Worked example · PE · Year 9
DCF: Data and computational thinking → Data and information literacy
A secure Year 9 response, annotated so you can see which success criterion each part meets. It is also your answer key: the third-quarter tally is P 24, X 6, G 3, M 4, I 1, E 2 (total 40); the Centre caused 5 of the 8 turnovers; match pass completion is 86.8% and match shooting is 70.6%; the score went 7–5, 15–11, 18–20, 24–25. For the early-finisher question, the longest spell without a turnover ran from 05:25 to 07:13, which is 1 minute 48 seconds.
| Code | Meaning | Tally | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| P | Pass completed | |||| |||| |||| |||| |||| | 24 |
| X | Pass lost | |||| | | 6 |
| G | Goal | ||| | 3 |
| M | Missed shot | |||| | 4 |
| I | Interception won | | | 1 |
| E | Other error | || | 2 |
| Check: all six totals added together | 24 + 6 + 3 + 4 + 1 + 2 = 40 | ||
Tallied in fives and checked against the 40 events in the log before moving on, so no line was missed or counted twice. Evidences criterion 1.
| Position | X (passes lost) | E (other errors) | Turnovers (X + E) |
|---|---|---|---|
| C | 4 (events 5, 8, 21, 29) | 1 (event 20) | 5 |
| All other positions together | 2 (WA event 16, GA event 34) | 1 (GS event 37) | 3 |
| Whole team | 6 | 2 | 8 |
Centre's pass completion in the third quarter: 10 ÷ 14 × 100 = 71.4%. The rest of the team completed 24 − 10 = 14 passes out of 30 − 14 = 16, which is 14 ÷ 16 × 100 = 87.5%.
Every turnover is traced to an event number, so the count can be checked, and the team figure is split so the Centre can be compared with everyone else. Evidences criteria 1 and 2.
| Quarter | Passes attempted | Passes completed | Pass completion % | Shots | Goals | Shooting % | Interceptions won | Other errors | Goals conceded |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 40 | 36 | 90.0 | 9 | 7 | 77.8 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
| Q2 | 44 | 39 | 88.6 | 10 | 8 | 80.0 | 2 | 2 | 6 |
| Q3 | 30 | 24 | 80.0 | 7 | 3 | 42.9 | 1 | 2 | 9 |
| Q4 | 38 | 33 | 86.8 | 8 | 6 | 75.0 | 4 | 1 | 5 |
| Match | 152 | 132 | 86.8 | 34 | 24 | 70.6 | 10 | 6 | 25 |
Working for the match row: 40 + 44 + 30 + 38 = 152 passes attempted; 36 + 39 + 24 + 33 = 132 completed; 132 ÷ 152 × 100 = 86.8%. Shots 9 + 10 + 7 + 8 = 34; goals 7 + 8 + 3 + 6 = 24; 24 ÷ 34 × 100 = 70.6%.
Running score: after Q1 7–5 · half-time 15–11 · after Q3 18–20 · full time 24–25.
The match percentages are worked out from the match totals, not by averaging the four quarter percentages, which would give a slightly different and wrong answer. All figures to one decimal place. Evidences criterion 2.
Solid against striped, so the chart still works on a black-and-white printer; each bar carries its value; the title names both teams and what is measured. The one quarter where the striped bar is taller than the solid one jumps out. Evidences criterion 3.
(a) The match was lost in the third quarter. Llanbedr led 15–11 at half-time, then scored 3 and conceded 9, so they lost that quarter by 6 goals and went 18–20 down. They won each of the other three quarters (by 2, 2 and 1, which is 5 goals in total), so without the third quarter they would have won. They lost the match 24–25.
(b) In the third quarter the Centre completed 71.4% of her passes (10 out of 14), while the rest of the team completed 87.5% (14 out of 16). The Centre was involved in 5 of the team's 8 turnovers. The coach's notes explain why: the usual Centre was off injured and the substitute normally plays Wing Defence, so she was playing out of position. When the Wing Attack moved to Centre for the fourth quarter, team pass completion went back up to 86.8% and Llanbedr won the quarter 6–5. That fits the explanation, but it does not prove it on its own — Pentre Isaf may also have changed something at half-time, and their actions were not logged.
(c) The 42.9% is only 3 goals from 7 shots, and the Goal Attack's part of it is 1 goal from 4 shots. With numbers that small, one shot changes everything: if one more of those 7 shots had gone in, it would have been 4 ÷ 7 = 57.1%. Also, the team only got 7 shots in the quarter, compared with 9 or 10 in the first half, because the turnovers meant the ball was not reaching the circle. So the shooters are not the main problem; the supply is.
(d) First, it does not show how much pressure a player was under: a pass lost to a brilliant interception and a pass thrown straight out of court both get an X. Second, it does not show where on court things happened, so the coach cannot tell whether the ball was being lost on the centre pass or deep in the attacking third. It also cannot show anything Pentre Isaf did, and it is one observer's record of one match.
(e) 1. Train a second player properly for Centre. In the third quarter the substitute Centre made 5 of the team's 8 turnovers and completed only 71.4% of passes, against 87.5% for everyone else. 2. Work on getting the ball into the circle under pressure, not just on shooting: Llanbedr had only 7 shots in the third quarter against 9 or 10 in the other quarters, and the whole-match shooting of 70.6% shows the shooters are reliable when the ball reaches them.
Every claim quotes a number; the explanation in (b) uses the coach's notes as well as the log and admits what the data cannot prove; (c) spots the small-sample trap and works out the effect of one extra goal; (d) names real limits of the method. Evidences criteria 4 and 5.