Health - National Moderator's Report

Insights

91236: Evaluate factors that influence people's ability to manage change 

Performance overview: 

This standard requires students to respond to a change situation presented as a scenario, or gather their own data by interviewing a person who has experienced change. The scenario should allow opportunity to draw out risk and protective factors at personal, interpersonal and societal levels. If an interview is used, the evaluation needs to focus on the standard’s requirements rather than solely recount the story of change. 

A combination of personal, interpersonal and societal strategies must be recommended to maintain the protective factors and/or minimise the risk factors. 

Practices that need strengthening: 

A clear ‘change situation’ is needed to ensure the requirements of the standard can be met. Grades were changed in moderation where a clear ‘change situation’ was not provided, or where multiple ‘change situations’ were given. Without a specific, clearly stated ‘change situation’, it is difficult for students to understand risk and protective factors relevant to the change. Explanatory Note 4 of the standard provides further information about the nature of the ‘change situation’ needed for an analysis. 

Risk and protective factors are personal, interpersonal and societal influences on a person’s ability to manage life’s changes. Risk factors increase the likelihood of difficulties coping with change, while protective factors better enable people to cope with life’s changes. These influences must exist prior to the change situation being experienced. 

The standard requires students to explain strategies that will maintain protective factors and/or minimise the risk factors at all levels (personal, interpersonal and societal). The levels at which the proposed strategies aim to address protective and/or risk factors must be clear in the student evidence. To show understanding of level, students' descriptions of personal strategies should be framed in terms of what they involve for the individual, others and the wider community. 

Explanations of strategies need to include a clear description of the strategy, the action it involves, and reasons to justify why and how it will help the person to cope with the change situation and be resilient when faced with future changes. 

91464: Analyse a contemporary ethical issue in relation to well-being 

Performance overview: 

Analysing a contemporary ethical issue involves explaining the differing and opposing perspectives on the issue and the reasons for these different perspectives, as well as the implications of current related health practices for the well-being of those directly affected by the issue, others associated with those people and the well-being of people and society.  

A contemporary ethical issue is defined as a health-related controversial issue of current public concern where there are contrasting perspectives held by groups of people. 

A range of both international and national issues were selected for analysis in 2023, and included the following examples: assisted euthanasia, child immunisation, abortion, transgender people in sport, etc. 

Practices that need strengthening: 

A contemporary health-related ethical issue must be selected for analysis. Explanatory Note 3 of the standard provides examples of ethical issues that could be considered as possible contexts for an analysis. 

Explanations of contrasting perspectives must include at least two groups for each opposing perspective. It is expected that the perspectives be those of major stakeholders/groups, rather than individual people’s points of view. Where contrasting perspectives for individuals rather than groups were solely provided, and/or an insufficient number of groups’ perspectives explored, grades were changed in moderation. 

If international perspectives (via social media and other digital sources) have informed group perspectives, it should be apparent that these perspectives have informed the debate in the country where the implications of current practice are being examined. If this is not apparent, then selected groups should be localised to the country/place of the current implication’s explanations. 

For Excellence, it is expected that students will clearly link perspectives of the selected groups to their ethical foundations. For example, linking the rights approach with the Voluntary Euthanasia Society’s stance on assisted dying. 

Implications for wellbeing need to be considered in relation to current practice in the country being examined. It needs to be clear where groups for and against the ethical issue are based, and where implications for current practice are being considered. Current practice is likely to be determined by laws and/or social mores, and is likely to align with one of the perspectives. 

The implications on wellbeing should be of current practices associated with the chosen issue, rather than of the issue itself. For example, when analysing the issue of assisted dying the implications should be of the current law and practice. This could include consideration of ideas such as “if it is now legal in New Zealand, what are the implications of this on the wellbeing of the individual, others, and society?”. 

A critical perspective is needed at all levels of achievement. This could involve identifying and challenging taken-for-granted assumptions, exploring who is advantaged and disadvantaged by aspects of the ethical issue, focusing on the ‘key’ aspects of the issue and/or making explicit links to the underlying concepts of the learning area. 

At all levels of achievement, the analysis of the ethical issue needs to be supported by recent and relevant evidence. 

Feedback

Give us feedback on this report (external link)