Assessment Report

New Zealand Scholarship
Music 2020

Standard 93305

Part A: Commentary

The diverse range of musical performances at a very high standard continues to grow, including multiple portfolios from candidates in musical theatre. 

The use of the resources on the Music subject page, as well as the assessment specifications, on the NZQA website is encouraged. These include the Scholarship performance standard, assessment specifications and assessment schedule.

Part B: Report on performance

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship with Outstanding Performance commonly:

  • demonstrated highly advanced technical skills integrated with critical thinking in a portfolio that was planned, prepared and executed specifically for scholarship music
  • demonstrated carefully planned and authentic performances in front of an audience with appropriate stage etiquette
  • included introductions of pieces, acknowledgement of applause, communication with the accompanist and / or other performers
  • prepared a well-presented portfolio for composition, showing carful consideration of instrumentation and song structure
  • Recorded both visual scores and audio that demonstrated an exceptional level of quality and musical communication
  • provided a critical reflection which showed a high level of insight and reflected upon the whole process (from planning to performance/completion and beyond).
  • provided writing that was well-structured, supported by references to other material and sources, annotated or made links to the score, of high quality, and used terminology confidently.

Candidates who were awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • for Performance, demonstrated advanced technical skills and understanding of their selected repertoire throughout the performance and maintained and communicated their musical intentions from the outset of the video through to the end of it
  • for Composition, demonstrated originality and a comprehensive understanding of composition techniques across their work/s; showed technical understanding of the instruments composed for, and the genres and styles composed in
  • for Musicology, demonstrated insight and perception through an in-depth and comprehensive analysis of a work of appropriate length, showing consistency throughout and making strong and applicable connections to the score
  • submitted a critical reflection which was original, showed a high level of communication skills and made relevant links to their portfolio and other sources consistently throughout.

Candidates who were not awarded Scholarship commonly:

  • submitted a portfolio which did not sufficiently meet the specified guidelines, e.g. a performance portfolio that was only 7 minutes long (essentially only half a portfolio).
  • for performance, submitted a disconnected and disparate selection of material that did not play to their strengths
  • for performance, did not demonstrate or sustain a high level of technical ability on their chosen instrument
  • for composition, submitted works which lacked understanding of instrumentation writing skills and thematic development of musical structures
  • for musicology, did not demonstrate an advanced understanding of their chosen works, e.g. the analysis included errors and / or a lack of comprehensive detail.
  • wrote a commentary which described rather than reflected upon their portfolio for their critical analysis submission, often lacking substance, was too brief; and / or showing poor communication.
  • often copied the formatting and the phrasing of previously published exemplars for the critical reflection, showing a lack of original thought.

Subject page

Previous years’ reports

2019 (PDF, 94KB)

2018 (PDF, 84KB)

2017 (PDF, 44KB)

2016 (PDF, 188KB)

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