Assessment Report

Level 3 Social Studies 2018

Standards 91596  91598

 

Part A: Commentary

Successful responses included those that integrated Social Studies concepts within candidate answers and did not include them as separate paragraphs.

It was clear that some candidates were unaware that the resource booklet standard had changed from 91596 to 91598.  This was clearly signalled in the 2018 Assessment Specifications document.

 

Part B: Report on standards

91596:  Demonstrate understanding of ideological responses to an issue

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • wrote viewpoints that incorporated values and ideologies/perspectives, with stronger responses addressing points of view that included specific people/groups, rather than a generalised group, e.g. “Republican leader Mitch McConnell believes …”  rather than “Republicans believe … ”
  • explained responses in specific detail and provided supporting evidence
  • linked impacts of the responses to the issue
  • outlined a social issue that gave adequate detail for the marker to know a little about the issue. 

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • completed most or all elements for Achievement, but lacked sufficient depth and detail, e.g.  Candidates wrote things like “this has been around for a very long time”, or “many people have died”, rather than giving specific details relating to the response being described
  • did not write viewpoints that incorporated values and ideologies/perspectives
  • did not provide a detailed description of two responses
  • wrote a one sentence description of the impacts of the responses
  • did not include the impacts of the responses, or did not link them to either the response they had written about, or the issue they were discussing
  • appeared to have prepared essays that were more aligned with the requirements of external Achievement Standard 91598.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • gave a brief overview of aspects of the ideology that shaped each response
  • provided a detailed explanation of reasons how or why the response was influenced by the ideology
  • provided supporting evidence to support their explanation
  • provided two to three detailed reasons for each response
  • wrote a high-level response but failed to evaluate the impact of the response, i.e. some candidates evaluated the strengths and weaknesses of the response itself, but never linked these strengths and weaknesses back to the issue.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • judged the impact of each response using ideas such as: short- and long-term impacts on the issue, size and scale of the impact on the issue, and positive and negative impacts on the issue; these ideas were more appropriate than ‘strengths and weaknesses’ and tended to provide a stronger evaluation
  • linked their evaluation back to the impact of the response on the issue.

Standard specific comments

A way for candidates to improve their level of performance is to explicitly describe aspects of the ideology and make links between these and the ideological response. For candidates at Achievement level, there was little description of elements of the ideology which influenced the response.

Some candidates refer to what an individual has ‘said’ in response to an issue, rather than any actions they have taken as their response. This means it is more their point of view than a ‘response’, as required by the standard and task.  Candidates could meet this requirement by stating that “the individual/group responded to the issue by giving a speech/interview or addressing a convention, etc., where the individual/group stated … ”.


 

91598:  Demonstrate understanding of how ideologies shape society

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • understood the ideology, and did not just repeat word for word the resource material
  • described the identifiable ideology with details
  • stated specific societal change(s) shaped by the ideology working with the two social processes
  • used a range of relevant specific evidence to support their generalisations
  • identified points of view of specific groups or individuals, and linked values and ideologies to these
  • outlined that points of view/values/perspectives were about the change involved.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • used little specific, relevant evidence to support their generalisations
  • used points of view about the ideology, rather than the change in society
  • failed to link the ideology to the two social processes
  • did not identify one or more points of view, values, and perspectives
  • provided quotes, rather than describing the points of view.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • used a wide range of specific evidence to support their generalisations
  • identified reasons for the ideology shaping society.

 Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • used supporting evidence in their evaluation different to that used elsewhere in their answers
  • referred back to arguments and details they had made earlier in their answers and then elaborated on these
  • looked to the future, with reference to other societies with similar ideological contexts, when evaluating the extent of the influence of ideology
  • drew on a range of details that showed a clear understanding of the society and the ideologies that have shaped it
  • evaluated the ideology by considering the positives and negatives
  • made specific, supported statements about the relative impact of each social process on the society.

Standard specific comments

There was a clear division between candidates who understood what was required and those who did not. Those candidates who did not were lacking points of view, values and perspectives. Candidates must be able to show that they have understood different people's opinions. This could be inferred from a quote, or the actions or stance of the person, or what a candidate could generally infer from the person’s position, role, and/or ideological background.

 

Social Studies subject page

 

Previous years' reports
2017 (PDF, 47KB) 2016 (PDF, 218KB)

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