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
Chinese 2017

Standard 93005

Part A: Commentary

Overall performance in Scholarship Chinese reflected high level of language confidence. Many candidates achieved one or two questions at scholarship level. However, candidates need to take into consideration that critical thinking skills, rather than just language fluency, are crucial for the scholarship level responses.  



Part B: Report on performance standard

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship with Outstanding Performance commonly:

  • showed full understanding of all the ideas from the stimulus materials and developed substantiated responses from them
  • went beyond paraphrasing and summarising the ideas from the stimulus materials; evaluated and explored different perspectives with supporting details both from the source texts and individual experiences
  • demonstrated insight and independent reflection on both personal ideas and opinions, and those of people from other cultures
  • used the language flexibly, showing the ability to link ideas from the source texts in original and creative ways 
  • had evident language ability beyond Chinese Curriculum Level 8 and expressed their ideas confidently and convincingly, integrating a wide range of vocabulary and idiomatic structures
  • managed their time effectively in the examination.

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • understood all the ideas from the stimulus materials, and developed responses from them
  • organised their ideas clearly and usually fluently, showing some critical evaluations
  • acknowledged and explored some perspectives but lacked consistency in discussion
  • demonstrated language ability at or beyond Chinese Curriculum Level 8, and clearly communicated in a natural manner with a range of vocabulary and structures.

Other candidates

Candidates who were not awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • answered each question at a superficial level
  • translated the source texts without interpreting or evaluating the main ideas involved
  • produced disorganised responses
  • gave inaccurate / insufficient information
  • did not answer all questions fully, or did not fulfil the requirements of the questions
  • used some variety of structure, however failed to attract or retain interest for the audience.

Standard specific comments

As with NCEA Level 3 Chinese, the examination was not restricted by vocabulary and language in the prescribed Level 3 List and Appendix for external assessment. Scholarship candidates are expected to make educated guesses about unfamiliar words using both context and prior knowledge. 

Successful candidates answered all the questions specifically with reference to the stimulus material and did not just express personal ideas or opinions.

To answer all three questions successfully, candidates were expected to:

  • show full understanding of the stimulus material and its references, through analysis and evaluation, independent reflection, and extrapolation 
  • assemble ideas in a logical, clear, concise and seamless manner, and make minimal use of expressions from the source texts.

Successful candidates responded in a formal, academic register, generally avoiding the use of slang, abbreviation and casual language. 

Candidates who structured their writing effectively (paragraphing, connectors, rhetorical devices) produced more consistent and convincing answers.

The speaking aspect of the scholarship examination set the greatest challenges for candidates. However, some candidates demonstrated more confidence in speaking and their responses showed preparation for question three.

Overall, candidates were assessed on their critical thinking skills and ability to explore perspectives beyond the stimulus materials.




Subject page


Previous years' reports
2016 (PDF, 188KB)

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