Assessment Report

Level 3 Spanish 2020

Standards 91568  91571


Part A: Commentary

Successful candidates showed their understanding of the texts by backing-up their inferences and arguments with specific evidence from the texts rather than including their personal understanding of the subject matter. Candidates should make sure that they select relevant information from all parts of the texts and include a wide range of supporting arguments in their responses.

Successful candidates read the questions carefully and planned their answers, so they addressed the question directly. They organised their arguments logically and supported them with information from throughout the texts.

Candidates can answer questions in English, te reo Māori, and/or Spanish. Those candidates who chose to respond in Spanish generally provided some valid information from texts and passages and tried to address the questions directly but tended to summarise information and omit important details. .

Part B: Report on standards

91568:  Demonstrate understanding of a variety of extended spoken Spanish texts

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • demonstrated a general understanding of the passages
  • interpreted questions correctly and could give correct, or at least partially correct answers, but were unable to provide enough correct specific detail to support their responses
  • provided basic details to justify their answers.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • failed to understand the main points of the texts or misinterpreted the passages and basic details
  • did not address questions properly and merely listed details which were only partially correct at best
  • offered their own opinion instead of basing their answers on the passage
  • provided incorrect information
  • formulated answers based on isolated lexical items.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • selected and linked information, messages and key points from throughout the passage
  • developed their answers by adding some correct specific detail to justify their responses
  • addressed all parts of each question correctly
  • omitted or misinterpreted some of the complex information in the passages and were therefore unable to show thorough understanding.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • justified fully their ideas with a wide range of specific and detailed evidence from the passage
  • developed well-articulated answers that were comprehensive with comparisons, opinions and conclusions that clearly showed knowledge of the implied meanings within the passage
  • rearranged evidence from the texts to fit with their answer so that their responses flowed well and directly addressed all parts of the question.

Standard specific comments

Candidates who were more successful tended to make extensive listening notes. Furthermore, they made sure to address the question in a structured manner and incorporated all relevant supporting detail from the passages in a meaningful way instead of merely listing details..


91571:  Demonstrate understanding of a variety of extended written and/or visual Spanish texts

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • showed understanding of some or most of the key lexical items in the texts
  • provided an answer that in general terms was logically consistent with the main idea of the text
  • omitted or misunderstood detail when attempting to develop their answers specially with the second text
  • failed to draw conclusions or make inferences, or did so based on very superficial understanding of the texts or on their own personal experience
  • included words or extracts from the text in Spanish when they did not demonstrate understanding of them
  • repeated and rephrased the same idea within their answer without adding any extra detail.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • produced answers which were logically inconsistent with the main ideas of the texts
  • produced answers totally based on their own opinions of the topics and omitted any information from the texts. This was particularly evident in Text 1 as the topic is well known to all
  • based their answers on the recognition of single lexical items or cognates
  • provided some valid information that failed to encapsulate the main ideas of the texts.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • identified the main ideas of the texts and developed these with some specific detail extracted from the texts
  • attempted to refer to, but misinterpreted some of, the complex information in the text and were therefore unable to show thorough understanding
  • failed to use all or most of the information within the texts meaningfully. This was particularly evident in Text 2. 

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • understood a range of detail, including complex structures and nuances, and communicated this unambiguously
  • made effective use of connectives to explicitly articulate their ideas
  • made meaningful connections within the various parts of the texts
  • explored the implications, inferences and possible conclusions of the information contained in the texts
  • based their conclusions on all possible factors mentioned in the text that were of relevance
  • produced responses that evidenced careful and thoughtful planning.

Standard specific comments

Successful candidates addressed the questions by using wording in the questions as a starting point for their answers. They built their answers around information in the text and used all the relevant information.

The questions could not be directly addressed by merely translating sections from the text. Candidates needed to process the information, group it in a logical way and draw conclusions.

Some candidates produced very coherent responses and made some valid inferences but failed to gain Excellence as they omitted detailed and specific information from texts.

Candidates should be encouraged to always make explicit and clear links with the text.

Careful and accurate translation of sentences or short sections is appropriate when used purposefully as part of an argument.

Candidates should always be reminded of the importance of using the information from the texts to justify their answers.


Spanish subject page


Previous years' reports
2016 (PDF, 217KB)

2017 (PDF, 44KB)

2018 (PDF, 97KB)

2019 (PDF, 234KB)

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