 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 2 Mathematics and Statistics 2020
Standards 91261 91262 91267
Part A: Commentary
In general terms, students who were well prepared over the breadth of the examinable curriculum gained reward for their efforts and diligence. On the other hand, students who had gaps in their curriculum knowledge, or who gave only minimalistic answers, found it difficult to achieve each standard.
Part B: Report on standards
91261: Apply algebraic methods in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 could interpret the required information from a graph
 applied basic log and index rules
 made a connection between the context of a question and an algebraic expression
 factorised quadratics with a coefficient > 1
 put an expression into completed square form
 substituted values into an equation
 solved simple exponential equations
 solved a power equation involving fractional indices.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 did not know how to use log properties
 showed very little working
 could not substitute into an algebraic expression
 could not factorise a quadratic
 were unable write a simple quadratic in completed square form
 used logarithm relationships incorrectly
 were unable to manipulate two fractions with different denominators
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 were able to give an answer with multiple lines of correct working
 used the quadratic formula with variables
 understood the nature of whole number/integer solutions
 communicated working effectively
 could solve exponential and log equations
 rearranged an algebraic expression to make one variable the subject
 solved equations with decimal or fractional indices
 manipulated and solved logarithmic equations
 solved exponential equations using logarithms
 could manipulate algebraic fractions
 formed and solved a quadratic equation given in context.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 interpreted an extended abstract problem involving a less familiar situation
 used their mathematical knowledge to solve unfamiliar problems
 demonstrated knowledge of features of logarithms i.e. base and argument are both positive
 solved simultaneous equations involving quadratics with unknown constants and determined the restrictions placed on the constants
 formed and solved quadratic equations, used the discriminant and justified their solution within the given context
 understood the implication of particular solutions – for example, where on a graph they might be, which values could not be determined, the importance of inequalities
 understood the nature, and number, of solutions – particularly in working with integer and whole number solutions
 communicated their working clearly.
Standardspecific comments
Candidates who had a good understanding of the concepts fared better than those who just knew the methods. This highlights the need for students to be exposed to a wide range of problems that extend their mathematical thinking.
The use of unknown constants, and consideration of conditions placed on them, was important at the higher level in this examination. Candidates who could use knowledge from other level 2 standards, such as Graphical Models and Systems of Equations, were at an advantage, as were those with a graphics calculator.
91262: Apply calculus methods in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 found the gradient of a function at a given point
 could find the x coordinate of a function that gives a specified gradient
 understood the link between the derivative and the gradient function
 remembered to find the “constant” value when integrating an expression
 correctly drew the derivative function
 understood that turning points of a function occurred when f’(x) = 0
 understood the basic links in kinematics between distance, velocity and acceleration
 understood basic rates of change
 could find the equation of a tangent or turning points.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 simply substituted into the given function incorrectly or simplified the problem
 had limited knowledge of calculus and could not determine when to differentiate or when to integrate
 attempted to use noncalculus methods to solve problems
 did not recognise the graphical representations of the derivative and its function and viceversa.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 accurately performed multiple steps towards the solution of a problem
 found a correct expression for distance given acceleration
 justified the nature of turning points
 understood the link between the graph of a gradient function and the graph of a function
 could identify the gradient from a linear equation and use this to solve a problem related to the tangent of a curve.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 accessed complex situations and accurately applied the multiple steps required, with very few errors, to find a solution to a problem
 applied calculus to form and solve quadratic equations and simultaneous equations involving nonnumerical constants
 devised a strategy to investigate an optimisation situation
 could apply calculus methods appropriately to kinematic problems.
Standardspecific comments
Candidates must apply calculus in solving problems for this standard.
Many candidates demonstrated a high level of competence in calculus and clearly communicated their answers along with well set out working.
Candidates need to use correct notation and / or mathematical conventions to ensure their knowledge and understanding can be clearly identified and rewarded.
A common area of weakness appears to be interpreting rate of change questions and an inability to provide an answer to the actual question.
Candidates who did not use a graphics calculator were disadvantaged. When graphics calculators are used to solve equations, care should be taken to ensure the answer to the question is explicit, with all detail given. Decisions around the candidate’s chosen solution need to be clearly stated. Some candidates failed to recognise that when a solution to a quadratic equation gives complex roots, a mistake or misinterpretation has occurred.
Some careless errors when calculating may be ignored (MEI) if this results in a minor error that does not affect the level of difficulty of the problem, however this often limits further progress in the answer. When an impossible or unlikely solution is obtained, this should be seen as a message to recheck prior working and attempt to ascertain where this careless mistake may have occurred.
91267: Apply probability methods in solving problems
Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:
 were able to use and manipulate probability trees and proportions to solve a problem
 were able to use a graphical calculator, diagrams and / or tables to solve simple problems involving the normal distribution
 had a basic knowledge of the characteristics of a normal distribution
 were able to read correctly from a twoway table
 could use basic numerical skills such as converting fractions to decimals
 could make comments on basic features of a graph
 were confident in interpreting answers in standard form.
Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:
 did not have sufficient understanding of all three major concepts examined in this standard
 were confused by which total to use for their probability calculations
 could not interpret probability information to form or use a probability tree or twoway table
 were unable to calculate probabilities from a normal distribution
 appeared to think that a probability could be more than 1.
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:
 could solve problems involving inverse normal distributions and give working or a diagram
 combined probability outcomes correctly
 could calculate and interpret relative risk
 understood the concept of expected value and could interpret the answer statistically in context
 used a graphical calculator effectively
 avoided merely commenting that a sample size could have been made bigger to improve accuracy (this is always true so not worthy of comment)
 were able to clearly pick out key points in comparing data with a normal distribution, for example referring to "mean" or "median" rather than just "centre"..
Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:
 had an indepth knowledge of the characteristics of a normal distribution and could relate them to the context of the question
 could use the standard normal distribution to solve problems
 were able to find relative risks and write correct conclusions based on them
 could evaluate the quality of evidence given or the validity of conclusions drawn
 were careful to answer the question completely and look “behind” the data to consider the relevance of any conclusion made
 could accurately compare elements of a given distribution to those of a normal distribution and used their comments to evaluate a claim
 understood what a relative risk of 1.33 means
 justified their claims showing a detailed understanding of probability concepts
 were able to interpret more complicated probability problems that involved using some algebraic skills.
Standardspecific comments
Combined probabilities and probability comparisons were understood much better than normal distributions.
Candidates are expected to have access to a graphical calculator at this level but need to be reminded that a correct answer only, with neither working nor diagram, will generally be rewarded with only a ‘U grade’ on that question part.
Candidates need to understand that converting the form of a probability (fraction, decimal, percentage) helps to compare two or more probabilities with each other. Being able to round appropriately is also essential. For example, rounding to 1dp is not appropriate when you are dealing with very small probabilities..
Mathematics and Statistics subject page
Previous years' reports