 Home
 Studying in New Zealand
 Qualifications and standards
 NCEA

Māori and Pasifika
 Field Māori Assessment Support Materials
 Field Māori programme development support
 Mātauranga Māori qualifications and assessment standards
 Te Hono o Te Kahurangi quality assurance
 Māori providers
 Te Kōkiritanga 20202023
 Māori and the Future State
 Pasifika
 Ngā Kete Mātauranga
 Equity in STEM Symposium

Providers and partners
 About education organisations
 NZQA's quality assurance system for tertiary education organisations
 Quick links to NZQF documents
 Consistency of graduate outcomes
 Approval, accreditation and registration
 Monitoring and Assessment
 Selfassessment
 External evaluation and review
 Assessment and moderation of standards
 Submitting results and awarding qualifications and microcredentials
 The Education (Pastoral Care of Domestic Tertiary Students) Interim Code of Practice 2019
 The Education (Pastoral Care of International Students) Code of Practice
 Offshore use of qualifications and programmes
 Guidelines and forms
 Reform of Vocational Education
 International Education planning
 About us
Assessment Report
Level 3 Calculus 2020
Standards 91577 91578 91579
Part A: Commentary
The 2020 papers followed a similar format to recent years’ papers. Overall candidate performance was also of a similar standard, although there were fewer with very low scores. As usual there were candidates who displayed good skills and the ability to solve problems in both conventional and innovative manners.
Common points made by panel leaders were:
 Sound, reliable algebra skills are the first requirement for success in calculus. They are needed in the setting up of a problem, and in the solving which follows any differentiation or integration.
 Setting out of working in a clear, logical manner is a real advantage when trying to solve problems, in particular problems with which require an extended chain of reasoning.
 A number of candidates attempted to gain an Excellence grade by only attempting the questions that they interpreted to be ‘excellence’ questions. This is not a good strategy as errors in the questions they attempted, and with no ‘backup’ questions answered, often resulted in a disappointing final grade.
 A number of candidates gave multiple answers for a problem. It was not always clear which answer they wanted to be marked. In this case their answer will be marked as incorrect.
 A number of candidates who Not Achieved answered only one or two parts of each question. By doing this, they missed opportunities to gain credit for making some progress in higher level questions.
Part B: Report on standards
91577: Apply the algebra of complex numbers in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 successfully used the algebra skills necessary to factorise, solve, expand and simplify
 identified real and imaginary terms in an expression and could group them correctly
 manipulated complex numbers successfully in both rectangular and polar form
 successfully used the remainder or factor theorems
 successfully found the modulus of complex numbers
 applied the rules relating to discriminant and could set up an appropriate expression to represent it
 squared both sides of an equation correctly
 expanded an expression involving surds
 understood the notation for a conjugate and could manipulate generalised complex numbers to simplify.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 could not manipulate complex numbers in either polar or rectangular form
 did not recognise when the discriminant should be used over the quadratic formula
 could not expand and manipulate surds correctly
 misunderstood how and when to use the remainder theorem
 included ‘i’ in their moduli calculations or attempted to square the entire complex number
 lacked the basic algebra skills needed to solve, simplify, expand, and factorise
 failed to complete enough of the paper
 misread the question and started their working incorrectly
 changed their mathematical statements between lines of working
 expanded brackets incorrectly
 had little understanding of the real and imaginary parts of a complex number
 failed to accurately divide polar form complex numbers
 made careless arithmetic errors
 could not find the modulus of a complex number.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 were accurate in their algebra when solving equations or manipulating expressions
 understood the meaning of modulus and argument and were able to express statements using these features correctly
 understood how to use De Moivre’s theorem and could apply it correctly
 knew the difference between the factors and solutions of an equation and understood the algebra around this
 understood the meaning of “purely real” or “purely imaginary” complex numbers and could form and solve the equations that resulted
 could apply the process of adding fractions with different denominators to complex number problems and simplify the result
 removed surds and gathered terms correctly.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 communicated their thinking clearly and accurately about what they were doing while completing multistep problems
 completed the required proof by making connections between factors and roots and then manipulating the resulting expressions
 knew to manipulate both moduli equation given, as well as fraction given, to arrive at correct proof
 solved problems that involved several stages of reasoning
 recognised the need to set up the parts of a proof so that common factors could be cancelled and avoid complex calculations that led nowhere
 worked fully through questions to prove the required statement.
Standard specific comments
Candidates needed to be careful with their answers for questions requiring the use of De Moivre’s theorem when finding solutions to an equation. Care needed to be given to setting up a general solution with a correct initial angle. The error of a negative modulus as part of the solution occurred often. Questions requiring the application of De Moivre’s theorem occur regularly in this standard so candidates should be well prepared.
The requirement to show an answer in terms of a specific variable or in in a specific form is not understood or ignored by some candidates. Preparation for these types of questions could be made easier if candidates took notice of past papers and past exam schedules.
The need for multiplying by a conjugate fraction was required several times in this examination. It should be a skill that is well practised by candidates in its various forms as it will undoubtedly be needed in future years.
The skill of understanding the modulus of a complex expression was required several times in the paper. Many candidates lacked the ability to form the expression needed to solve the problem that resulted or understand the algebra required to make progress toward an answer.
Candidates should answer the question completely. This may require an explanation at the end of a calculation or a short concluding statement.
91578: Apply differentiation methods in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 used the chain rule, product rule and quotient rule correctly in combination with power functions, trigonometric functions, exponential and logarithmic functions
 found the first derivative of parametric functions, applying the chain rule correctly
 were able to use their calculator to evaluate trigonometric and exponential functions
 found the corresponding xvalue for a given gradient
 set up a correct model for an optimisation problem and managed to correctly differentiate their equation
 simplified differentiated functions without making errors
 displayed the algebra skills necessary to set up problems for differentiation and solve problems after differentiation.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 were unable to differentiate problems using the chain rule
 did not recognise when to use the product or quotient rule
 could not use an appropriate form of the quotient rule
 were unable to apply the product rule or quotient rule in combination with power, trigonometric, exponential and logarithmic functions
 could not manipulate negative indices and surds
 could not use their calculator correctly to solve problems even though they had found the correct derivative
 could not use their calculator to correctly evaluate trigonometric functions, often mixing up the angle mode required when it should have been radians, not degrees, and not using brackets in appropriate places
 made errors simplifying their answers when the question clearly stated that they did not need to simplify their answers
 demonstrated poor algebraic skills and were unable to correctly manipulate the expressions prior to and / or after finding the required derivative
 demonstrated poor knowledge of trigonometric equations, thinking that the inverse of tan x was the same as the reciprocal of tan x.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 successfully used the product, quotient, and chain rules when differentiating challenging functions
 manipulated equations involving logarithmic and exponential functions correctly, demonstrating good algebraic skills
 recognised that if ln(x) = 0 then x = 1
 could find the equation of a tangent given the function and the point of contact and show that their equation matched the provided equation
 successfully set up models for optimisation questions in terms of 1 variable, before correctly differentiating and using their model to consistently solve problems
 were able to use their calculator correctly when solving problems, especially when evaluating problems involving surd, exponential and trigonometric functions
 manipulated trigonometric functions correctly by using identities
 found the second derivative of a parametrically defined function correctly
 found the second derivative of a power function correctly
 demonstrated a good understanding of the relationship between the gradient of a tangent and the gradient of a normal and were able to apply this knowledge appropriately to locate the unknown xintercept
 demonstrated reliable algebra skills when solving problems.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 displayed the ability to model a volume of a cylinder, find its derivative, and them maximise the volume for the given object
 successfully used related rates of change to solve a problem involving the evaluation of a required derivative
 used the second derivative of a function defined parametrically to find the coordinates of a point corresponding to the given value for the second derivative
 could use differentiation to locate the stationary points of a given power function, involving the manipulation of negative indices
 could use the first or second derivative test to determine the nature of the stationary points of the function provided
 correctly completed a proof showing that LHS = RHS using logical, clear working
 demonstrated excellent algebraic skills when solving problems, especially when simplifying expressions.
Standard specific comments
Many candidates did not understand the importance of brackets and how the lack of them changes the meaning of what they are writing.
Many candidates did not set out the proofs well. Few candidates set out their response for Q3(e) as a proper proof, involving LHS and RHS.
Few candidates gave exact coordinates for the point P as required by the instructions of Q2(e).
To do well in this paper also involved good algebra skills; the ability to correctly differentiate a function is only one step on the path to solving a problem.
There were many candidates giving multiple answers for the problems. It was not always clear which answer the candidate wanted to be marked.
91579: Apply integration methods in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 successfully integrated polynomials, exponential, trigonometric, and straightforward rational functions
 wrote surd expressions in exponent form correctly
 correctly found the constant of integration given the necessary information
 correctly used Simpson’s rule.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 could not find the correct value of h when applying Simpson’s Rule
 incorrectly integrated straightforward rational and trigonometric functions
 forgot to include the arbitrary constant or assumed incorrectly it was zero
 failed to integrate and just used their graphics calculator to calculate answers for definite integrals
 integrated any function with f(x) in the denominator to ln(f(x))
 forgot to divide by coefficients of x when integrating using trig.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 correctly found an area under a curve
 solved differential equations by separating the variables, including calculating the value of the constant of integration
 correctly integrated a rational function correctly either by using long division or integration by substitution
 successfully derived the solution of the differential equation dN/dt = kN, showing all the required steps, then correctly used the other information given to evaluate the two constants that are required.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 developed and used a strategy to successfully solve a problem involving areas
 solved differential equations by separating the variables, including calculating the value of the constant of integration
 used trigonometric identities correctly
 understood the concept of ‘signed’ area and applied it successfully to solving problems.
Standard specific comments
Many candidates were able to select the correct techniques to solve a problem, however poor algebraic manipulation skills prevented them arriving at the correct solution.
A number of candidates attempted to gain an Excellence grade by only attempting the questions that they interpreted to be ‘excellence’ questions. This is not to be recommended as errors in the few questions they attempted, and no ‘backup’ answers, regularly resulted in a disappointing final grade.
A requirement of this standard is that candidates should communicate using appropriate representations and mathematical statements. There were many candidates that did not use appropriate notation and who did not communicate clearly what they were doing at each step of working.
Mathematics and Statistics subject page
Previous years' reports