Show your contribution and learning with evidence
| English | 中文 | Pinyin |
|---|---|---|
| contribution/ˌkɒntrɪˈbjuːʃn/ | 贡献 | gòng xiàn |
| decision record/dɪˈsɪʒn ˈrekɔːd/ | 决策记录 | jué cè jì lù |
| corroboration/kəˌrɒbəˈreɪʃn/ | 佐证 | zuǒ zhèng |
| evaluation/ɪˌvæljuːˈeɪʃn/ | 评价 | píng jià |
| portfolio/pɔːtˈfəʊlɪəʊ/ | 学习档案 | xué xí dàng àn |
A shared result hides different contributions
- A fictional pupil team makes a library map. Mei drafts the legend, Arun checks the room labels, and Jo tests a draft with the librarian. A photograph shows all three holding the finished map. Does it establish who did each task?
- A contribution 贡献 is the part a person actually played. The finished map shows a shared result; an individual account needs a specific action and appropriate evidence. This classroom case is not a completed CAS experience.
Which action is Mei’s own contribution?
The case assigns those three tasks to different pupils.
Show the decision in your work
- Mei's first draft uses three similar symbols. After the librarian reports confusion, Mei revises the legend with distinct symbols and labels. The two dated drafts make the change visible.
- A decision record 决策记录 explains why the change was made and what Mei did. Credit Jo for seeking the feedback and Arun for checking the labels. Mei cannot claim those tasks as her own.
The team photograph proves that Mei completed every task.
A shared photograph does not establish each person’s actions.
Match evidence to the learning claim
- Mei says she learned to make instructions easier to follow. Her reflection should identify the initial difficulty, the feedback, her revision and what a later check showed. A draft change alone does not establish its effect on readers.
- Corroboration 佐证 can support a specific account through another person's relevant observation. A librarian's note about Mei explaining the new legend may support that action; it does not certify every learning outcome.
What do the two dated drafts most directly support?
The drafts make the revision visible; its effect needs relevant reader evidence.
Match the record to what it can support.
Choose evidence for the particular claim rather than treating all records as equivalent.
Report mixed results honestly
- In the next approved trial, two readers identify the study rooms correctly, but one still confuses the lift and stairs symbols. The revision helped some readers while an important problem remained.
- An evaluation 评价 explains what the evidence changes in your judgement. Propose a relevant revision and another agreed check instead of claiming that the map now works for everyone.
Which conclusions fit the later trial?
Report both the improvement and the remaining difficulty.
Keep evidence accurate and private
- A portfolio 学习档案 holds selected records of actual work and learning. Follow the school's approved process for drafts, feedback and permissions; avoid collecting or publishing unnecessary personal details.
- Only real approved action can support a record of an experience. Keep this invented case labelled practice. The school reviews authentic evidence and programme requirements; a quiz cannot confirm CAS completion.
How should you use this lesson’s invented case?
Reasoning practice does not establish actual participation or learning outcomes.
Mei can explain that feedback revealed confusing symbols, identify her own legend revision and credit her teammates' different roles. The dated drafts support the change. The later trial supports a limited improvement and identifies a remaining lift/stairs problem. A next action is to agree a clearer symbol with the librarian and test that distinction. This is a fictional practice explanation, not an actual portfolio entry.
Attendance or a team photograph does not by itself show a person's task or learning. An attractive final product can still have an unresolved problem.
Explain your own action, connect appropriate evidence to learning, credit others and use honest feedback to decide the next step.