# Lesson and assessment production examples

These are draft design blueprints, not complete teaching packages or approved rubrics.


## Graphic design and image manipulation

Sprint: mm12-26-s02

The preferred starting point. Build on editable Photoshop foundations and teach the design decisions that make an image communicate.

Independent evidence: A purposeful advertisement and an independently adapted audience/format version, with the editable source and a short defence.

Teach:

- Audience and purpose; visual hierarchy; type relationships; colour and contrast; image credibility and compositing decisions.
- Demonstrate the actual editing controls with genuine action/checkpoint screenshots, then let students choose and defend a different solution.
- Use Explorer to teach design principles before the selected guided Truck Ad work. The changed brief tests decisions beyond tutorial copying.

| Proposed criterion | Observable target | Teach/practise/demonstrate | Field O/C prompt |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Audience and message | The main idea and reading order are clear for the stated audience; image/type choices support that purpose. | Explorer comparison and audience test; independent changed-audience version. | Point to the choice that matters most for this audience. What did you change after testing? |
| Editable image construction | The source file retains purposeful controls, and the learner can use the relevant layer/mask/adjustment to make a changed edit. | Guided Truck Ad techniques; independent revision using the learner’s own file. | Observe a targeted repair. Ask why this control protects the rest of the image. |
| Design reasoning and revision | The learner explains a visible design problem, the revision made and the resulting communication improvement. | Critique practice, before/after comparison and final defence. | What evidence shows that the revision improved the message? |

Draft criterion design for MM12 image/design outcomes. Formal descriptors, exact outcome links and approved rubric IDs must be resolved from the existing project rubric/registry. COM11 uses its village-identity task and course outcomes; it does not automatically inherit the full Truck assessment.

Materials to produce:

- Reuse the approved Truck Ad HTML, assets and valid assessment components.
- Complete Explorer teaching examples, one short practice task and a changed-audience brief.
- Create a criterion-by-lesson map, sampled O/C cards, bounded reflection and an exportable versioned rubric.

Next: Use the campaign brief and design vocabulary to plan original photographs in Sprint 3.


## Photography supplies original material

Sprint: mm12-26-s03

Photography extends the design work: students deliberately capture the images their message needs.

Independent evidence: Original photographs/contact sheet, chosen image and layered campaign, source/consent notes, and an independently changed format.

Teach:

- Camera care, stable capture, focus/exposure, framing, available light and practical file management.
- Use controlled comparisons: one deliberate change, a predicted result, an actual photograph, then a decision.
- Teach image context/ethics and purposeful selection before applying reversible edits and design principles.

| Proposed criterion | Observable target | Teach/practise/demonstrate | Field O/C prompt |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Purposeful capture and selection | The learner produces and selects an original usable image, with a defensible framing/light choice for the brief. | Capture stations and paired light studies; original shoot/reshoot and contact sheet. | Observe one deliberate capture change and ask the learner to explain the result. |
| Image construction and communication | The edited campaign communicates the intended idea and preserves an editable source for the new format. | Selection/edit demonstration, audience test and independent format adaptation. | Which edit strengthened the message, and where could editing become misleading? |
| Production decisions | The learner can trace source, capture, selection, revision and output choices using actual files. | Shot plan, source log, review and defence. | Ask for the file or comparison that supports one decision. |

MM12 judges the image-production/design outcomes selected for the task. COM11 Sprint 3 needs a separate course configuration addressing camera care, SLR/tripod technique, lighting and file formats; reuse instruction where appropriate, not the same outcome labels.

Materials to produce:

- Confirm available cameras/tripods and create genuine camera/tool examples.
- Create a shot-list/contact-sheet template, lighting comparison lab and teacher demonstration files.
- Finish the task rubric, short knowledge check, O/C sample plan and independent changed-format task.

Next: Separate the original campaign image into assets that can move in Sprint 4.


## Animation makes the design work in time

Sprint: mm12-26-s04

Reuse the original campaign and photographs, then add new learning about timing, movement and viewing conditions.

Independent evidence: A 15–20 second motion message, timed storyboard, editable timeline and independently changed pacing/format version.

Teach:

- Sequence, holds, keyframes, interpolation/easing, transitions, visual continuity and text reading time.
- Compare two timings using the same assets so students explain the effect of a decision.
- Teach export/reopen/playback checks and prepare an audio cue sheet for the next sprint.

| Proposed criterion | Observable target | Teach/practise/demonstrate | Field O/C prompt |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Purposeful motion and readability | Movement, holds and sequence make the intended message understandable to its audience. | Storyboard, timing comparison and viewer test; independent shortened version. | How does this hold or movement affect what the viewer understands? |
| Editable motion process | The learner can locate and change the relevant timeline control and produce a working export. | Timeline lab and guided production; observed timing/layer repair and export check. | Observe a timing diagnosis and ask the learner to show the control. |
| Revision under changed conditions | The new duration or viewing format preserves the central idea through deliberate trade-offs. | Practice critique followed by an unfamiliar duration/format requirement. | What did you keep, remove or retime, and why? |

Draft MM12 motion criterion design, not an approved rubric. Select focal module 2 outcomes explicitly. Do not label a static composite as motion evidence. Later Sprint 6 revisits motion with greater production choice. The actual editor/version is a production input still to confirm.

Materials to produce:

- Prototype the timeline workflow in the available editor; capture real action and error screenshots.
- Create a short worked example with different assets plus checkpoint/source files.
- Finish the rubric, changed brief, O/C cards, knowledge items and export test.

Next: Use the silent motion sequence and cue sheet for sound design in Sprint 5.


## IB Digital Society builds the reasoning

Sprint: ibds-26-s01

Use the same clear teaching format to make mechanisms and reasoning visible. This course has its own disciplinary content and assessment.

Independent evidence: A mechanism explanation, small source synthesis and independent changed-context judgment, followed by a short defence.

Teach:

- Explain a face-matching system using a simplified synthetic model: inputs, representation/comparison, threshold and decision; state what the model leaves out.
- Use the source pack to distinguish observed findings, claims, assumptions and limits. Teach stakeholders and selected 3Cs as analytical tools.
- Move from impact to implication, then counter-perspective, trade-off and a qualified judgment under changed conditions.

| Proposed criterion | Observable target | Teach/practise/demonstrate | Field O/C prompt |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Mechanism accuracy | The explanation connects the relevant system stages and shows how a changed rule can affect a decision. | Worked diagram and threshold lab; independent changed-system explanation. | Where does the decision happen, and what changes if this threshold changes? |
| Evidence and source reasoning | The learner uses relevant evidence and identifies a limitation affecting what can be concluded. | Source-card practice and theme comparison; independent synthesis. | Which source supports this claim, and what does it not establish? |
| Analysis and qualified judgment | The learner connects mechanisms to stakeholder consequences, weighs a credible alternative and explains a condition on the conclusion. | Model on another case; guided analysis; unfamiliar transfer and defence. | Who has the strongest counterargument, and what evidence would change your conclusion? |

These are proposed local formative reasoning criteria, not official IB markbands, IA criteria or a predicted grade. Formal Paper 1, Paper 2 and IA tasks require their current applicable assessment instruments and teacher guidance.

Materials to produce:

- Check the historical case and current technical sources, select short purposeful excerpts and write teacher source notes.
- Create the synthetic threshold lab, mechanism diagram, contrasting practice responses and source-synthesis activity.
- Write the independent changed-context task, local formative descriptors and sampled defence prompts; keep teacher answers separate.

Next: Reuse the mechanism/source/qualified-claim habits when evaluating age assurance in Sprint 2.