2010 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre — Personal Development, Health and Physical Education
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Personal Development, Health and Physical Education. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2010 Higher School Certificate examination, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.
This document should be read along with the relevant syllabus, the 2010 Higher School Certificate examination, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of Personal Development, Health and Physical Education.
Teachers and candidates should be aware that examiners may ask questions that address the syllabus outcomes in a manner that requires candidates to respond by integrating the knowledge, understanding and skills they developed through studying the course.
Candidates need to be aware that the marks allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper), are guides to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing in excess of the space allocated may reduce the time available for answering other questions.
Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked, or verbs may be used which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Section I – Core
Better responses clearly outlined how two socioeconomic determinants contribute to health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. These responses referred to socioeconomic determinants such as socioeconomic status, education, employment, income, access and location. These responses then sketched in general terms how each determinant impacted on the health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Mid-range responses either identified two socioeconomic determinants or provided an outline of one socioeconomic determinant. These responses provided some understanding of socioeconomic determinants rather than specifically linking socioeconomic determinants to the health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Weaker responses provided some relevant information about health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, but lacked the specific link to socioeconomic determinants.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough understanding of the different roles that individuals, communities and governments have in addressing health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. They made clear distinctions between the roles of the three groups and clearly provided characteristics of how each group can address the health inequities. They described a range of roles of both indigenous and non-indigenous people, clearly demonstrating their knowledge of the specific roles of local communities and acknowledging the overarching role that the different levels of governments can play.
Mid-range responses showed a general understanding of the roles that individuals, communities and governments have in addressing health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Responses outlined the roles rather than describing them or provided a general range of roles which were not specific to addressing the health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Weaker responses identified some information about health inequities experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples or some relevant information about the roles of individuals, communities and governments in addressing inequities.
In better responses, candidates clearly described two action areas of the Ottawa Charter. They identified the action area correctly and provided a correct feature/characteristic of that action area.
In weaker responses, candidates either correctly identified an action area of the Ottawa Charter and provided an incorrect feature/characteristic of that area, or provided a correct characteristic/feature of some action area of the Ottawa Charter and incorrectly named the action area or completely omitted it.
In better responses, candidates clearly demonstrated the benefits of applying the action areas of the Ottawa Charter to one health promotion initiative. They provided a thorough discussion and included examples of the strategies relevant to that action area. In better responses, candidates used health promotion initiatives that clearly demonstrated the benefits of applying the Ottawa Charter such as the National Tobacco Strategy, National Skin Cancer Awareness Campaign, Fresh Tastes @ School, Beyond Blue and Close the Gap.
In mid-range responses, candidates showed a general understanding of the application of the Ottawa Charter. They described the application of the action areas of the Ottawa Charter to a health promotion initiative, providing examples of strategies for these action areas.
Weaker responses identified some information about the Ottawa Charter or a health promotion initiative or health promotion in general. Many of these responses did not use a health promotion initiative but a strategy of a health promotion initiative or a health priority area, for example, smoke-free zones, cardiovascular disease, smoking.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a clear understanding of three physiological adaptations in response to aerobic training. Typical responses recognised the relationship between aerobic training and the adaptations, providing an outline of why they occurred.
In mid-range responses, candidates tended to correctly identify three physiological adaptations or outlined two physiological adaptations.
In weaker responses, candidates tended to list some physiological adaptations with little understanding of the impact of aerobic training.
Better responses contained strong judgements with a clear link to how creatine may or may not improve performance. These responses were linked to the ATP/PC system and performance. Better responses also acknowledged that a balanced diet for many athletes was sufficient, excess creatine was excreted and that there was a risk of unknown health issues occurring.
In mid-range responses, candidates tended to make value statements of the role of creatine in the body. The responses demonstrated some understanding of how resynthesis of ATP/PC aids in the recovery of the muscles allowing for repeated movements. Other mid-range responses provided a description of creatine without any judgement as to its effect.
Weaker responses reflected a limited understanding of creatine supplements in relation to improving performance.
In better responses, candidates provided a clear description of the three stages of skill acquisition, highlighting the characteristics and features of each stage sequentially. They generally described the characteristics of the athlete at each stage, linking the appropriate practice methods and feedback, emphasising the benefits for the learner. In high-range responses, candidates often referred to kinaesthetic sense, temporal patterning and anticipation.
In mid-range responses, candidates sketched in general terms the three stages of skill acquisition, the basic features of each, with some supporting characteristics. Other responses described each stage through the use of examples.
Weaker responses reflected limited understanding of the stages of skill acquisition. A weak connection was made between learning a new skill and practice. Other responses listed the stages of skill acquisition.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a clear understanding of the psychological strategies that could be implemented by the two athletes to either enhance motivation or manage anxiety. They identified and compared either two strategies per athlete or compared two strategies to the two athletes. These high-range responses included clear comparisons with strong links to enhancing motivation or managing anxiety. The psychological strategies provided were not always limited to those listed in the syllabus.
In mid-range responses, candidates attempted to explain the psychological strategies that are suitable for each athlete in order to manage anxiety or enhance motivation. The explanations of strategies and their application were sometimes knowledgeable but the comparison between athletes or between the strategies for each athlete was not strong.
In weaker responses, candidates provided some information related to either psychological strategies or motivation or managing anxiety and generally reflected only a limited knowledge of those areas. These responses just included repetition of the stimulus material.
Question 27 – The health of young people
In the best responses, candidates identified a relevant health issue for young people, sketched the main features and used relevant examples such as ‘risk taking behaviour alone such as burn outs, drag racing and driving recklessly to impress friends contributes to the majority of motor vehicle accidents ...’ or ‘The use of alcohol consumption has increased among young people and it can cause them to be hospitalised ... it can cause injuries.’
In weaker responses, candidates either identified a major health issue or focused on the extent rather than the nature of the health issue.
In the best responses, candidates provided characteristics and features of relevant protective factors clearly linked to part a (i). They described a wide variety of examples of protective factors in a clear and logical way. They used examples such as laws and legislation, resilience and coping skills, education and health literacy skills, social support, health promotion, as well as protective factors specific to the health issue.
In mid-range responses, candidates sketched in general terms protective factors for the health issue identified in part (a) (i) or provided the characteristics and features of protective factors for another health issue.
Weaker responses provided some relevant information about health issues and young people.
In better responses, candidates gave criteria-based judgements on the actions that governments and non-government agencies have implemented to target a youth health issue, as well as determining the effectiveness of these actions to reduce the impact of the health issue on young people. They focused on using terms such as mortality, morbidity and current health trends. These reports demonstrated a thorough knowledge and understanding of health and physical activity concepts relevant to the question.
In mid-range responses, candidates showed how and why actions by government and non-government agencies reduced the impact of a youth health issue.
In weaker responses, candidates provided some characteristics and features of government and/or non-government actions, or provided some information about these actions or about youth health issues. They used some examples to illustrate their response with limited reference to the health issue.
Question 28 – Sport and physical activity in Australian society
In better responses, candidates clearly defined the traditional gender roles and social expectations. They identified historical barriers to female participation. These responses also described the traditional role of men.
Mid-range responses sketched in general terms the traditional roles of men or women with some relevant examples or characteristics included.
Lower-range responses identified a characteristic of the gender roles of men and women or no real link to sport being a traditional male domain.
In better responses, candidates linked the relationship that gender has to participation rates in sport and physical activity. These responses explained the latest statistical trends associated with participation in Australia. Gender was successfully deconstructed using social expectations of parents and their children for the sports choices. Stereotypes such as boys play more aggressive competitive games, while girls play more passive and aesthetic games were also accurately identified. Positive role models for women, and issues associated with participation in co-educational PE classes, were also common examples.
In mid-range responses, candidates sketched in general terms traditional sports associated with men and women. Links were made to gender stereotyping and examples were given.
In weaker responses, candidates identified some relevant information, with reference made to what were the characteristics of men’s and women’s sports participation.
In better responses, candidates clearly showed the relationship between sport and Australia’s national identity. They evaluated the relationship by drawing out specific issues in Australia’s sporting history and making judgements about how they affected Australia’s national identity. In these responses, candidates made specific reference to government funding, politics, Olympic and Commonwealth games and achievements of national sporting teams.
Mid-range responses explained the relationship between and sport and national identity. Candidates focused on some historical sporting moments as well as the political aspects of sport or government funding. These responses made links to the multicultural aspects of sport in Australia, the contribution of the media and regional sporting events or icons.
Weaker responses sketched in general terms how sport shaped Australia’s national identity. These responses used examples like the success of athletes and sporting teams to show how Australia is seen as a sporting nation and how the nation is proud to support their achievements.
Question 29 – Sports medicine
In better responses, candidates succinctly outlined how problems associated with both iron deficiency and bone density affected female participation in sport. Responses separately outlined each condition, relating cause and effect. They also provided relevant examples to illustrate the negative impact on performance of iron deficiency and bone density.
In mid-range responses, candidates identified problems associated with either bone density or iron deficiency, including relevant examples.
Weaker responses displayed limited understanding of problems which result from these conditions. Responses only identified one effect or problem related to bone density or iron deficiency.
In better responses, candidates correctly identified the three medical conditions, asthma, diabetes and epilepsy. They generally provided an outline of the nature of each medical condition and the respective signs and symptoms.
These responses also demonstrated how sports medicine addressed each condition, providing a range of examples for each medical condition.
In mid-range responses, candidates correctly identified at least two medical conditions. Candidates either outlined the nature of the condition, or identified some examples of how medical conditions are addressed by sports medicine.
Weaker responses provided relevant information about the participation of children and young athletes in sport.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a thorough knowledge and understanding of sports environment and sports policy. Multiple examples were provided. A clear judgement was made on how these factors promoted safe participation, ranging from simplistic evaluation; for example ‘the compulsory wearing of shin pads in soccer has effectively reduced the occurrence of injury’ to multiple value judgements that made direct reference to specific injury and the philosophy behind the safety consideration. These responses were concise and logically structured.
In mid-range responses, candidates provided a sound understanding of sports policy and/or sports environments and used examples to reflect their understanding.
Weaker responses outlined information about the sports environment and/or sports policy. Responses lacked detail and commonly mentioned protective equipment and the playing surface. Some information was provided about safe sporting participation; however, these responses often lacked clarity and logical structure.
Question 30 – Improving Performance
In better responses, candidates clearly identified at least one benefit of drug testing and one limitation of drug testing.
Mid-range responses identified either a benefit or a limitation of testing but not both.
In better responses, candidates clearly explained why performance enhancing drugs are considered unethical and provided a range of issues created by the use of these drugs, highlighting each issue raised with a specific example.
In mid-range responses, candidates identified some issues associated with the use of performance enhancing drugs, but failed to clearly link why their use was unethical. In other mid-range responses, candidates explained why one aspect of drug use was considered unethical.
In weaker responses, candidates identified that performance enhancing drugs were considered to be unfair or cheating but provided no explanation or examples to show why.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a depth of understanding of the factors relating to the avoidance of overtraining in athletes.
They clearly justified the factors a coach needed to consider in order to avoid overtraining and linked these factors with a range of strategies and overtraining signs and symptoms.
In mid-range responses, candidates provided factors that coaches needed to be aware of to avoid overtraining but failed to provide examples or justification as to why it should be avoided.
Weaker responses identified either symptoms of overtraining or factors a coach could consider to avoid overtraining. Examples were often superficially presented and failed to establish what a coach was required to do for their athletes.
Question 31 – Equity and health
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a clear understanding of the factors that contribute to health inequities.
Mid-range responses identified several factors that contribute to health inequities.
Weaker responses provided limited information with no supporting examples.
In better responses, candidates demonstrated a clear understanding of how government funding could be used to reduce health inequities. They provided clear links to a population experiencing health inequalities.
Mid-range responses focused on general government funding with little reference to specific funding programs and population groups.
Weaker responses focused on generalised government funding with no reference to specific population groups.
Better responses clearly identified the characteristics of a health promotion strategy. These responses were supported by a range of clear examples.
Mid-range responses identified several characteristics of a health promotion strategy with limited examples.
Weaker responses discussed health promotion initiatives with little or no reference to the characteristics of a health promotion strategy.