- Home
- Qualifications and standards
- NCEA
- Māori and Pasifika
-
Providers and partners
- About education organisations
- NZQA's quality assurance system for tertiary education organisations
- Guidelines and forms
- Consistency of graduate outcomes
- Approval, accreditation and registration
- Monitoring and Assessment
- Self-assessment
- External evaluation and review
- Assessment and moderation of standards
- Submitting results and awarding qualifications and micro-credentials
- Tertiary and International Learners Code of Practice
- Offshore use of qualifications and programmes
- Reform of vocational education
- International Education planning
- international
- About us
Assessment Report
New Zealand Scholarship Geography 2022
Standard 93401
Part A: Commentary
Arguments this year were generally of a high quality. Successful candidates demonstrated their clarity of ideas through a logical development of argument. They were able to analyse, think critically, and apply sound geographic knowledge when demonstrating an understanding of urban growth in a global context.
Successful candidates incorporated supporting evidence from across the whole resource booklet. It is vital candidates incorporate resource booklet material into each of their arguments. Some unsuccessful candidates integrated outside evidence yet failed to synthesise and incorporate sufficient material provided into their argument.
Candidates effectively argued their stance through perspectives, and often used original visuals to enhance their argument. Time-management skills were effectively demonstrated with many candidates completing all three questions.
Part B: Report on Performance
Candidates who were awarded Scholarship with Outstanding Performance commonly:
- included clear planning and effectively interpreted the question
- demonstrated sophisticated literacy skills (e.g., wrote precise introductions and conclusions specifically addressing the question)
- integrated quality original visuals into their answers and referred to them explicitly
- presented a balanced argument
- demonstrated sophistication in their argument, making connections within their arguments
- understood perspectives from a geographic approach
- synthesised and extrapolated material from the resource booklet and used evidence from beyond the booklet
- engaged in clear and concise critical thinking
- demonstrated convincing communication
- demonstrated perception and insight through critical evaluation, discussion, justification, and analysis
- applied a high level of geographic knowledge and skills in their responses.
Candidates who were awarded Scholarship commonly:
- understood key command words of the question and planned their responses
- argued their stance from the outset
- demonstrated logical development of ideas
- demonstrated effective literacy skills
- integrated numerous original visuals throughout their responses
- used appropriate geographic terminology
- synthesised the resource booklet material to support the logical development of their responses
- integrated specific evidence throughout, both from within the resource provided and beyond
- demonstrated critical analytical, evaluative, discussion, and justification skills
- applied a high level of geographic knowledge in their responses
Candidates who were not awarded Scholarship commonly:
- wrote brief responses and lacked structure in their writing
- demonstrated no clear planning
- did not develop a clear argument
- often had no visuals or the visuals were weak and not integrated
- consistently showed a lack of understanding of how to be critical
- did not argue through perspectives in their responses
- copied the visuals and material straight from the resource booklet
- did not use the resource book for evidence to support their ideas.
Geography subject page
Previous years' reports