- The student, Alexandra Jarvis-Ferentinos, received marks and feedback for various coursework assignments related to planning, constructing, and evaluating a video project. - For the planning assignment, the student's work showed clear understanding but could have added more analysis and stronger links to theory. - The main video construction assignment showed proficiency in technical skills, well-matched editing, controlled camera work, and a strong narrative that followed genre conventions. - Ancillary assignments like the digipak and poster showed basic technical skills but would have benefited from additional thought and own images rather than just screengrabs. - The evaluation assignment answered all questions well and showed understanding, but could have provided clearer

1. A2 Coursework Overall Marks Sheet
Name: Alexandra Jarvis-Ferentinos
Planning – comments and mark out of 15/20
Some very good work with lots of detail and clear understanding of your video and
genre. Annotations of magazine advert and floor plans included. Some more detail
could be added to analysis, too descriptive at times. Better links to theory needed.
Construction – Main Task – comments and mark out of 33/40
The candidate has shown proficiency in the in the creative use of most of the
technical skills. Editing matches most of the beats well. Controlled use of the camera
with a good variety of shots. Mise en scene and performance follow genre
conventions well and has a strong clear narrative. Strong direction of performers and
excellent use of props.
Construction – Ancillary Task 1 (Digipak) comments and mark out of 6/10
Digipak has been constructedwith basic ability in some of the technical skills but is
clearly screengrabs from video. Some more thought into images needed. But some
good detail into creative decisions.
Construction – Ancillary Task 1 (Poster) comments and mark out of 6/10
Poster shows some understanding of conventions with basic ability in some of the
technical skills, with links to video, plus company logos. A difference in font size for
main text in yellow is good. Simple but effective, but own images needed.
Evaluation – Comments and mark out of 14 /20
Question 1 – answered with good detail on decisions and construction using Prezi.
All decisions have been explained using examples of own work with clear links to
audience, MES and links to Goodwin. Clearer links to real work productionswould
have been good. (4)
Question 2 – Text under advert / digipak. Some good detail on how products are
linked with reference to font, colour and conventions. Examples of real products
noted with good understanding of relationship between products.
Question 3 – answered using video interview.Group filmed reacting to video that
showed audience enjoying video and laughing. Some reflection on audience
feedback but could have explained further how production could be
improved.Reflection is limited. (3)
Question 4 – some good detail in answer using PowToon. Answer split well into
planning, construction and evaluation stages. Some good detail into how and why
different technologies used during production but lacks good detail. Images could
have been used as examples, plus some slides move to quick making reading hard.
(4)
Overall a good evaluation piece. All questions answered well with good
understanding of the questions. More variation on technologies used to answer
would have been good.
Total 74 /100 Level: 3 Grade: B