Ask an expert

Firstly, to the specifics in your question…

The two types of reasoning that you refer to in your question (functional reasoning and practical reasoning) are to ensure that a holistic evaluation of a technological outcome’s potential and actual impact on the world is made during the technological modelling.

Functional reasoning provides a basis for exploring the technical feasibility of the design concept and the outcome. Examples of this in a website context could be the ease of navigation around the site, the legibility and readability of text on the web pages, the speed that images or other content loads, how the website behaves across browsers and across platforms. Examples in the database context could be the actual structure of the database, the required fields, field formatting considerations, the layout of forms and reports, the behaviour of data validation rules, and the output produced in reports. So the functional reasoning is around decisions as to could it happen (how to make it happen) in functional modelling and how is it happening in prototyping.

The practical reasoning aspect introduces another dimension by providing a basis to explore the acceptability of the design concept and the outcome itself. This relates to such things as moral, ethical, social, political, economic, and environmental dimensions. Not all of these will necessarily apply in any particular case. Examples of this in the website context could be around the age appropriateness of material (text, images, other media content), privacy considerations (such as not using images of people without appropriate permission or not giving out personal details), copyright considerations, or cultural considerations such as connotations of particular colours or combinations of colours. In the database context the issues around privacy would be significant here such as adherence with the principles in the Privacy Act in the way information is collected, stored etc. So the practical reasoning is around decisions as to should it happen in functional modelling and should it be happening in prototyping.

Secondly, some general comments about technological modelling that are not specifically referred to in your question but are worth reiterating here…

There is support material available on Technology Online for technological modelling. See key ideas on technological modelling.

The indicators of progression contains the achievement objectives, teacher guidance, and indicators. See technological modelling indicators of progression.

Remember technological modelling covers both functional modelling and prototyping. These two types of reasoning (functional reasoning and practical reasoning) are both involved at both the concept stage when functional modelling is used to explore the feasibility of the design concept and at the prototype stage when the feasibility of the finished outcome is explored.

The standards at level one and two for technological modelling are about students understanding about modelling as opposed to students doing modelling. Whilst students do learn by doing, the standards are not asking for a diary of practice showing their own modelling but rather a report that shows their understanding about modelling. At level one the report should demonstrate understanding of how technological modelling supports decision-making. At level two the report should demonstrate understanding of how technological modelling supports risk management.

Nature of Technology
This question is related to characteristics of Technological outcomes at Curriculum level 3 (NOT NCEA) Where students are required to demonstrate understanding that technological outcomes are recognisable as fit for purpose by the relationship between their physical and functional natures.
The indicators of progression with teacher guidance give clear guidance about this objective. See indicators of progression for characteristics of technological outcomes.
To support students to develop understanding of characteristics of technological outcomes at level 3, students need to be exposed to a range of technological outcomes with unknown functions to explore and guide them to make informed suggestions regarding who might use them and the possible function they could perform, based on the physical and functional attributes of the outcome. They also need to explore a range of technological outcomes that are similar in their functional nature but have differences in their physical natures and conversely the opposite. Students should understand that the intended use and users, social and physical locations all combine to determine how the physical and functional attributes can be best matched for fitness for purpose. For example; a selection of brooms could be described as having similar functional attributes (clean an area by sweeping unwanted material to another location, able to be used while standing) but whether they are for a young child to sweep dust of the kitchen floor or for an adult to sweep water off driveways will mean quite different physical attributes will be necessary to ensure the broom is fit for its purpose. In the reverse a selection of brushes could be described as having similar physical natures (all have flexible bristles) but the way in which they are used will determine their functional nature as to whether they function to clean, as a means of holding and spread a substance, as in painting or to move something as in sweeping. Students also need to understand the relationship between the physical and functional nature in a technological outcome.
Indicators of progression also give a clue as to what to teach as these are the outcomes you are looking for in student activity, discussion and any written evidence
Students can:
• describe possible users and functions of a technological outcome based on clues provided by its physical attributes
• describe examples of technological outcomes with different physical natures that have similar functional natures
• describe examples of technological outcomes with different functional natures that have similar physical natures
• explain why a technological outcome could be called a ‘good’ or ‘bad’ design.
So to explore these concepts you could work within any of the following contexts
For example:
• a range of raising agents to explore how different raising agents effect the physical outcome.
• A range of potato peelers, different looking ones, made from range of materials, but all have same function
• categories of finishes (such as oil, varnish, paint)
• a range of brushes (hair, paint, washing up ....)
• Explore functions of, for example, bags that are there to do similar things in terms of physical nature.
• A cake, muffin, and bread, have similar ingredients with similar functional ingredients functional natures, but each has a different physical nature.

Guidance on health and safety in technology spaces can be found at: Safety in technology education revised 2017.

'Functional attributes' refers to those characteristics that describe what a product (technological outcome) ‘does’ or ‘how it is to function’. Examples of functional attributes for a potato peeler could include attributes such as: able to peel a potato, able to be washed in a dishwasher, blade swivels.

‘Physical attributes’ describe what the product ‘looks like’, feels like, smells like etc. For example in the case of a potato peeler physical attributes could include: shaped to look like a potato, handle soft and spongy.

Each of these (functional attributes and physical attributes) can be refined into specifications that define the physical and/or functional requirements of the outcome in terms that allow them to be measured (i.e. enable a technological outcome’s ‘fitness for purpose’ to be determined). In the case of a potato peeler specifications focused on function could be: peel thickness removed from the potato to be between 1.2 -1.5mm; blade to swivel 90 degrees. Examples of specifications that describe the physical requirements of a potato peeler could be: handle made from sky blue or lime green PVC; blade made from T304 stainless steel.

White paper is not a restriction. In fact coloured paper for rendering is an acceptable practice and often allows the student to show stronger highlights and shadows. Buff coloured paper, for instance, is easier on the eye than white paper and often helps students with dyslexia to see shapes with more ease, plus it is often easier for all students’ to use. White paper is often too “precious” and can stop students being more expressive. Another suggestion is to use coloured paper with a high GSM. Photocopy paper has a GSM of 80 gms. A paper with 130 to 160 gsm is a good rendering paper and allows students to build up colour without the paper buckling.

Entering "fitness for purpose in its broadest sense" in the keywords search brings up the following result: Search resultTwo answers in this search give the detailed questions and answers for this concept – one in textiles, the other in digital.

Learning programme design in Technology should be driven by multiple factors. Guidance is provided in the Senior secondary teaching and learning guidelines - Learning programme design.

It is not ideal to have the assessment tool driving the programme design. The purpose of the assessment for this achievement standard is for students to demonstrate they have an understanding about the (often multiple) complexities of manufacturing.

There are lots of digital technologies context examples students could refer to. For example, the manufacturing of cell phones, tablets etc. The Owens Design website states, “The challenge of manufacturing cell phones, tablets, and other mobile devices continues to grow more complex. The trends of increasing device complexity, miniaturization, and customization are driving a revolution in manufacturing process.” This website includes a range of case studies. See Mobile devices

Students could look at the role of programming/computer science in relation to production lines and robotics.  Most equipment on a production line has an element of computer programming that enables it to perform a specific task. For example, Howard Wright use a computer-generated production line to manufacture their beds. They have programmed robotic equipment to move at an optimal pace to retain precision and maximise yield.

Yes. The strategies defined employed in ideation (initiate design ideas through exploration) can be extended beyond what is indicated in the standard.

Fitness for purpose in its broadest sense relates to the outcome itself as well as to the practices used to develop the outcome. This is a curriculum level 8 concept and is referred to in the generic achievement standards at NCEA level 3. Some of the areas students could consider when demonstrating understandings of this concept and/or applying this within practice are shown in the table below. These suggestions should not be considered exhaustive and students will find other ideas that relate to particular outcomes.

Some teachers have found that, when developing a brief that allows fitness for purpose in the broadest sense, it works well to have students develop specifications for the two aspects. That is, students categorise their specifications as either being for the outcome itself or for the practices to be undertaken to develop the outcome. This helps to reinforce that students must consider more than just fitness for purpose (as is the practice at NCEA level 2).

Examining and critiquing the practice of technologists within the framework of fitness for purpose in its broadest sense can also assist students to develop their understandings of this concept.

If you cannot view or read the table on this page, download the PDF version:

Ask an expert: AS91611 (PDF, 46 KB)