Assessment Report

Level 3 Health 2021

Standards 91462  91465

 

Part A: Commentary

Candidate responses that considered the resource material provided and then applied this alongside their own learning to the question were the most effective responses.

Candidates who answered the questions concisely and coherently generally achieved higher grades as the question was answered with the emphasis being on the quality of the response rather than on the quantity of writing.

Candidates who used resource material that was relevant to the points that they were making in their response and sourced this accurately also achieved higher grades.

Candidates who applied the relevant underlying concepts within their responses provided the most effective responses.

 

Part B: Report on standards

91462:  Analyse an international health issue

Examinations

The 2021 examination was a one question response covering how poverty influences a sexual and reproductive health issue. The question contained four different parts and was focused on the impact of poverty in relation to accessing contraception in Sub Saharan Africa. The question required candidates to apply their understanding of how significant determinants of health impact on people and society and require different strategies to address the determinants and impacts. Candidate were required to provide evidence from the resource booklet provided and their own learning to analyse the health issue.

Observations

Reference to the resource booklet was required to provide evidence to support the various aspects of the analysis including the determinants, implications and strategies particularly for candiates achieving Merit and Excellence grades.

The relevant underlying concepts of health needed to be evident within the candidates answer to achieve an Excellence grade.

Candidates answers needed to be coherent and concise to achieve higher grades.

Grade awarding

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • explained two major determinants of health and their implications
  • had consistent evidence throughout their response
  • provided two different strategies but not necessarily national and international.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • did not identify why the issue was of international concern
  • provided one determinant or strategy
  • did not provide sufficient evidence to support their analysis
  • did not explain the impact on people and society of their identified determinants of health.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • provided determinants of health that were significant to the health issue.
  • provided referenced evidence throughout all answers
  • explained impacts with detailed reference to Hauora and provided two clear and well explained determinants of health and strategies
  • strategies related directly to the determinants of health and implications identified.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • utilised a range of evidence from the different sources in the resource booklet and applied to these to all parts of the question
  • identified two significant determinants of health and were able to  apply their knowledge and understanding of the underlying concepts to each part of the question showing clarity and understanding throughout
  • effectively linked the underlying concepts.

 

91465:  Analyse models for health promotion

Examinations

The examination was a one question response. The question covered the comparison of two different health promotion campaigns that related to drug driving. ‘Steer Clear’ which used a Collective Action Model and ‘Unsaid’ which used a Behavioural Change Model. The question required candidates to apply their knowledge of the two Models for Health Promotion and the supporting documents of The Treaty of Waitangi and The Bangkok Charter to compare and contrast their effectiveness in improving the wellbeing of New Zealanders in relation to Drug Driving.

Observations

Candidates who accurately recognised the Collective Action Model as the most effective for ensuring long term sustainable improvements for wellbeing achieved higher grades.

Candidates who utilised the resource booklet, and included consistent evidence in their answers also generally achieved higher grades.

Candidates who were able to compare and contrast the two different campaigns and the various elements that aligned with the two models for health promotion in their effectiveness achieved higher grades. The relevant underlying concepts of health needed to be evident within the candidates answer to achieve an excellence grade.

Grade awarding

Candidates who were awarded Achievement commonly:

  • provided some comparison of the Behavioural Change and Collective Action models for health promotion in the two different campaigns
  • demonstrated some understanding of the effect on well-being of the two campaigns
  • provided some supporting evidence.

Candidates whose work was assessed as Not Achieved commonly:

  • did not attempt all parts of the question or provided only brief responses to one or more parts
  • inaccurately identified the models for health promotion present in the two different campaigns
  • provided inaccurate explanations of the models for health promotion and / or the supporting documents
  • did not compare and contrast the models or the supporting documents
  • did not explain how the well-being of New Zealanders could be affected by the campaigns.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Merit commonly:

  • provided mostly in-depth, and mostly accurate, comparisons of the models for health promotion and the supporting documents
  • provided reasoned conclusions about the advantages and disadvantages of the models for health promotion used in the campaigns
  • demonstrated understanding of the links between the models and supporting documents and how they could improve the well-being of New Zealanders
  • provided in-depth explanations of the inclusion or lack of inclusion, of the supporting documents
  • used the resource materials appropriately to support their explanations.

Candidates who were awarded Achievement with Excellence commonly:

  • demonstrated conceptual understanding of the models for health promotion and the supporting documents
  • provided accurate comparisons of the models for health promotion and the supporting documents within the campaigns
  • recognised that the collective action model ensured long term sustainable changes
  • showed insight when explaining how the models and supporting documents related to the underlying concepts.

Health subject page

Previous years' reports
2020 (PDF, 149KB)

2019 (PDF, 243KB)

2018 (PDF, 112KB)

2017 (PDF, 44KB)

2016 (PDF, 211KB)

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