System Updates: Monday 18 March 2019 Published at 4.46pm on 18 March

We are undertaking some important system updates between 5pm and midnight on Monday 18 March.

Access to secure sections of the website will be unavailable during this time, including the learner and provider login.

We have scheduled this outage at this time to minimise the impact to our clients. We apologise for any inconvenience.

Assessment Report

New Zealand Scholarship
Agricultural & Horticultural Science 2017

Standard 93105


Part A: Commentary

It appeared that candidates had prepared well for this assessment by referring to the detail in the performance standard and the assessment specifications. Many candidates responded with sufficient level of detail and included specific data and facts. Question 3 was handled well despite being an open-ended question with very little guidance provided beforehand. Successful candidates showed perceptiveness, synthesis, and personal reflection. 

Part B: Report on performance standard

Candidates who were awarded Outstanding Performance commonly:

  • discussedthe questions effectively with a high level of perception and critical understanding of what was being asked
  • included relevant data in their discussion 
  • showed evidence of careful planning that resulted in an answer that was well structured and well-articulated
  • contained evidence of a highly developed level of knowledge of the chosen primary production system or contemporary issue.

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • planned their response for each questionto assist the construction of an answer that contained accurate, relevant and appropriate information 
  • chose nationally significant primary products that are typically exported and that related well to the selected contemporary issueor question
  • provided a well-structured series of paragraphs within their answer
  • used clear, correct statements and appropriate datato back up their statements in their discussion
  • showed a depth of understanding of their chosen product(s), and the production and marketing aspects of it.

Other candidates

Candidates who were not awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • provided vague, shallow answers that lacked detail in either the information provided or the discussion of that information 
  • did not take guidance given in the assessment specifications when preparing for the examination. This was particularly evident in question one where incorrect tariffs or quotas were stated
  • did not fully apply knowledge and understanding that would be expected from a candidate who had fully engaged in the Level Three Agricultural & Horticultural Science course – especially in terms of the requirements of questions two and three
  • wrote answers that indicated a poor awareness of the entire production system, from producer through to the consumer and, the issues, implications, challenges and opportunities relevant to that production system
  • did not understand the wider meaning of consumer preferences including what drives them for their chosen product
  • failed to differentiate between general information or facts and thosethat are ‘critical’ or highly significant within the context of the product / issue / question.


Subject page


Previous years' reports
2016 (PDF, 190KB)

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