Assessment Report

Level 2 Geography 2020

Standards 91240  91242  91243

 

Part A: Commentary

Candidates who were familiar with their case studies wrote concisely and integrated specific information in their response.

Those candidates who had prepared well had the opportunity to show their depth of knowledge through careful planning and wrote logically to achieve at higher level.

Candidates who presented a pre-prepared response or used case studies that may have been relevant in the past versions of the achievement standard version did not achieve to a high level.

Candidates who used extra paper to complete their responses did not necessarily obtain higher grades.

Part B: Report on standards

91240:  Demonstrate geographic understanding of a large natural environment

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • explained how elements or processes interact in a large natural environment
  • explained how a person or a group of people interact with their environment
  • included general case study evidence.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • did not address the questions being asked
  • did not provide any relevant case study information to support their answers
  • attempted only one part of the question or provided generic descriptions.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • explained in detail how elements and processes interact within a large natural environment
  • provided detailed case study evidence consistently within their answers.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • fully explained, with insight, elements and processes interacting along with how a person or a group of people interact within a large natural environment
  • demonstrated a high level of geographic understanding through use of geographic terminology and concepts
  • provided accurate and comprehensive diagrams and case study information to support their answers.

Standard-specific comments

Candidates who scored higher grades demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of geographic concepts. They used this knowledge to respond to questions in depth and support their answers with relevant, detailed evidence.


91242:  Demonstrate geographic understanding of differences in development

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • explained one of the strategies well
  • explained one of the limitations well
  • demonstrated understanding of differences in development
  • lacked detailed case study information to support their answers

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • wrote about gender differences rather than focusing on differences in their case study areas
  • wrote generalised answers with limited details
  • did not provide case study evidence or gave incorrect information
  • provided limited responses and did not answer the question that was asked
  • wrote answers about factors rather than strategies for reducing the differences in development.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • provided case study evidence to support their answers but did not integrate it well enough to be awarded excellence
  • demonstrated a clear understanding of the relevant geographic concepts
  • lacked consistency across both parts of the exam; one part was often much more detailed than the other.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • explained the differences in development between their two selected case study areas
  • gave comprehensive case study evidence that was integrated throughout their answer
  • wrote coherently and linked explicitly to the outcomes of the development
  • addressed all aspects of the questions and took care to plan and present their responses logically
  • showed insight through consistent use of relevant geographic concepts throughout their responses.

Standard-specific comments

Some candidates wrote of strategies that did not provide scope for discussing how this reduces the differences in development between their chosen case study areas. Some strategies are out-dated or did not have successful outcomes, which did not allow candidates to engage with the question being asked in this examination.

Candidates who wrote about strategies that were too similar showed a lack of breadth of different strategies for reducing differences in development.

Candidates must ensure they are writing about case study areas. Differences in gender or ethnicities do not meet the requirements of the standard.


91243:  Apply geography concepts and skills to demonstrate understanding of a given environment

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • gave some supporting evidence
  • used conventions to interpret information on the graphs but did not include specific information
  • presented information on the précis map but did not take sufficient care with accuracy
  • showed understanding of geographic concepts by applying the resource material without explicitly referring to the concepts, including only descriptions in most instances.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • applied geographical skills – such as mapping and interpreting graphs without using conventions or taking care with accuracy.
  • repeated information from resource material without interpreting it.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • used accuracy and appropriate geographic conventions such as scale, direction, and features in the map
  • referred to relevant geographic concepts and explained how they applied to the given environment
  • included specific detail from the resources in their responses.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • showed a high level of accuracy and used key geographic conventions in the interpretation of the graph and the précis map
  • selected appropriate concepts and supported them with concise explanations.

Standard-specific comments

Candidates had the opportunity to show understanding of the Ganges River environment through application of geographic skills and conventions and through use of relevant geographic concepts.

Most candidates attempted all parts of the paper.

Geography subject page

Previous years' reports

2019 (PDF, 234KB)

2018 (PDF, 110KB)

2017 (PDF, 46KB)

2016 (PDF, 214KB)

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