Commit e71e64
2026-05-25 22:51:38 lisa: SD C04: add Hot Cross Bun Matrix activity page; link from design guide and C04-home Hands-on Use-Modify-Create activity: design + run + defend an evaluation matrix on 2-3 bun brands, with blind tasting, independent scoring, persona stress-test, a blank scoring template, and transfer to C4-2/U4 O1. Original example (not reproducing CHOICE's data); links the CHOICE bun video. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>| /dev/null .. sd/C04/Activity - Hot Cross Bun Matrix.md | |
| @@ 0,0 1,97 @@ | |
| + | > **DRAFT** — under teacher review. |
| + | |
| + | # Activity — Design a Hot Cross Bun Matrix |
| + | |
| + | The Hamilton and Alexandra College · Year 12 · 2026 |
| + | |
| + | The fastest way to learn how to *design* an evaluation matrix is to build one for something real — and edible. CHOICE rates hot cross buns with the same discipline it rates headphones; in this activity, so will you. By the end you'll have designed, run and defended an evaluation matrix — the exact skill you need for **C4-2** and **Unit 4 Outcome 1**, where the thing you're judging is your own software. |
| + | |
| + | {{Video|src=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7m04xW0fzk}} |
| + | |
| + | **🎯 Watch first:** notice the panel scores against *agreed criteria*. Your job today is to decide those criteria — and defend them. |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## The challenge |
| + | |
| + | We have **two or three brands** of hot cross buns. Working as a review panel, you will **design an evaluation matrix, use it to crown a winner, and justify every design decision** — exactly as you would for a [software evaluation](/sd/C04/Designing%20an%20Evaluation%20Matrix). |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Step 1 — Make the design decisions *before you taste* |
| + | |
| + | This is the whole point: criteria come **first**, never invented afterwards to crown the bun you happened to like. Working from the [seven design decisions](/sd/C04/Designing%20an%20Evaluation%20Matrix), agree on: |
| + | |
| + | - **Who you're recommending for** — the persona drives everything. "Best bun" is meaningless; "best bun *for a family's Easter breakfast*" tells you what to measure. |
| + | - **Your criteria** — the handful that decide it for that person. |
| + | - **How each is measured** — a blind panel rating, or something objective like price-per-bun or counting fruit pieces. |
| + | - **Weights, justified** — where your point of view lives. |
| + | - **A scale** (use 0–5), and **what you deliberately exclude** (and why). |
| + | |
| + | A worked design for the persona *"a family buying for Easter breakfast"*: |
| + | |
| + | | Criterion | Weight | How you'll measure it | |
| + | |---|---|---| |
| + | | Taste | 35% | Blind panel rating, 0–5 | |
| + | | Texture & freshness | 20% | Blind panel rating | |
| + | | Fruit & spice | 20% | Blind panel rating | |
| + | | Value | 15% | Price per bun → converted to a 0–5 score | |
| + | | Appearance | 10% | Rating | |
| + | |
| + | *Deliberately excluded:* packaging — it doesn't change how the bun eats. |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Step 2 — Taste blind, score independently |
| + | |
| + | Two habits here are real evaluation skills, not just fairness: |
| + | |
| + | - **Blind it.** Label the brands A, B, C with the names hidden. If you can see the brand, the brand scores it for you — that's bias, and controlling for it is part of doing evaluation properly. |
| + | - **Score on your own first, then compare.** If everyone just agrees with whoever speaks loudest, you've measured confidence, not buns. |
| + | |
| + | Apply your weights to each brand's scores to get a **weighted total**. |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Step 3 — Write the verdict |
| + | |
| + | - **Explain** which bun proceeds, citing at least two criteria and their scores. |
| + | - **Justify** it by **naming the rival**: what does your winner give up compared with the runner-up, and why is that trade-off worth it for your persona? |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Step 4 — Stress-test your matrix |
| + | |
| + | - **Swap the persona.** Re-weight for *a uni student on a tight budget* (value jumps) or *someone who can't stand sultanas* (fruit might even score *against* a bun). Does the winner change? It should — that's the lesson. |
| + | - **Try to game it.** Could one inflated weight force a favourite to win? |
| + | - **Hunt the missing criterion.** Aroma? Dietary needs? Size? |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Your scoring sheet |
| + | |
| + | Copy this and fill it in: |
| + | |
| + | | Criterion (weight) | Method | Brand A | Brand B | Brand C | |
| + | |---|---|---|---|---| |
| + | | | | | | | |
| + | | | | | | | |
| + | | | | | | | |
| + | | **Weighted total / 5** | | | | | |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## Why this matters |
| + | |
| + | The buns are a stand-in. The design decisions are **identical** when you evaluate your own software design ideas in [C4-2](/sd/C04/C4-2%20Checkpoint%20-%20Evaluation%20Matrix) and your finished solution in Unit 4 Outcome 1 — except there you can't taste the answer, so designing and defending the criteria *first* matters even more. |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ## See also |
| + | |
| + | - [Designing an Evaluation Matrix](/sd/C04/Designing%20an%20Evaluation%20Matrix) — the seven design decisions in full |
| + | - [C4-2 Checkpoint — Your Evaluation Matrix](/sd/C04/C4-2%20Checkpoint%20-%20Evaluation%20Matrix) · [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) |
| + | |
| + | --- |
| + | |
| + | ← Back to [C04 Home](/sd/C04/C04-home) · [VCE Software Development Hub](/sd/VCE%20Software%20Development%20Hub) |
| sd/C04/C04-home.md .. | |
| @@ 26,6 26,7 @@ | |
| - [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 | |
| - [Designing an Evaluation Matrix](/sd/C04/Designing%20an%20Evaluation%20Matrix) — how to *design* a matrix from first principles (seven justified decisions), reverse-engineering a CHOICE magazine test; for C4-2 and U4 O1 | |
| + | - [Activity — Design a Hot Cross Bun Matrix](/sd/C04/Activity%20-%20Hot%20Cross%20Bun%20Matrix) — a hands-on taste-test challenge that practises the seven design decisions before you apply them to software |
| - [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 | |
| sd/C04/Designing an Evaluation Matrix.md .. | |
| @@ 123,6 123,7 @@ | |
| ## See also | |
| + | - [Activity — Design a Hot Cross Bun Matrix](/sd/C04/Activity%20-%20Hot%20Cross%20Bun%20Matrix) — practise the seven decisions on something edible before you do it for software |
| - [C4-2 Checkpoint — Your Evaluation Matrix](/sd/C04/C4-2%20Checkpoint%20-%20Evaluation%20Matrix) — build the matrix for your own design ideas | |
| - [Evaluation Criteria and the SRS](/sd/C04/Evaluation%20Criteria%20and%20the%20SRS) · [Efficiency vs Effectiveness](/sd/C04/Efficiency%20vs%20Effectiveness) | |
| - [Evaluation vs Testing](/sd/C04/Evaluation%20vs%20Testing) | |