find amongst the rest of the material in a largely unstructured piece of writing. A
small number of candidates made the mistake of answering the set questions for Foundation
Portfolio, which was not acknowledged by the Centre. Most candidates did address the required
questions but in many cases their answers tended to be descriptive. Many evaluations took the
form of largely text-based essay-style answers on blogs or on numerous PowerPoint slides,
which many Centres then inappropriately rewarded as being excellent use of digital technology
and ICT. In one case a candidate was filmed reading her answers, which does not constitute
excellent use of digital technology. A number of Centres submitted DVDs of candidates either
being interviewed by a teacher answering the questions or delivering a presentation of their
evaluation to a class using a PowerPoint presentation. Some of these were extremely overlong,
in one Centre averaging 20 minutes per presentation. One centre filmed their presentations with
very faint audio, the candidates standing in front of the classroom door (which was opened in the
middle of presentations by other members of the Centre!) and with the view of the PowerPoint
on the screen being partially obscured by a desk top fan. This was not a very useful experience
and perhaps the sound and ‘mise en scene’ of this could be reconsidered for future submissions.
Advice
• The expectations of the unit are greater than for the old 2733 and this needs to be
reflected in the marking
• The best submissions were those making the most of the electronic basis of the new spec,
thoroughly integrating audio, video, image and web links to the written word during the
planning and research stages and the evaluation
• Encourage candidates to blog or use VLEs where possible, on an ongoing basis; this will
prove especially useful in preparing for G325
• Ensure candidates answer the four questions in their Evaluation
• Teach the skills for the ancillary tasks not just the main tasks
• Set an internal deadline well in advance of the Board’s deadline
• Complete print-based coversheets, filling in all sections accurately
• Where there are fewer than 10 candidates send all work to the moderators without waiting
for a sample request
great variety of shots, using fast cuts to create an effective and atmospheric trailer. However the
majority followed the narrative of the film and were overlong and would have benefited from a
greater variety of shots and tighter editing. Some of the weakest looked more like submissions
for the short film brief!
Film posters were the most successful aspect of the ancillary tasks submitted and showed good
understanding of conventions. Magazine front covers were the most inconsistent. The weakest
showed little understanding of generic conventions.
There were some informed and effective TV documentaries, that demonstrated understanding of
the appropriate conventions, explored with technical skill and which had succeeded largely
because they had been built on genuine stories and featured real interviewees and mise en
scene and used thoughtful cutaways, relevant to what was being talked about. These
productions also clearly demonstrated a detailed level of planning. Some Centres submitted
much weaker TV documentary productions, where candidates had clearly fabricated the content
of their documentaries using people to play characters in the documentary who were clearly
reading a script when being ‘interviewed’. Sound was a real problem with a large number of
productions, with inconsistent sound levels and background noise under the voiceover. The
ancillaries for this brief were met with different levels of success: newspaper adverts were
generally well produced but a number of candidates used found images in their construction.
Double page spreads of listings magazines were the weakest element, with most of the DPS
being taken up with listings for TV channels and only a small amount of space being used for the
original production. The best created a full DPS about the programme with still images from the
programme and detailed and creative text. Few candidates produced radio adverts and those
that did tended to be weak with just a voiceover outlining the programme and little variety of
content, such as clips from the programme. The best productions had clearly been planned with
consideration of the channel it was to be broadcast on and target audience. This was evident in
the style and content of the programme and the ancillary texts with clear channel identity and
scheduling. There was only one candidate who appeared ‘confused’ producing a documentary
extract with the Channel 4 ident before the production started then producing ancillary texts
indicating the programme was to be broadcast on BBC1.
A few candidates worked to the short film brief and these were largely successful with clear
narrative and characterisation, careful construction of mise en scene, titling and camerawork.
Centres need to be more careful about originality in soundtracks, however. The posters for these
films were generally effective although the film magazine review pages were less successful.
There were very few radio trailers for the films. Evaluation
The best Evaluations took a multi-media approach. Whether as a presentation, a blog entry, or
as a DVD extra, an effective evaluation used clips and stills from the production work, feedback
from the audience - often as video or audio clips - and reflective analysis. Of particular note are
those candidates who created video-based evaluations which included talking heads, clips from
production work (often paused and annotated), and interviews with the audience. The direct
addressing of the four set questions was also a characteristic of a focused evaluation.
However, the Evaluation more generally tended to be the weakest element of candidates’ work
and the most over-marked. The worst evaluations were those on blogs or presentations that
consisted entirely of text, especially when responses to the set questions were either very short
or difficult to find amongst the rest of the material in a largely unstructured piece of writing. A
small number of candidates made the mistake of answering the set questions for Foundation
Portfolio, which was not acknowledged by the Centre. Most candidates did address the required
questions but in many cases their answers tended to be descriptive. Many evaluations took the
form of largely text-based essay-style answers on blogs or on numerous PowerPoint slides,
which many Centres then inappropriately rewarded as being excellent use of digital technology
and ICT. In one case a candidate was filmed reading her answers, which does not constitute
excellent use of digital technology. A number of Centres submitted DVDs of candidates either
being interviewed by a teacher answering the questions or delivering a presentation of their
evaluation to a class using a PowerPoint presentation. Some of these were extremely overlong,
in one Centre averaging 20 minutes per presentation. One centre filmed their presentations with
very faint audio, the candidates standing in front of the classroom door (which was opened in the
middle of presentations by other members of the Centre!) and with the view of the PowerPoint
on the screen being partially obscured by a desk top fan. This was not a very useful experience
and perhaps the sound and ‘mise en scene’ of this could be reconsidered for future submissions.
Advice
• The expectations of the unit are greater than for the old 2733 and this needs to be
reflected in the marking
• The best submissions were those making the most of the electronic basis of the new spec,
thoroughly integrating audio, video, image and web links to the written word during the
planning and research stages and the evaluation
• Encourage candidates to blog or use VLEs where possible, on an ongoing basis; this will
prove especially useful in preparing for G325
• Ensure candidates answer the four questions in their Evaluation
• Teach the skills for the ancillary tasks not just the main tasks
• Set an internal deadline well in advance of the Board’s deadline
• Complete print-based coversheets, filling in all sections accurately
• Where there are fewer than 10 candidates send all work to the moderators without waiting
for a sample request
Wednesday 15 September 2010
Presentations
Well done for some excellent presentations. Make sure you upload them to your blog. Take the time to look at each others then write a feedback comment for each other on the blog comment. Its important that you use your blogs in the most interactive way possible.
You all have lots of information and activites to plough through over the next couple of weeks. I would like you to upload your responses to these onto yours blogs in the most user friendly way possible. You can record yourself straight onto the computers in almost a 'video diary', manner, discussing your ideas. Short responses or powerpoints are fine, but the exam board doesn't really want essay type responses. I will be looking at your blogs after every lesson and giving you a grade, -, = or + for the effort and level of response. Remember, sixth formers can have detentions and if there is nothing there you will have one! You are expected at this level to work outside of lesson time as well. I would suggest at least four hours a week.
Trailers:
Look here for activities to go with your sheets.
Short Films:
Look again at the 'About a Girl' worksheets and work through those for a detailed analysis of a short film.
You all have lots of information and activites to plough through over the next couple of weeks. I would like you to upload your responses to these onto yours blogs in the most user friendly way possible. You can record yourself straight onto the computers in almost a 'video diary', manner, discussing your ideas. Short responses or powerpoints are fine, but the exam board doesn't really want essay type responses. I will be looking at your blogs after every lesson and giving you a grade, -, = or + for the effort and level of response. Remember, sixth formers can have detentions and if there is nothing there you will have one! You are expected at this level to work outside of lesson time as well. I would suggest at least four hours a week.
Trailers:
Look here for activities to go with your sheets.
Short Films:
Look again at the 'About a Girl' worksheets and work through those for a detailed analysis of a short film.
Tuesday 7 September 2010
Proposal for Advanced Portfolio
This needs to be handed in on Wednesday 8th September
Name:
Title of Brief:
Outline of ideas:
Auxiliary Products:
Target Audience: (age, gender, socio/economic group)
How will your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real
media products? What is your inspiration?
How will your main product and ancillary texts compliment each other?
How will you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
How will you incorporate the following concepts?
Genre
Narrative
Representation
Audience
Media language
Timeline: the final product is due in on Friday 17th December. Draft a timeline for your research, planning, production, post-production (including audience feedback). How are you going to get it all done?
Name:
Title of Brief:
Outline of ideas:
Auxiliary Products:
Target Audience: (age, gender, socio/economic group)
How will your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real
media products? What is your inspiration?
How will your main product and ancillary texts compliment each other?
How will you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation stages?
How will you incorporate the following concepts?
Genre
Narrative
Representation
Audience
Media language
Timeline: the final product is due in on Friday 17th December. Draft a timeline for your research, planning, production, post-production (including audience feedback). How are you going to get it all done?
A2 G324: Advanced Portfolio in Media
A2 G324: Advanced Portfolio in Media
You will be assessed on your ability to:
1. plan and construct media products using appropriate technical and creative skills (AO3);
2. Your knowledge and understanding in evaluating your own work, showing how meanings and responses are created (AO2);
3. Your ability to undertake, apply and present appropriate research (AO4).
4. You need to demonstrate engagement with contemporary media technologies, and develop your own skills in these technologies and in your presentation skills.
In the evaluation the following questions must be answered so you must bear this in mind during the planning and production process.
• In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real
media products?
• How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
• What have you learned from your audience feedback?
• How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation
stages?
Choose from either:
A promotion package for a new film, to include a teaser trailer, together with two of the
following three options:
• a website homepage for the film;
• a film magazine front cover, featuring the film;
• a poster for the film
Or
A short film in its entirety, lasting approximately five minutes, which may be live action or
animated or a combination of both, together with two of the following three options:
• a poster for the film;
• a radio trailer for the film;
• a film magazine review page featuring the film.
You will be examined on your Portfolios in
Section A: Theoretical Evaluation of Production
You answer 2 questions.
Question 1(a) requires candidates to describe and evaluate their skills development over the
course of their production work, from Foundation Portfolio to Advanced Portfolio. The focus of this
evaluation must be on skills development, and the question will require them to adapt this to one or
two specific production practices. The list of practices to which questions will relate is as follows:
• Digital Technology
• Creativity
• Research and planning
• Post-production
• Using conventions from real media texts
In the examination, questions will be posed using one or two of these categories so you need to prepare answers for all.
Where candidates have produced relevant work outside the context of their A Level media course,
they are free to additionally refer to this experience.
Question 1(b) requires candidates to select one production and evaluate it in relation to a media
concept. The list of concepts to which questions will relate is as follows:
• Genre
• Narrative
• Representation
• Audience
• Media language
In the examination, questions will be set using one of these concepts only, you can use either your Foundation or the Advanced Portfolio to answer this depending on which is most suitable. So again you need to prepare answers to all of these and consider the concepts when planning and producing your artefacts.
You will be assessed on your ability to:
1. plan and construct media products using appropriate technical and creative skills (AO3);
2. Your knowledge and understanding in evaluating your own work, showing how meanings and responses are created (AO2);
3. Your ability to undertake, apply and present appropriate research (AO4).
4. You need to demonstrate engagement with contemporary media technologies, and develop your own skills in these technologies and in your presentation skills.
In the evaluation the following questions must be answered so you must bear this in mind during the planning and production process.
• In what ways does your media product use, develop or challenge forms and conventions of real
media products?
• How effective is the combination of your main product and ancillary texts?
• What have you learned from your audience feedback?
• How did you use media technologies in the construction and research, planning and evaluation
stages?
Choose from either:
A promotion package for a new film, to include a teaser trailer, together with two of the
following three options:
• a website homepage for the film;
• a film magazine front cover, featuring the film;
• a poster for the film
Or
A short film in its entirety, lasting approximately five minutes, which may be live action or
animated or a combination of both, together with two of the following three options:
• a poster for the film;
• a radio trailer for the film;
• a film magazine review page featuring the film.
You will be examined on your Portfolios in
Section A: Theoretical Evaluation of Production
You answer 2 questions.
Question 1(a) requires candidates to describe and evaluate their skills development over the
course of their production work, from Foundation Portfolio to Advanced Portfolio. The focus of this
evaluation must be on skills development, and the question will require them to adapt this to one or
two specific production practices. The list of practices to which questions will relate is as follows:
• Digital Technology
• Creativity
• Research and planning
• Post-production
• Using conventions from real media texts
In the examination, questions will be posed using one or two of these categories so you need to prepare answers for all.
Where candidates have produced relevant work outside the context of their A Level media course,
they are free to additionally refer to this experience.
Question 1(b) requires candidates to select one production and evaluate it in relation to a media
concept. The list of concepts to which questions will relate is as follows:
• Genre
• Narrative
• Representation
• Audience
• Media language
In the examination, questions will be set using one of these concepts only, you can use either your Foundation or the Advanced Portfolio to answer this depending on which is most suitable. So again you need to prepare answers to all of these and consider the concepts when planning and producing your artefacts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)