Sei sulla pagina 1di 5

CIE A-Level

AICT practical
[paper 4]
notes

Everything in red is what I had to ask my teacher. This file includes all the important point from
the examiners report and marking schemes! HOPE IT HELPS : )
J une 2008
explanation of why the relationship was 1-to-Many. The explanation needed to include a reference to allowing individual
customers to make many bookings.
County and Post Code fields were part of the address.
Candidates were required to provide a printout showing both the mail merge codes and the document field codes; some
candidates failed to realise the difference and showed only the mail merge codes. Some candidates recognised the difference
but were unable to change the print settings, and provided screenshots showing both sets. It should be noted that the question
paper specifically states that candidates should print this document showing merge and field codes.
Use <>" " to specify in access query tht the field is not supposed to be blank.
100% accuracy was required for the prompt and default text as given in the question paper. IF ITS DEFAULT THEN DONT TICK
ASK ONCE OTHER WISE ASK ONCE CUZ THEN IT MUST ASK FOR EACH LETTER IF ASK ONCE IS TO BE TICKED,
DONT ENTRE DEFAULT TEXT
some candidates were not awarded marks when the evidence of the hyperlinks showed only the path and source file or URL.
Evidence of the object the link applied to was required for award of the mark.
SHOW THIS AS WELL
.to print acknowledgement letters required the further explanation that the letters were acknowledging the receipt of new
customer bookings.
.to print letters apologising needed additional information about what the apology was for; i.e. the unavailability of the items
requested by the customer.
.to open the data source was not acceptable unless some description of what the database contained was given. This should
have included the information that the database contained details of the customers and records of their bookings.
Evidence document. A large number of candidates failed to produce a single evidence document and resorted to individual
pages with screenshots as required. It should be noted that the question paper specifically states that candidates should use an
evidence document, and candidates were even given the filename for this document. As long as their candidate details were on
each of the submitted pages, credit was given to candidate where possible.
For the margins of picture: format pic position alignment of page always tick absolute position
Check spec 08 for menu system instructions.

November 08
If then else step 11
LETTERS DONT FIT IN 1 PAGE. IS THAT OKAY?
Column widths adjusted. What does this mean in ms? For the letters.. change to fit to page?
Merge code = from the source file
Field codes: if then else, fill in codes etc
Evidence of paste link.. imp always include!
candidates failed to use the option? to display the full field codes and thus failed to provide enough evidence of the paste
linking [not mentioned in question] or the use of the conditional field.
In general where selection of recipients is required evidence of the selection method is required. Screenshots of the final
recipients list is not acceptable as evidence of the selection method because they provide no evidence of the method used and
could be created from a manually typed data source.
Merge field and field codes diff? check.. ASK TO SHOW BOTH TOGETHER.
Where marks were lost it was usually for failing to ensure there was only one address field per line. This is a requirement for
which candidates could be better prepared since it applies in almost all Circumstances where an address is included.
FOR MILLSMENU: The explanation must have been sufficient for a new or non-technical user to understand the selection. This
should have included the information that the file contained details of the customers and records of their orders. .to print
letters needed further explanation that the letters were providing updated information about the items available for hire and
offers of further discounts.
The question paper included instructions to save some files with specified names. These were checked by the file references
used in the Menu document. Some candidates did not use the names as specified. Those who used different file names were
penalised at this point. At this level candidates should be made aware that when simulating a business solution it is important to
stick to the specification supplied. In general candidates need to be careful to follow all instructions within the question paper to
avoid losing marks unnecessarily.
Indeterminate relation: not primary to primary key
Always make query to chek if relationis correct

June 2009
In the syllabus, assessment objective B1 for the A2 level specifies: the ways in which an extensive range of organisations use
information and communication technology With this in mind, an emphasis on the nature and format of business documents
would be well advised. In particular, candidates would do well to remember that their audience for any explanations or interfaces
which they develop in the course of the assessment should be regarded as the intended end user i.e. a non-ICT specialist.
EXPLANATION OF RELATIONSHIP
A number of candidates also failed to establish optimal relationships by normalising" the tables efficiently as required by the
syllabus in assessment objective 11 a(i). In this paper, subsequent tasks were not adversely affected; in general, it could be
expected that any deficiencies in this regard could make using the database to provide complex solutions more difficult.
Theoretical details involving terms such as Primary keys and Foreign keys were not required. A suitable explanation would
cover the reason the type of relationship was created. For example ... a Many-One relationship was created because One
BoatModel could appear in Many CruiseRegions.....
It is worth stressing, however, that in practical tasks such as this, the intended user of the simulated system being created
should be regarded as a non-ICT specialist business user and the prompts should, therefore, be full, clear and professional in
tone.
Candidates should be reminded that a Menu is intended as an interface for a user not involved in the creation of the system or
indeed necessarily skilled in the use of ICT. Thus explanations should be detailed enough to inform the user of the content
and purpose of the resultant documents. ALWAYS INCLUDE LABELS IN ANY KIND OF MENU.
If one table has 3 of the same fields dont link all 3 to each other cuz thiS creates repetition and a dbms is supposed to
eliminate that. Just link 2 to each other.
Include screen shot(s) of your code, macro or switchboard items table in your evidence document. Ask what is
this. Itsn ot the same as the switchboard cuz its mentioned twice one after the other.
Include screen shot(s) or listing(s) of your code or macro in your evidence document.
Click on button property sheet event -- on click -- code for EACH BUTTON or macro builder..
Or use event procedure code opens
TASK 9+10: how to do the macro, how to prompt [rules in mail merge not showing], enable for all docs [look at next doc.],
include yours sincerely in the doc only or in macro also? [read er]
In general, candidates should be guided to examine the scope of such tasks before creating a solution. [task 8-10]
The selection of recipients for the mail merge was by a database search or a filter. Evidence of the selection method was
required. Screenshots of the final recipients list was not acceptable as evidence of the selection method because they provide
no evidence of the method used and could be created from a manually typed data source. [task11]
Evidence: Examiners expected to see the document printed as a whole with the evidence sequenced as specified in the
question paper.
It would be sensible for Centres to remind candidates to adhere more closely to the instructions in future.

November 2009
Try not to keep a relation thats in determinate [try other options]cuz if its indeterminate you will have to say
why it is that way
many candidates failed to recognise that explanations, descriptions, labels and prompts should be written for non-
ICTspecialists (users). This may well be an area centres will wish to emphasise in preparing candidates since tasks at this level
are intended to simulate a business scenario and that the output should reflect this.
provide sufficient evidence.
Relationships description: Theoretical details involving terms as Primary keys and Foreign keys were not required. A
suitable explanation would cover the reason the type of relationship was created. For example ... a Many-One relationship
was created because there may be Many Enquiries..for One Region.
GIVE EVIDENCE FOR EVERYTHINGGG!!!!! I MEAN IT!!!
For task 5 the air con field doesnt come itself even though you add it in the report in design it goes away you have to add it
urself. and make sure its true and false not 0 and -1 change it in the design view of the table to tru and false.
As a part of the business scenario, candidates need to provide documents of professional quality.
Centres may also be wise to highlight the difference between report and page footers in the database application.
It worth stressing that the Menu was intended as an interface for a user not involved in the creation of the system or indeed
skilled in the use of ICT. Whilst most candidates provided a working Form or switchboardmenu, very few included descriptions
that were detailed enough to inform the user of the content and purpose of the resultant document.
Task 9: a number of candidates failed to realise that they were required to move their candidate details from the footer of the
exported report to the footer of the new document.
Task 10 = if then else not working
June 2010
A common fault, however, was that candidates were unable to configure the word processor and printer options to display the
mergefield evidence in full. Teachers may wish to cover this in more depth to avoid loss of marks.
Very few candidates had any difficulty with the mail merge tasks but many, indeed most, will have wasted a lot of time
documenting and providing evidence of their efforts in creating a database as the source for the mergefields. This evidence
was not required. It may well be that teachers prepared candidates with this expectation because of an over reliance on past
papers.
Although fewer than in previous sessions, marks were lost unnecessarily when, once again, many candidates failed to
recognise that the scenario for the paper is setting up a system for non-ICT specialists as users. This means that explanations,
descriptions, labels and prompts must include enough detail so that functions and operations are clear. Tasks at this level are
intended to simulate a business scenario and the output should reflect this.
Task1 labels: since a principle of the paper is automation, manual selection of the recipients by inspection was not accepted as
a suitable solution.
Task 2 = if-then-else
Task 3
Use of if
the format of the table was not exactly as shown
the IF formulae for the text book costs returned zeroes not blanks.
Paste link the field to Cell A2 in your Book Costs file.
Print Invoices for Student ids 11cs158 and 11cs164..what do I do with the recipients list.. and the excel sheet has to
be updated also?
In this task many candidates produced the documents for the specified recipients but displayed the table incorrectly in that
details of the items not required were also shown. Clearly an invoice should show only the details and prices of the items
purchased.
They key to success in this task was the presentation of the evidence showing the OLE link to the word processed document in
the spreadsheet and the field codes in the document.
In this instance the most suitable solution was a simple document with descriptions detailed enough to inform the user of the
content and purpose of the options and hyperlinks to the resultant files or documents. Solutions using a switchboard menu or
macros rarely enabled candidates to gain all the marks available.
Centres will find it worth noting that when instructions require documents to be created or saved with given filenames, the
hyperlinks must reference these specifically.

November 2010
Whilst not an integral feature of this paper, Centres may be advised to cover normalisation in a little more depth and give
candidates further experience of analysing data and proposing structures.
When explaining the relationships a simple statement such as, One module may be taken by Many students is more suitable
than a technical treatment involving Primary and Foreign keys. Indeed without reference to the specific fields the answer is
invalid.
Task5
In this task, it was acceptable to use a database query as the data source or to apply filters in the word processing application.
In the latter case, however, only a few candidates provided sufficient evidence of the method. A screenshot of the filtered list
was not sufficient evidence.
production of letters of a professional standard was important.
Also of particular interest, is the number of candidates who did not format the date correctly.
Another issue was the failure of the conditional field to provide correct results due to the use of the incorrect test criteria. The
field used was Boolean, so needed to be tested as True or False.
The query searched for the candidates in the specified teachers Option Modules; at the very least, the user had to be reminded
that it is a Tutors name they need to input.
For task 7== import from report to excel not from query to excel!!!!
The question specified a form or switchboard which should have helped candidates to recognise that the interface needed to
be within the database application. A number of candidates produced a word-processed document and used hyperlinks. Whilst
hyperlinks could display the data required, the documents produced would only be based on up to date data if the report had
been run and exported first.
Since the menu is intended as an interface for a user not involved in the creation of the system or skilled in the use of ICT, most
descriptions and explanations of the menu items were not detailed enough to sufficiently inform such a user of the nature and
purpose of the information to be displayed.
Centres will find it worth noting that when instructions require queries, reports, or documents to be created or saved with given
filenames, the evidence must reference these names specifically.


June 2011
As such, solutions should be robust and repeatable in another cycle with the next set of data. In the case of this session (June
2011), candidates solutions should be seen to be applicable, (without significant alteration) to the next months prize draw.
Also of note is the widespread lack of proof-reading printouts and verifying results.
Linking the data from the website was not necessary, but a good candidate would have seen this as a possible advantage for
future processing.
At this point, the higher performing candidates realised that in subsequent cycles (months) the number of eligible customers
would be different; so the solution should include a mechanism for the bounds for the random number to be calculated
automatically rather than entered manually after inspection of the list.
Many candidates chose to transpose the Current Prizes data extracted from the website and use a Vertical lookup function.
This was quite acceptable in this case but unnecessary steps are best avoided. The Horizontal lookup function was more
suitable.
Most erroneous results were achieved when candidates determined the lookup values for the Draw Entrants (D2:D6) and also
applied them to the Customer Details data. A simple visual check that the resulting customer surnames matched the customer
email Addresses could have alerted candidates to this error.
It was pleasing to note that many candidates recognised the need to follow a given specification exactly and most formatted the
resultant table as required. This needed to include the text wrap and alignment formatting.
Task 2 toggle not working
What do you mean by normalizing tables
The resulting certificates were required to be formatted consistently and fit on a single page. A number of candidates did not
ensure that all the certificates fitted on to a single page and that all the fields were formatted as required. This was particularly
evident in the resulting conditional text. Proof-reading printouts with reference to the specification is necessary before
submission.
Candidates who attempted this task usually completed it well, however, a number did not recognise they were simulating the
creation of a system for others to use. Their new toolbar or menu item should have been labelled meaningfully. Text such as
Macro1 or Task 3 carries no information as to the function and purpose. A button or menu item labelled Format Certificates
would suffice.
Also of note is that many printouts showed a lot of unnecessary code. This was often generated by mistakes by candidates in
recording their steps and the subsequent corrections. It is not unreasonable to expect code to be cleaned up and Centres
may be wise to spend some time helping candidate to determine the efficiency of macros or procedures rather than just the
result.
Candidates were then required to test their solution and produce the reformatted certificates. At this point, some did not
remember the specifications provided in Task 2 and ensure that all the certificates fitted a single page. Simple proof-reading of
the result against the specification provided could have avoided this error.
Although this was generally well done, a number of submissions were cropped too severely to verify the screenshot was not
from a database view, and, in some, the export had affected the formatting of the table unduly
Numbers always have to be on the right and text on left. If numbers that are to be used for calculations are on right change
them to number and make sure they are on left otherwise they wont work in calculation.

November 2011
Task 3 date
how will they come to know if we have run the macro or not
is there a way of viewing macro code for macro created in word?
for macro always use this this doc or all doc
task3 : Evidence of the removal of unnecessary code from subroutines)

Specimen 2008
in access query: [] use to enclosed fields, () for the formula
To make sure primary key doesnt have any duplicates : select primary key in table design view -- general indexed yes [no
duplicates]
read example guide from ms

Potrebbero piacerti anche