What were the biggest things you learnt while completing this task?
The most important thing I learned from doing this was the reality of how many teenage drivers are affected by driving under the influence of alcohol. Before the task, I was aware that drunk driving was an issue, but I had no idea how bad it was. I was surprised that these accidents affected such a large number of people, despite the fact that many individuals educate us on this issue. An example of this is the number of 1 in 5 teenagers who get into car crashes were drunk driving. This was quite a revelation for me, and it captured the severity of the situation.
What onepiece of advice would you pass on to youngdrivers above all else? Why?
That you are putting so many people in jeopardy because of one of your poor choices. What I believe teenagers fail to realise when they choose to drink and drive is that they are endangering their own life as well as the lives of those around them. To prevent harmful circumstances, you should always consider before acting, especially when the lives of others are at stake. Instead taking the wheel after drinking, you should take precautions when you believe you have had too much alcohol. Taking an Uber or having another designated driver take you is the best option.
Write down a pledge that you will commit to when you start driving. Why did you pick these things to commit to? How will you stick to these commitments?
I pledge to never drive while I swear I will never drive while inebriated or, that if I have the power to control it, allow anyone else to drive while intoxicated. I decided to do this because it is the most effective approach to keep myself and others in our community safe. I’m hoping to make the roadways a little safer for everyone. If I am inebriated, I will honour my pledge by allowing someone sober to drive me. I intend to maintain this dedication throughout my driving career since it benefits everyone in the long run.
The engineering process is a process which enables engineers to develop new designs which are beneficial for our world and its needs. The process is a cycle where the steps are repeated as many times as necessary to come up with the best solution. Using this process, we mimicked a real life problem with spaghetti and blu tack to learn about structures we can build to prevent earthquakes in the areas which are prone to them.
DEFINING OUR PROBLEM
Our task was to build a structure which is earthquake resistant which would be effective for areas that commonly experience them. We represented the building materials with spaghetti and blu tack. Our challenge was to create a structure which needed to have a minimum height of 60 cm and a maximum base of 30 cm x 30 cm. The structure also had to be under $60 with the cost of the materials. The spaghetti being $1 per 10 cm and the blu tack being $1 per gram. People need a quick and easy structural design which allows limited resources and doesn’t take up too much money. This is why the budget was implemented into our challenge. We wanted to design a building which was able to last 10 seconds of the table shaking. This shaking representing an earthquake in the real-life situation and the results of what happen to our building after the shaking, would tell us if our structure could be a successful design or not.
STEPS TO SOLVING
The first thing we did was brainstorm the different shapes and elements that we could potentially use to build a successful structure. We put our designs on a page together and selected the one which we think would be the best idea to go through with. Though, we knew that this wouldn’t be our final shape because of the next step of research, it was good to start somewhere. The research helped and created a success criteria for our building.
The next step in the process was to research all the different solutions to our problem and how engineers have tackled the problem in the real world. It allowed us to bring all our research together, described how they could be implemented and why they would be successful, and then justified why it was the best solution. When our group gathered our research together, we learnt many different things. Which is a positive point of the engineering process, it allows people to bring their ideas forward and share them to help find the best solution.
We found that domes are the most used and the strongest structural shape to use in buildings. Though, we realized we couldn’t do much with this since we were working with spaghetti and blu tack. Knowing this, we researched further and found that triangles were the best shape to use structurally since they provide support and equal distribution to structures when implemented in designs. We learnt that without the equal distribution of forces on a building we wouldn’t get anywhere near success in our challenge. is the key to a successful structure and that we need to reinforce the corners of buildings since they are the weakest part. These are a few of the pieces of information were what we had to keep in mind for later while we were creating and planning our designs. Another structurally balancing feature that we learnt would be handy in our project was cross braces (the ‘x’ figure) in our building to again, balance the forces and weight of our building.
The third step to the engineering process is design. Designing is the process where you create a plan for what you are going to make to solve the problem. Engineers use this in the real world by using diagrams to represent what their solution is.
We worked together to plan out a structure which we thought met the criteria for a successful structure. Corners with extra blu tack to reinforce them and cross bracing to make our structure durable. It was also well under budget with only a total cost of $42. We were very happy with this design until we got to the actual building part of the process.
Engineers are responsible for maintaining the physical infrastructure that connects our society. They have to create buildings which are built with limited resources, cost efficient and energy efficient.
The building part of the process was the most difficult process for our group. It was where everything started to go downhill. The spaghetti was weak and it did not hold as much weight as we expected. When building, we realized that many things were going wrong. The spaghetti was too thin and weak. Sticking two spaghetti joints together also weakened the build, which we had not thought about when creating our plan. The amount of blue tack around the top corners was also weighing the building down. We also observed that we had a lack of supports in the between the bottom faces of the prism which would cause the building to fall easily. In the end we couldn’t even finish the prototype for the earthquake test because it wouldn’t stand up.
Tough we were gutted this was a good learning area observe where we went wrong and apply the new knowledge, we gained into our second prototype. We were disappointed since we thought that our design met the briefs but we understood our mistakes and it played a significant part in our second trial.
REPEATING THE PROCESS
Repeating the process of engineering again, to design, brainstorm, create and build Our second structure required a structure with a minimum height of 25cm and a maximum base of 30 cm x 30 cm. The structure also had to include a platform which was able to support the weight of a Lego man and make sure he stayed on during the earthquake test.
For our second prototype we created a more abstract design which incorporated doubled up spaghetti at the base of our structure. This enabled for a stronger ground, this was one of the mistakes we had made in our first prototype. We included cross braces in almost every face, consistently spreading the weight of the blu tack and the spaghetti. It included many triangular faces and had a platform for the Lego man to stand on.
When completing the earthquake test our structure had taken zero damage and the Lego managed to stay on the platform. We were extremely pleased about how we had actively taken on the lessons we learnt from the defeat of our first prototype and reflected on it to create a successful design which was within budget.
And the end of the process, we were glad that we had been able to create a structure that solved the problem and met all the criteria for our task.
COLLABORATION
Our group worked well together but there were definitely some things that we could improve on.
Potential design brainstorming Prototype construction Final structure construction Stile answers and research Photography
Person 2
Project research Final structure construction
Our group could have split the tasks more evenly, this was a bit difficult due to the fact that we had an absent member when going through the process for the first time. The one thing that we did well was compensate for the absence for the person who wasn’t here. What I mean by this is that one of our members who was absent for most of the time while we were creating our first prototype, took the initiative to do most of the building in the second prototype which we really appreciated.
I think that our group was good at presenting data neatly and make sure it was well presented. Everything was engaging to read and look at, including pictures and diagrams to explain our research further. All our data was collected and organised well, so it was easy to find and use.
I felt that we could have been more persistent throughout the project but especially with our first design, since it failed, we should have been more determined like we did in the second prototype and at least try to build it up with a new design. But instead, we gave in and we couldn’t test our first structure.
I also feel like our group could have managed our time more wisely. The first lessons we had to research we got easily distracted and produced low levels of work. What we did well was reflect upon this and we decided to redo our research since we had realized that we had produced low quality work. We took time to reconstruct it and make sure we found the things that we needed. This did affect the time we had left to do the other parts of the engineering process which is why I think we should work on our time management skills a bit more.
LEARNING
I learnt many things from this task such as how to use the engineering process effectively and how to use teamwork and collaboration effectively and consistently. It also taught me how much planning and effort goes into infrastructure surrounding us, solving problems in our society and how people can actively put scientific research to use to solve ongoing problems. It was a great experience which I learnt a great deal from. I grasped the concepts from this task well and will actively apply into future situations.
In this project, we learnt about the principles of justice that uphold Australia’s legal system, such as the presumption of innocence, an impartial judiciary, and the right to legal representation. I studied the case of Andrew Mallard, and analysed how these principles were both upheld and violated in this case. After writing an essay on the topic, we were required to incorporate feedback and edit the essay so that it was fit for online publication. This essay is the end result of that editing process. It demonstrates my ability to take feedback, and to refine a piece of written work to produce a professional result.
INTRODUCTION
Andrew Mallard who was 33 years old when he was accused and wrongfully found guilty for murder of Pamela Lawrence. In 1995, he was sentenced to a life imprisonment, he had fought for 12 years until he was free. Mr Mallard was exploited for his mental health state, having a drug addiction and bipolar disorder. The principles of justice were poorly upheld in his case, especially the rights to a fair trial and equality before the law.
EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW (trial and evidence)
Andrew and his lawyers
Andrew was not upheld by the principle of justice ‘equality before the law’. The police had treated him unfairly and presented false evidence against him in court. The first piece of evidence was a video from Mallard’s 11 hour interview, this video stated Mallard predicting how Pamela was murdered but the police used it as his ‘confession’. This made him look like he told them how he had managed to commit the crime, while he was merely thinking of a theory. The second was a pile of police notes to which the police claimed was a confession. While investigating the murder, police had found that Mallards DNA did not match the DNA found on the crime scene. They chose to keep this vital information from his defence team. Clearly, this highly goes against the principle of equality before the law. The law, promising to be treated equally by any person of legal authorities, it was disappointing to see Mr Mallard be treated as he was.
EQUALITY BEFORE THE LAW (interview)
Another part of the case which wasn’t supported by of equality before the law was Mallards interview and interrogation. The police, although knowing Andrew had a habit of making up stories, completely ignored all of this and used every single word he said against him in court. This definitely was an aspect that wasn’t supported by the principles of justice ‘equality before the law’. Andrew was treated unfairly and the police used his words, that have a great chance of being false, against him.
IMPROVEMENTS
Andrew should have been treated in a significantly better manner than what he was. The police should have been upholding their title by showing equality to everyone. Andrews mental state should have been taken into account while he was in the interview as well. An improvement for the future, monitoring the police as they operate, to ensure there is no misconduct and ensuring accuracy for the case. For t improvement in the future, people who have disorders or disadvantaged mental health which may affect the accuracy of the the case, should have a way of knowing what they are saying is true. This could be another witness agreeing with what they are saying. They shouldn’t be convicted on their words alone which may be false.
His family
RIGHTS TO A FAIR TRIAL
Mallards trial was not upheld by the principle of justice ‘rights to a fair trial’. The judge was unfair to him to convict him based on two small pieces of evidence. Any other case would not have been treated like that which means there was a clear aspect of injustice. The judge leading his hearing must have had some sort of ally with the police officers at this point, to make Andrew seem guilty. This goes against the third principle of justice ‘all individuals have the right to an impartial judiciary’. Meaning that any judge in charge of a hearing should have no information about the details of the case before leading it. Andrew was clearly deprived of this principle justice as well.
IMPROVEMENT
For improvement in the future cases, judges are not meant to know any information about the case until it is presented to them at their trial and they should hear both sides of the case fully before giving a conviction. Having two randomized judges for a hearing is also a good idea, two heads are always better than one.
POLICE MISCONDUCT
Not having full proof of what the reason of police misconduct was we can assume that it was laziness. Andrew Mallard was their only prime suspect and fit all the ‘criteria’ and ‘evidence’ to have pulled off the murder of Ms Lawrence. This is an extremely poor display of the officially promised principles of justice and we hope to never see something similar occur again.
CONCLUSION
Andrew Mallard was able to appeal to the high court and get his conviction, lifetime imprisonment quashed after a tough battle for 12 years. He was finally be able to get released in 2006. The investigation team found 2 policemen and a senior prosecutor guilty of misconduct. He also received a public apology from the head of the police force for the affect they had on his false conviction. He was given a compensation of more then $3 million for his jail time and being treated unfairly by the law. The laws, equality before the law and the right to a fair trial were very clearly not upheld.
I strongly believe no one should be treated this as Andrew Mallard was and I hope to see no false convictions in the future for our justice system. This is why the principles of justice are so important in our society, making sure it doesn’t ruin innocent lives, like Mr Mallards.
We all noticed that there was a lot of litter around the school and the community which made the community look messy. Most of this rubbish was plastic wrap that kids would have in their lunch box to wrap food. We wanted to do anything we could to stop this which brought us to make beeswax wraps, which is a substitute for plastic wrap. The first thing we did to get this business up and running was to make a prototype of the beeswax wraps. This took a lot longer than we expected as we needed to get the quantities right and we needed to test all different beeswax to see which was the highest quality. The first method we did was to iron the beeswax onto the fabric. Although this worked, we found that there was clumps of beeswax on some of the larger sizes as the iron can’t reach the corners. We didn’t want to sell faulty products, so we decided to try the oven version. This worked a lot better as we made them faster and they were better quality.
What have we learnt?
At the start of this journey, we were doing all the work during the innovated sessions which is once a week. We very quickly realised that we would have to do some of it in our own time. We started to make beeswax wraps in our own time which made us feel much more prepared and confident in our business. We have also learnt what type of fabrics we need to make the best products, for example, when the fabrics were predominantly white, they would get discoloured and stained with the beeswax. This is not the standard of products that we would like to sell. So, we experimented with different colours to see our best outcomes.
What capabilities we developed?
We learnt how important teamwork is when owning a group business. The times where this has been important is when we are coming close to the market date it is so important that everybody is doing their fair share so that we are ready. We also learnt how important problem solving is. This is because of course when starting up a new business not everything is going to go to plan and things will go wrong. It is important to overcome these things and move on.
In This Health unit we talked about online safety. I learnt a lot about the many dangers that social media opposes but I have also learnt how to deal with and prevent them. The main online platforms I use are, Youtube, Messages and Whatsapp, I still do but I am aware of how to use them efficiently. The key things I learnt this health unit are about respect, responsibility and empathy.
Respect – It is about not criticizing other people for what they believe. It’s very important to have this quality online because not everyone is going to agree with everything you say but that is fine. Everyone doesn’t need to see things the way you do.
Empathy – It is about walking a mile in someone else’s shoes, seeing things in the perspective of others. We should realize that not all people have the same point of view as others. Again, others shouldn’t be attacked by hateful comments because of their thought of something. Online, it is a great quality to have because it allows us to get an idea of what others may be going through. It can also help us to sympathize with them.
Responsibility- It is about being mature. Responsibility shows that you know how to manage and control yourself well. This quality is important to have because you know what to post and what not to post. It helps when you are commenting on something and standing up for either yourself or someone else. When you are standing up for yourself or someone else it is important to shut them down in a kind manner and not offend anyone.
The topics in this unit have affected my online behavior by making me more aware of the things that go on in social media, for example, the devastating story about Dolly. It definitely helped me understand how to use online platforms safer and more efficiently. It made me understand that comments can be easily misunderstood because you don’t know the tone of them. I learnt that there is always someone to talk to when you need.
I will certainly change my online behavior in the future and this how I will do it – I will make sure to use ERIC when I am using online platforms and make sure that everything I do will not cause any harm to me or others. I will stand up for myself or other people if people are commenting hateful things about us. I will know when it is appropriate to comment and what and what not to post. Overall, it was a really informative unit and it has helped me a lot.
In HASS we recently learnt what a water footprint was. I was really shocked because I saw that we use so much water in our everyday lives. Just imagine, for one hamburger, the water footprint is 660 gallons! The way to improve your water footprint is to eat more fruits and vegetables.
This year in InnovatED we designed a gift for our grandparents, describing the differences between our education. For my family friend i created a replica of a textbook, talking about the different resources, learning areas, and much more. We did this over a term, planning, creating and expanding our ideas.
In Food Tech this week we had the opportunity to make oatmeal slices. We made these with only a few ingredients, golden syrup, flour, sugar, oats, egg and butter. We then put these into the oven to bake for 20 minutes. When they came out we cut them into slices and put them into our containers. They turned out to be super delicious!
In HASS we did a water carrying experiment. We did this because we wanted experience the struggle of having a low water supply. We had to carry a 15 L water bottle for 200 m. It was really tiring. The other experiment we carried out was transferring water from a bucket to another with only our hands. We had to save as much water as we could and not waste any. It took a long time to fill the bucket even until halfway.
