AS 91437 Annotated exemplars

This annotated exemplar is intended for teacher use only. Annotated exemplars are extracts of student evidence, with commentary, that explain key parts of a standard. These help teachers make assessment judgements at the grade boundaries.

Download all exemplars and commentary [PDF, 558 KB]

TKI History assessment resources (external link)

For Excellence, the student needs to comprehensively analyse different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves making judgements, as an historian, on the historical validity of different perspectives of the contested event, drawing conclusions that demonstrate thorough engagement with the evidence and the historical ideas it contains.

This student has identified (1) (4) (9) and explained (2) (5) perspectives about the Treaty of Waitangi, and written as an historian about the validity of these perspectives, engaging with the evidence (3) (6) (7) (8) (10). Conclusions are reached (11).

For a more secure Excellence, the student could provide slightly greater depth of supporting evidence at each stage of the writing, along with more explanations for the perspectives. For example, there could be explanation for why Māori may not have understood what they were signing (2) and what else Colenso felt he had done to make Māori understand the treaty (3).

For Merit, the student needs to analyse, in depth, different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves evaluating, as an historian, the validity of different perspectives of the contested event. Evaluating involves appraising and presenting an opinion.

This student has identified (1) (4) (7) (11) (12) and explained (2) (5) (8) (10) (13) perspectives about the Treaty of Waitangi, evaluating as an historian the validity of the perspectives, engaging with the evidence (3) (6) (9) (14). Conclusions are reached (15) (16).

To reach Excellence, the student could support the many valid points made with a little more discussion and detailed supporting historical evidence.

For example:

• clarification of the difference between sovereignty and kawanatanga (2)
• discussion of the ramifications of the existence of several different versions of the treaty (8)
• specific historian’s evaluation of the validity of the perspectives of Walker (7) (8) and Lord Stanley (10) (11), providing the same sort of depth as with the comments on the nzhistory website (2) and Our Nation’s Story (6).

For Merit, the student needs to analyse, in depth, different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves evaluating, as an historian, the validity of different perspectives of the contested event. Evaluating involves appraising and presenting an opinion.

This student has identified (1) (4) (8) (11) and explained (2) (3) (5) (6) (9) (10) perspectives about the Treaty of Waitangi, evaluating some of these perspectives (7). Some conclusions are drawn which further evaluate the perspectives (12) (13) (14).

For a more secure Merit the student could:

• provide more in-depth evidence to support analyses, for example, why understanding of sovereignty was an issue (3), and additional statements such as ‘It was written to meet the guidelines of the history standards at the time of publication’ (4).
• evaluate more frequently, for example by specifically evaluating the perspectives of Walker (1) and Colenso (8).

For Achieved, the student needs to analyse different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves explaining, as an historian, different perspectives of the contested event.

This student has identified (1) (4) (6) (9) and explained (2) (5) (7) (8) (10) perspectives about the Treaty of Waitangi, evaluating some of these perspectives (3). Evaluation is a Merit indicator, which helps to place the evidence at high Achieved overall. Some conclusions which further evaluate the perspectives are also drawn (11).

To reach Merit, the student could:

• provide more evaluation of perspectives
• provide more in-depth explanation for perspectives. For example, the quoted material (2) could be expressed in the student’s own words or further commented on by the student.

For Achieved, the student needs to analyse different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves explaining, as an historian, different perspectives of the contested event.

This student has identified (1) (4) (8) and explained (2) (5) (9) perspectives about the Treaty of Waitangi, evaluating some of these perspectives (11). The student finishes by drawing a brief conclusion (12) about which perspective is the most valid (an Excellence indicator). This helps to ensure that an holistic low Achieved judgement is possible.

For a more secure Achieved, the student could focus more on explaining the different perspectives that are identified, and shaping the evidence towards making a case about whether the different perspectives that are identified are valid. Validity, or otherwise, is often only implied (3) (6) (7) (10).

For Achieved, the student needs to analyse different perspectives of a contested event of significance to New Zealanders.

This involves explaining, as an historian, different perspectives of the contested event.

This student has identified different perspectives (1) (3) about the Treaty of Waitangi, begun to explain those perspectives (2) (4), and begun to make judgements on the validity of the perspectives (5).

To reach Achieved, the student could ensure that the focus of the evidence consistently concerns different perspectives, and explain those (a substantial part of the evidence, the long first paragraph, is merely an historical summary).

Greater depth in the explanations for the different perspectives could be provided, for example, Walker’s perspective on bribing Maori, and the use of ‘kawanatanga’ and ‘rangatiratanga’. Specific explanations could be provided when assessing the validity of perspectives (6).

The focus of the evidence needs to be analysis of people’s different perspectives rather than on analysing the history in general (7).