The evidence for this learner meets the standard required for Achieved.

The evidence presented in this portfolio has been gathered from the learner’s real contexts (school life) and is naturally occurring – it has been generated from research activities in the English class and from reading for personal interest in the homeroom class – and so meets explanatory note (EN) 2.  The evidence has been generated over a sufficient period of time to meet the intention of EN 3.  The three texts read by the learner are of different types, meeting the requirements of the Outcome 1 range.

This portfolio contains evidence that has been produced either through the learner’s written response or via attested-to and recorded oral responses. Across the three texts, the evidence presented meets the evidence requirements (ERs) of the standard: the learner has located information relevant to their purpose for reading the text (ER 1.1) in all three texts, has described an explicit idea in text 1 and an implicit idea in text 3 (ER 1.2), and has evaluated at least one text in terms of their reason for reading it (ER 1.3).  (The evidence requirements need only be met across the three texts, not necessarily within each text - refer clarifications for this standard.)

All three texts have been supplied in their entirety, so that the level of reading can be verified as meeting the general expectations of step/koru 4 of the Read with understanding Adult Literacy Learning Progressions (EN 4). (For alternatives to submitting each text in its entirety, refer to National external moderation for Literacy and Numeracy unit standards.)

Text 1 (The World’s Fastest Indian)

The text (from a website) is sufficiently complex to provide evidence of competence (EN 4).

The learner’s purpose for reading the text is clearly stated on the evidence collection sheet [note 1]. Note that if the purpose for reading is not clearly specified, evidence provided in support of ERs 1.1 and 1.3 cannot be verified.

Answers to comprehension questions can be used as evidence for ERs 1.1 and 1.2, providing they relate to the specified purpose for reading the text [note 2]. In this text, the learner demonstrates understanding of an implicit idea in the response to comprehension question 7 [note 3]:  the learner has ‘read between the lines’ to identify an idea that is implied rather than explicitly stated.  The response to comprehension question 6 [note 4] provides evidence of evaluating the text in terms of the stated purpose (ER 1.3).

Text 2 (Mandy Hager, Biography)

The learner has located several key pieces of information related to the stated purpose for reading, and has described some of the text’s explicit ideas (ERs 1.1 and 1.2). 

While the learner’s response contains some inaccuracies (e.g. the date of publication [note 5] is not provided in the text but is indicated as 2009), it demonstrates basic understanding of what has been read.  Note that implicit ideas or text purpose (ER 1.2) are not evidenced through responses to this text.  However, these requirements have been met elsewhere in the portfolio.  Taken in conjunction with other texts in the portfolio, this response provides additional evidence in support of the learner’s ability to read with understanding.

Text 3 (Newspaper article: All Blacks)

The text is of sufficient complexity to provide evidence of competency (EN 4).  The learner’s oral responses provide evidence of the ability to locate information relevant to the purpose and to identify explicit ideas.  An implicit idea, that the crowd was excited to see the All Blacks, is also identified [note 6].  The learner evaluates the text in terms of personal interest and usefulness of information [note 7].  Note that oral responses are acceptable as evidence if verified and recorded by an assessor.