Assessment Report

New Zealand Scholarship
Geography 2019

Standard 93401 

Part A: Commentary

Successful candidates were well prepared with an understanding of both the theme and the requirements of the performance standard. They were able to integrate their conceptual understanding of geography with the context provided in the resource materials.

Importantly, candidates need to write convincingly and concisely. Structured essay writing is essential. Questions need to be interpreted with care and approached in a systematic way. Sophistication and integration of ideas, and insightful commentary, were apparent in responses that had sound essay structure. Introductions should engage the reader and establish a clear focus for discussion of the theme.

In some instances, conclusions were rushed or incomplete.

Diagrams must be relevant and used effectively to strengthen the argument at scholarship level. Some candidates included several relevant diagrams that related well to their discussion.

In Question Three, candidates who performed highly had well-structured paragraphs that articulated the perspectives with precision and clarity.

Some candidates presented rote-learned responses to the theme and did not make any reference to the resources provided. 

Part B: Report on Performance

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship with Outstanding Performance commonly:

  • interpreted the question with clarity
  • planned their responses with precision and care
  • applied a high level of geographic knowledge and skills
  • wrote with clarity and sophistication, demonstrating convincing communication
  • demonstrated sophisticated integration of extensive specific evidence both from within and outside of the resources
  • demonstrated perception and insight by knowing how to critically evaluate, justify and analyse
  • were able to answer the question and offer alternatives that were thoughtful and well considered
  • wrote in a concise and insightful style, yet still wrote enough so the depth of ideas (range), as well as detail, was achieved
  • knew how to argue in their writing in a convincing and clever way
  • understood what was meant by viewing an argument through perspectives
  • wrote concise introductions and conclusions linked specifically to the question
  • integrated quality visuals (often numerous) into their writing seamlessly and referred explicitly to them in a balanced fashion.

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • wrote introductions that showed accurate interpretation of the question
  • integrated visuals 
  • demonstrated clear understanding of the difference between point of view and perspective
  • integrated evidence from the resource booklet and referred to resources
  • integrated evidence from beyond the resource booklet to support their argument
  • demonstrated a logical development of ideas with clarity
  • used correct geographic terminology
  • demonstrated critical thinking through analytical, justifying and evaluative skills
  • applied a high level of geographic knowledge and skills
  • showed good paragraphing skills
  • demonstrated good understanding by presenting convincing arguments
  • wrote succinct, convincing introductions and conclusions
  • planned their answers in some form
  • wrote answers that were detailed and/or had breadth
  • did not overuse personal pronouns
  • demonstrated the ability to write logical answers with clarity
  • linked back to the questions throughout the paragraphs.

Candidates who were not awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • wrote brief responses
  • did not include visuals or the visuals were weak and needed integration and relevance
  • often did not plan their answers
  • struggled to develop a clear argument
  • did not show consistent understanding of how to be critical
  • often described what the theme was instead of creating an argument
  • were unable to critically anaylse or evaluate
  • wrote irrelevant information
  • did not refer explicitly to the resource materials to support their own knowledge
  • did not understand how to argue through perspectives
  • lacked convincing fluency of writing
  • commonly used personal pronouns
  • copied the visuals straight from the resources
  • did not create structured paragraphs.

Geography subject page

Previous years' reports

2018 (PDF, 104KB)

2017 (PDF, 54KB)

2016 (PDF, 188KB)

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