AS 91468 clarification

Clarification for AS 91468: Analyse a food related ethical dilemma

Clarification details

Updated December 2016. The section ‘Food related ethical dilemma’ has been updated to address issues that have arisen from moderation.

Food related ethical dilemma

Explanatory Note 4 provides a list of possible dilemmas that could be explored.

Guidance may be required to ensure that the chosen food related dilemma is one that will provide an opportunity for students to link their analysis to the underlying concepts and achievement objectives of the Health and Physical Education learning area as per Explanatory Note 1. The benefits and limitations for New Zealand societal well-being must be explored.

It is expected that students will have explored the ethical principles/approaches and how these may shape people’s beliefs and values (see the TKI Resources for links to these).

An analysis   

The analysis must include an explanation of the nature of the food related ethical dilemma, i.e. what the very essence of the dilemma is; what the food issue behind the dilemma is; reasons for the dilemma; how we know it is a dilemma; and which groups in society are mostly affected.

An outline of the contrasting viewpoints should include detailed examples supported by some evidence. Most evidence should be less than five years old.

Implications for well-being must be focused mainly at a societal level, with consideration of people’s safety and human rights, balanced with producing the greatest benefit for all in society, including those not directly affected by the issue.

In-depth analysis

For Merit, an in-depth analysis should include an exploration of the underlying beliefs, values and practices associated with those holding the contrasting viewpoints, for example, what people know, value, can or can’t do or have control of, from both individual and societal perspectives. Reasons are expected explaining how and why the underlying beliefs, values and practices shape the contrasting viewpoints.

Comprehensive analysis

For Excellence, a comprehensive analysis should include a critical evaluation of the viewpoints of different stakeholders, and implications for societal well-being. For example, what effects are there for people not directly affected by the issue; what challenges are there for society; what opportunities are there for health promotion (challenging viewpoints), i.e. should the common good override individual rights – if so, when?

See all Home Economics clarifications