Topics

Comparing for Excellence, and how AS91228 is assessed

What you hand in

AS91228 is internally assessed, worth 4 credits, usually as a written report on the issue you and your school have chosen.

The criteria

Grade	Requirement
Achieved	Identify, define or describe concepts related to the issue; explain causes of the issue using economic models; explain impacts on various groups in New Zealand society
Merit	Both explanations, detailed
Excellence	Analysis of causes by comparing and/or contrasting their impact on the issue; analysis of impacts by comparing and/or contrasting the impact on various groups; analysis by integrating changes shown on economic models into detailed explanations

Excellence has three components, and all three are required. Two comparisons and integration.

Comparison 1 — comparing the causes

Compare your causes by their impact on the issue: which one did more, and why?
The criteria that justify the judgement:

Criterion	The argument
Size of the shift	Which cause moved its curve further?
Direction and severity	Demand shifts set direction; inelastic supply sets severity
Persistence	A permanent cause outweighs a temporary one
Tractability	Which one can actually be acted on?

"Both causes raised the price. But the demand shift determined the direction, whereas the inelastic supply determined the severity — because with supply nearly fixed, almost the entire adjustment had to fall on price rather than quantity. The supply constraint is therefore the more important cause, and it is also the one that persists after the demand surge ends."

Comparison 2 — comparing the groups

Compare two groups whose interests differ, and structure it in four moves:
1. The similarity — usually that both are affected by the same price movement.
2. The difference in direction — one gains, one loses.
3. The difference in severity — relative to income, options and buffers.
4. The judgement — who is worst affected, with reasons.

Component 3 — integrating the models

Not integrated: a diagram on one page and an explanation elsewhere that never mentions it.
Integrated: the model's labels appear inside the sentences.

"Population growth increased the number of households seeking rentals, so demand shifted right from D to D₁. Against a steep supply curve, the equilibrium rent rose sharply from Pe to Pe₁ while quantity rose only slightly from Qe to Qe₁ — and the households between Qe₁ and Qe are those now priced out of the market entirely."

The test: cover the diagram. If the explanation reads the same, the model is not integrated.

A report structure that maps onto the criteria

The issue — what it is, why it qualifies (current, of special interest, allocation of scarce resources), with New Zealand evidence
The concepts — defined, and chosen because your issue needs them
The market — buyers, sellers, price, quantity, and the model you will use
Cause 1 — named, modelled, labels integrated
Cause 2 — from the other side of the market
Comparing the causes — which mattered more, and why
Impacts on group 1 — mechanism, direction, severity
Impacts on group 2 — the same
Comparing the groups — similarity, difference, judgement
Conclusion

Checks before submitting

Issue is current, of special interest, and about the allocation of scarce resources
Concepts defined, and relevant to this issue
At least two causes, from both sides of the market
Every cause on a model, with labels in the sentences
At least two groups, with different interests
Comparison of causes written deliberately
Comparison of groups written deliberately
Every judgement supported by two or three reasons
Real New Zealand data, referenced with source and date

Tips and Tricks

Plan the comparisons before you write. They cannot be added at the end. A report that explains one cause thoroughly has closed off Excellence before the first paragraph, because there is nothing to compare it with. Decide at the planning stage: two causes, two groups.

Use the comparison vocabulary explicitly. Both… whereas… because… therefore the larger effect is… Markers look for those words, and their absence is usually a sign that two descriptions have been placed side by side instead of compared.

Every judgement needs two or three reasons. "The supply constraint mattered more" earns nothing. "The supply constraint mattered more, because it determined the severity rather than the direction, because it persists after the demand surge ends, and because it is the only cause policy can act on" is the Excellence standard.

Because this is internal, verify your data. Every figure needs a source and a date, and it should come from the original publisher — Stats NZ, MBIE, the council — not from a figure quoted in a news article.

Worked ExampleTurning a Merit paragraph into an Excellence one

A student has written:

"The main causes of rising rents were population growth and a lack of new houses being built. This affected renters, who had to pay more, and landlords, who earned more."

Rewrite it to meet the Excellence criteria.

Step 1 — Diagnose

The paragraph names two causes and two groups — the raw material is right — but it has:

No model. No curve shifts, no labels.
No detail. The mechanisms are not explained.
No comparison of the causes, and none of the groups.
No judgement.

Step 2 — Cause 1, with the model integrated

Step 3 — Cause 2, with the model integrated

Step 4 — Compare the causes — the first Excellence component

Both causes contributed to the rent rise, but they did different work. The demand shift determined the direction: more households seeking dwellings must raise the price. Whereas the inelastic supply determined the severity — because with quantity nearly fixed, the market could not clear by supplying more dwellings and had to clear by rationing through price instead.

The supply constraint is the more important cause, for two reasons. First, if supply had been elastic, the identical demand shift would have produced mostly extra dwellings and only a modest rent rise — there would have been no affordability issue at all. Second, the demand surge may ease if migration slows, whereas the construction pipeline will still be slow, so the constraint persists and will produce the same outcome in the next cycle.

Step 5 — Impacts on both groups, in detail

Step 6 — Compare the groups — the second Excellence component

Both groups are affected by the same movement from Pe to Pe₁ — every dollar the tenant pays is a dollar the landlord receives, so the two effects are strictly linked rather than independent.

However, the effects run in opposite directions and are of very different severity. The $140 a week is a large share of a low-income tenant's income and a much smaller share of a property owner's. Whereas the landlord can sell, refinance or simply hold, the tenant can only pay, move or go without — and housing is a necessity, so going without is not genuinely available.

Most importantly, the market rations by price, and price rations out those with the least ability to pay — so the entire burden of the shortage falls, by construction, on the low-income group.

The low-income renting households are therefore far more seriously affected, because they lose more relative to their means, have no substitutes or buffer, and include the households excluded from the market altogether. But the landlord's gain is what identifies the nature of the issue: this is a transfer from tenants to property owners rather than a loss of output, so the problem is fundamentally distributional — which is why the response must be to make supply more elastic, so that the transfer stops growing.

Step 7 — Count what was added

Component	Before	After
Models with labels	none	D→D₁, Pe→Pe₁, Qe→Qe₁ used in sentences
Detail	none	mechanisms for both causes and both groups
Comparison of causes	none	direction vs severity, with 2 reasons
Comparison of groups	none	similarity, contrast, judgement

Comparing for Excellence, and how AS91228 is assessed

Covers AS91228

What you hand in

AS91228 is internally assessed, worth 4 credits, usually as a written report on the issue you and your school have chosen.

The criteria

Grade	Requirement
Achieved	Identify, define or describe concepts related to the issue; explain causes of the issue using economic models; explain impacts on various groups in New Zealand society
Merit	Both explanations, detailed
Excellence	Analysis of causes by comparing and/or contrasting their impact on the issue; analysis of impacts by comparing and/or contrasting the impact on various groups; analysis by integrating changes shown on economic models into detailed explanations

Excellence has three components, and all three are required. Two comparisons and integration.

Comparison 1 — comparing the causes

Compare your causes by their impact on the issue: which one did more, and why?
The criteria that justify the judgement:

Criterion	The argument
Size of the shift	Which cause moved its curve further?
Direction and severity	Demand shifts set direction; inelastic supply sets severity
Persistence	A permanent cause outweighs a temporary one
Tractability	Which one can actually be acted on?

"Both causes raised the price. But the demand shift determined the direction, whereas the inelastic supply determined the severity — because with supply nearly fixed, almost the entire adjustment had to fall on price rather than quantity. The supply constraint is therefore the more important cause, and it is also the one that persists after the demand surge ends."

Comparison 2 — comparing the groups

Compare two groups whose interests differ, and structure it in four moves:
1. The similarity — usually that both are affected by the same price movement.
2. The difference in direction — one gains, one loses.
3. The difference in severity — relative to income, options and buffers.
4. The judgement — who is worst affected, with reasons.

Component 3 — integrating the models

Not integrated: a diagram on one page and an explanation elsewhere that never mentions it.
Integrated: the model's labels appear inside the sentences.

"Population growth increased the number of households seeking rentals, so demand shifted right from D to D₁. Against a steep supply curve, the equilibrium rent rose sharply from Pe to Pe₁ while quantity rose only slightly from Qe to Qe₁ — and the households between Qe₁ and Qe are those now priced out of the market entirely."

The test: cover the diagram. If the explanation reads the same, the model is not integrated.

A report structure that maps onto the criteria

The issue — what it is, why it qualifies (current, of special interest, allocation of scarce resources), with New Zealand evidence
The concepts — defined, and chosen because your issue needs them
The market — buyers, sellers, price, quantity, and the model you will use
Cause 1 — named, modelled, labels integrated
Cause 2 — from the other side of the market
Comparing the causes — which mattered more, and why
Impacts on group 1 — mechanism, direction, severity
Impacts on group 2 — the same
Comparing the groups — similarity, difference, judgement
Conclusion

Checks before submitting

Issue is current, of special interest, and about the allocation of scarce resources
Concepts defined, and relevant to this issue
At least two causes, from both sides of the market
Every cause on a model, with labels in the sentences
At least two groups, with different interests
Comparison of causes written deliberately
Comparison of groups written deliberately
Every judgement supported by two or three reasons
Real New Zealand data, referenced with source and date

Tips and Tricks

Worked ExampleTurning a Merit paragraph into an Excellence one

A student has written:

"The main causes of rising rents were population growth and a lack of new houses being built. This affected renters, who had to pay more, and landlords, who earned more."

Rewrite it to meet the Excellence criteria.

Step 1 — Diagnose

The paragraph names two causes and two groups — the raw material is right — but it has:

No model. No curve shifts, no labels.
No detail. The mechanisms are not explained.
No comparison of the causes, and none of the groups.
No judgement.

Step 2 — Cause 1, with the model integrated

Step 3 — Cause 2, with the model integrated

Step 4 — Compare the causes — the first Excellence component

Step 5 — Impacts on both groups, in detail

Step 6 — Compare the groups — the second Excellence component

Both groups are affected by the same movement from Pe to Pe₁ — every dollar the tenant pays is a dollar the landlord receives, so the two effects are strictly linked rather than independent.

Step 7 — Count what was added

Component	Before	After
Models with labels	none	D→D₁, Pe→Pe₁, Qe→Qe₁ used in sentences
Detail	none	mechanisms for both causes and both groups
Comparison of causes	none	direction vs severity, with 2 reasons
Comparison of groups	none	similarity, contrast, judgement