Commit 7b1008
2026-05-25 11:26:37 lisa: SD: add 'C04 to C05 - Choose, then Detail' explainer; link from both homes Cross-criterion explainer (breadth->depth, divergent->convergent) with funnel-fan diagram and CYU. Linked from C04-home and C05-home Key concepts. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>| sd/C04/C04-home.md .. | |
| @@ 17,6 17,7 @@ | |
| - [Evaluation vs Testing](/sd/C04/Evaluation%20vs%20Testing) — why a solution can pass all tests and still fail evaluation; the exact distinction the 7–10 band requires you to hold | |
| - [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) — side-by-side scenario; how each term maps to separate evaluation matrix tables; why getting this wrong costs marks | |
| - [Evaluation Criteria and the SRS](/sd/C04/Evaluation%20Criteria%20and%20the%20SRS) — why every criterion must trace to a numbered SRS requirement, with worked counter-examples and a pre-submission checklist | |
| + | - [C04 → C05 — Choose, then Detail](/sd/C05/C04%20to%20C05%20-%20Choose%20then%20Detail) — how this criterion (choose *which* idea) differs from C05 (detail the chosen idea); breadth vs depth |
| ## Resources | |
| /dev/null .. sd/C05/C04 to C05 - Choose then Detail.md | |
| @@ 0,0 1,82 @@ | |
| + | > **DRAFT** — under teacher review. |
| + | |
| + | # C04 → C05 — Choose, then Detail |
| + | |
| + | The Hamilton and Alexandra College · Year 12 · 2026 |
| + | |
| + | C04 and C05 sit back-to-back in the SAT and share the word *design*, so they're easy to blur. The distinction is simple once you see it: **C04 decides *which* idea; C05 specifies that idea precisely enough to build.** |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## The one-sentence rule |
| + | |
| + | | Criterion | In one sentence | The question it answers | |
| + | |---|---|---| |
| + | | **C04** — Generating Design Ideas & Evaluation Criteria | Explore *several* rough design ideas, then use evaluation criteria to choose one | "Which design should proceed — and why?" | |
| + | | **C05** — Producing Detailed Designs | Take the *chosen* idea and detail it until someone else could build it | "Exactly how is this built — every screen, field and step?" | |
| + | |
| + | The shift is **breadth → depth**: C04 is *divergent* (many options, then a decision); C05 is *convergent* (one option, fully specified). |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## One picture |
| + | |
| + | C04 fans *out* into options and funnels *in* to a decision. C05 takes that single decision and fans it back *out* — but this time into detail, not alternatives. |
| + | |
| + | ```mermaid |
| + | flowchart LR |
| + | I1["Idea A"] --> M{{"Evaluation matrix<br/>C04 · choose which"}} |
| + | I2["Idea B"] --> M |
| + | I3["Idea C"] --> M |
| + | M ==>|"the chosen design"| D["Detailed design<br/>C05"] |
| + | D --> T1["Mock-ups"] |
| + | D --> T2["Data dictionary"] |
| + | D --> T3["IPO charts"] |
| + | D --> T4["Pseudocode"] |
| + | D --> T5["Object descriptions"] |
| + | ``` |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Side-by-side |
| + | |
| + | | | **C04** | **C05** | |
| + | |---|---|---| |
| + | | What you produce | Several rough ideas + an evaluation matrix | One detailed design of the chosen idea | |
| + | | Mindset | Explore, then **decide** | Commit, then **detail** | |
| + | | Key tools | Mood board, brainstorm, mind map, annotated sketches | Mock-ups, data dictionary, IPO charts, pseudocode, object descriptions | |
| + | | Output's job | **Justify a choice** | **Be buildable** | |
| + | | Leans on | Your SRS (C03) and design brief | Your C04 decision | |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## The trap |
| + | |
| + | C05 is **not** "make the C04 sketch look nicer." A rough idea becomes a *detailed design* when another person could build from it **without asking you what you meant** — exact data types in the data dictionary, real logic in the pseudocode, every control annotated on the mock-up. That buildable precision is the whole point of C05. |
| + | |
| + | > [!TIP] |
| + | > **Architect's analogy:** C04 is sketching three concepts and arguing for one. C05 is drawing the construction blueprints for the concept that won. You can't blueprint what you haven't chosen — so C05 depends on the C04 decision. |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Check Your Understanding |
| + | |
| + | 1. In one phrase, what does C04 decide that C05 then assumes? |
| + | >| *Which* design idea proceeds. C05 details that already-chosen idea — it doesn't re-open the choice. |
| + | |
| + | 2. Breadth or depth — which word fits C04, and which fits C05? |
| + | >| C04 = **breadth** (several ideas, then choose). C05 = **depth** (one idea, fully specified). |
| + | |
| + | 3. A student repolishes the colours and fonts of their C04 sketch and submits it as their detailed design. What's missing? |
| + | >| Buildable detail — data dictionary, IPO/pseudocode logic, annotated controls. "Looks nicer" is not "detailed enough for someone else to build." |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## See also |
| + | |
| + | - [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) — the key distinction *inside* C04's evaluation criteria |
| + | - [Design Principles vs UX Characteristics](/sd/C05/Design%20Principles%20vs%20UX%20Characteristics) — a distinction *inside* C05 |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ← [C04 Home](/sd/C04/C04-home) · [C05 Home](/sd/C05/C05-home) · [VCE Software Development Hub](/sd/VCE%20Software%20Development%20Hub) |
| sd/C05/C05-home.md .. | |
| @@ 10,6 10,7 @@ | |
| Short explainers for the concepts most commonly confused or under-done at each rubric band: | |
| + | - [C04 → C05 — Choose, then Detail](/sd/C05/C04%20to%20C05%20-%20Choose%20then%20Detail) — how C05 (detail the chosen idea) differs from C04 (choose *which* idea); why C05 means "buildable", not "prettier" |
| - [Design Principles vs UX Characteristics](/sd/C05/Design%20Principles%20vs%20UX%20Characteristics) — why these are two separate lists, why usability appearing in both is a trap, and what the slot-five validation is actually checking | |
| ## Templates and scaffolds | |