CLARIFICATIONS TO DEVELOPERS/WRITERS for INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CSEC

The following are the points of clarification discussed at the meeting of June 9, 2008.

The bidder is required to identify free software. There is no requirement for adaptation under this bid.

There is no requirement for population of the item bank under this bid.

If the bidder is a group, the highest qualifications of any individual in the group will be used for evaluation.

The product to be delivered under the contract will be based on the 2010 syllabus.

Proof of ownership of the materials will be based on a statement by the bidder. The company will be indemnified if the bidder is not the owner.

The delivery schedule will be by term starting from september 2008.

It is acceptable for foreign nationals to bid.

Instructional Materials

Comparisons between:
CSEC Chemistry Teaching Curriculum, August 2007. By: Dr. Lorna Sue-Ho
Scope and Sequence for Chemistry Syllabus (2002) , Prepared by Ivy Cummings For The E-Learning Company
Comments:
Both documents provide the Scope and Sequence for Chemistry, and both did some minor reordering of CSEC objectives based on experience. This author cannot comment on the reordering as the topic is beyond my expertise level.
Both Documents allude to material available to help the teacher and tease them with these, but fail to give specifics and details. For example “If there are available CD’s and Videos, they should be used”
Document 1 gives “Sample Lesson Plans”. This is good
Both documents give Suggested Laboratory Experiences (call it different terms) and briefly describe what to do, but fail to provide the details and the OBJECTIVES of the activity (Although objectives for the UNIT are given).
Document 1 refers to many other elements (“ … Read report on CSC past scores”), which takes the reader from the matter at hand.
Document 2 Provides “Prerequisite Knowledge” for each week. This is good
Document 2 provides “Examples and Explanatory notes” to the reader. This is good
Document 2 provides the “Scope” in clearer bulleted form. This is good
Both Documents break down the terms into weeks, providing Term, Week, Topic, CSEC objective and suggested Activities (labs).
Document 1 breaks down the Activities/labs into ones which should be done by the student, or ones which should be done by the teacher as a demonstration. This is good.
Document 1 flushes out the CSEC objective with the “Content”. This is good.
Document 1 provides “Teaching strategies”. This is good.
Document 1 provides “sample Lesson Plans”. This is good
Document 1 – Very interesting approach and tracking mechanism for KC and UK for the Skills based activities
General Comments

These “Scope and Sequence” documents are a good first step from the CSEC objectives/Test. But, they are the FIRST step, and the teachers do not need a KIT for what to do in the classroom, but support in the form of daily activates, plans and ideas that they can they adapt to their personal strategies and their unique students
Both document use the 3 Semester in 10th grade, and 2 Semesters in 11th grade. Time NEEDS to be allotted for test preparation, review, etc if we wish the students to do better on the CSEC test.
The “Model”, should be a combination of these two documents as they each have their advantages and disadvantages.