Assessment Report

Level 3 Home Economics 2021

Standards 91470  91471

 

Part A: Commentary

Candidates need to read through the entire question booklet before beginning to write their response. This will help them see the way the parts of the question have been scaffolded to guide them through the requirements of the standard, and they can then plan their response to best show their knowledge and avoid repetition.

In general, the resource material was well utilised, and candidates were able to respond to it effectively, showing sound nutrition knowledge and understanding.

 

Part B: Report on standards

91470:  Evaluate conflicting nutritional information relevant to well-being in NZ society

Examination content and assessment specifications

The examination comprised one question separated into five parts (a)–(e). The resource material comprised three articles.

The question covered the context specified in the 2021 assessment specification which was the role of carbohydrates in a balanced diet. The question required candidates to apply their nutrition knowledge and understanding to analyse information in the resource material.

A critical evaluation of the credibility of the resource material was required, which involved using analysis tools, then challenging false assumptions in a clear and coherent essay answer.

Standard-specific observations

It was evident that most candidates are familiar with MOH guidelines and were able to show their nutrition knowledge regarding carbohydrates. Some candidates were able to explain the value of fruit and vegetables in a balanced diet and not just breads and cereals.

At level 3 the use of words such as ‘bad’ should not be used in relation to foods, and candidates should be encouraged to use more meaningful descriptive words which give context, and link to well-being when writing about specific foods.

Candidates are encouraged to understand the difference between a nutritionist and a dietician when drawing conclusions about the credibility of resource material.

Grade related bullet points

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • completed a good overview of all resource material
  • briefly analysed the possible impacts on the well-being of New Zealand society of the conflicting nutritional evidence from the resource material
  • analysed the underlying intentions of each source, although may not be totally accurate
  • showed understanding of well-being in discrete dimensions
  • were unable to draw an appropriate or substantial conclusion regarding the credibility of information provided in the resource material.

Candidates who were assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • misunderstood the concept of conflicting information and were confused by the resource material
  • showed insufficient understanding of well-being
  • showed insufficient nutritional knowledge of the MOH guidelines regarding carbohydrates.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • analysed the possible impacts on the well-being of the New Zealand society, showing understanding of the interconnections between the dimensions
  • applied their knowledge of the MOH guidelines regarding carbohydrates
  • analysed the motivations of the resource material and commented on their credibility using examples from the resource material.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • demonstrated a holistic view of well-being, explaining how the advice on carbohydrates would impact New Zealand society
  • provided an in-depth analysis of the underlying intentions of each source
  • used several tools to conclude decisively which sources are credible and which information should be supported or refuted
  • applied their knowledge of nutrition to at least two assumptions or perceptions in the sources.

 


91471:  Analyse the influences of food advertising on well-being

Examination content and assessment specifications.

The examination comprised one question separated into five parts (a-e). The resource material comprised three advertisements.

The question covered the content specified in the 2021 assessment specification which was the analysis of three advertisements. The question required candidates to apply their nutrition knowledge and understanding to analyse information in the resource material.

A critical evaluation of one advertisement was required, which involved identifying explicit and implicit messages, and their impact on well-being, then challenging the messages conveyed in a clear and coherent essay answer.

Standard-specific observations

It is important that students identify explicit features first and then explain the implicit messages conveyed by these, rather than explaining pre-learnt implicit messages not linked to the explicit features of the chosen advertisement.

Whilst colours and other formatting features may support explicit features, by themselves, they are not adequate, and often not relevant.

The standard is focused on the influences of food advertising on well-being. Candidates who do not specifically discuss at least one dimension of well-being do not meet the standard. Mentioning that a product may be 'healthy' or 'nutritious' is not sufficient discussion on impacts on well-being.

Challenges must relate to the specific explicit features and implicit messages from the advertisement identified in part (b) of the question. Some candidates have used pre-prepared challenges of the techniques which did not show analysis of the chosen advertisement. At Level 3, challenges need to be expressed by reasoned argument.

Powerade ION4 was by far the most commonly selected advertisement, though many candidates were unable to successfully analyse the technique ‘links Powerade ION4 to a particular lifestyle’ and used the same features and messages they used for the ‘role model endorsing Powerade ION4’ technique. Candidates who chose one of the other two advertisements were more often able to identify different features for both techniques and were able to challenge the messages of both techniques, securing a higher grade. Candidates should be selective in choosing the advertisement that uses techniques that allow the candidate to show a range of knowledge and understanding and provide the best supporting evidence to make their challenges convincing.

Grade related bullet points.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • showed good understanding of explicit features and identified these accurately
  • identified appropriate target market with reasoning explained
  • discussed well-being briefly, explaining the impact on one or more dimension
  • made clear links between explicit feature, intended market and impact on well-being.

Candidates who were assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • were unable to identify explicit features of advertising techniques
  • showed no understanding of how advertising techniques influence food choices so were unable to clearly identify a target market
  • did not adequately discuss impacts of food choices on well- being.

 Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • showed a good understanding of explicit features, identified these accurately AND explained the implicit messages conveyed by these features
  • identified appropriate target market with good reasoning
  • discussed well-being, explaining the impact on one or more dimension
  • made clear links between explicit feature, the implicit message, intended market and impact on well-being.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • showed a good understanding of explicit features, identified these accurately AND explained the implicit messages conveyed by these features Identified appropriate target market with good reasoning
  • discussed well-being, explaining the impact on two or three dimensions in depth
  • made clear links between explicit feature, the implicit message, intended market and impact on well-being
  • challenged the messages from one (E7) or both (E8) techniques, making specific reference back to the explicit features and implicit messages from part (b) of the question.

Home Economics subject page

Previous years' reports
2020 (PDF, 236KB)

2019 (PDF, 258KB)

2018 (PDF, 94KB)

2017 (PDF, 43KB)

2016 (PDF, 211KB)

 
Skip to main page content Accessibility page with list of access keys Home Page Site Map Contact Us newzealand.govt.nz