1. Home
2. HSC
3. HSC Exams
4. Pre-2016 HSC exam papers
5. 2009 HSC Notes from the marking centre
6. 2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Food Technology

2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – Food Technology

Contents

• Introduction
• Section II
• Section III
• Section IV

 

Introduction

This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 course in Food Technology. It provides comments on candidate responses to the 2009 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 2009 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 Food Technology.

Teachers and students are advised that, in December 2008, the Board of Studies approved changes to the examination specifications and assessment requirements for a number of courses. These changes will be implemented for the 2010 HSC cohort. Information on a course-by-course basis is available on the Board’s website. A Specimen 2010 Food Technology HSC written examination is available on the Board’s website.

General comments

Candidates need to be aware that the mark allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper) are a guide to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.

Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words which contains terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how’ or ‘what’ may be asked or verbs that are not included in the glossary may be used such as ‘propose’ or ‘list’.

Section II

Part A

Question 11 – The Australian food industry

1. Better responses correctly identified and named relevant legislation, distinguished between federal and state legislation and were also clear about the breaches of legislation in the scenario. Some responses incorrectly named two state or two federal laws, rather than identifying one of each.
   
   Weaker responses incorrectly named the legislation, eg ‘Food Safety Act’, ‘HACCP’ (rather than the Food Standards Code or FSANZ); or included legislation not directly related to the scenario, eg the ‘Health Act’ or ‘Clean Air Act’.
   
   A large number of responses identified the breach (eg poor labelling) rather than the legislation it related to. Some candidates were not aware of changes that have occurred in legislation, for example some candidates referred to FSANZ as ‘ANZFA’ .
2. Better responses clearly identified the characteristics of the breach in the scenario and described the aspects of the Act that had been breached. Most of these better responses identified several breaches in the scenario, especially in relation to worker safety and food hygiene.
   
   Weaker responses were confused about which aspects of the breaches related to which legislation. The most common confusion related to the aspects covered by the Food Act and OHS, for example stating that the failure to clean chopping boards was an OHS breach rather than a breach associated with the Food Act. Poorer responses tended to identify a breach relating to one piece of legislation only, stated features of breaches incorrectly linked to legislation, or wrote in detail about the legislation without identifying the breaches.
3. Better responses described in detail the FSANZ product recall process and/or the activities of the Environmental Health Officer, and included internal processes that would need to be addressed by the manufacturer, eg thorough cleaning and the implementation of HACCP. Most responses identified that a product recall and EHO inspections would need to take place, although only the better responses provided sufficient detail regarding these processes.
   
   Weaker responses outlined the need/features of HACCP or discussed breaches in the scenario, generally stating what should have been done in the scenario rather than addressing how the company should deal with the existing problem of contamination.
   
   Very weak responses focused on the symptoms of food poisoning or listed breaches.
4. Better responses clearly detailed a strategic program, and the value of the activities proposed was clearly related to food safety and hygiene. Examples of programs candidates proposed included training workshops conducted in-house by internal or external trainers, ongoing refresher activities to reinforce information, group discussions and practical applications/scenarios, booklets and training manuals followed up by some form of testing procedure, the use of ICT and video resources, introduction and training in HACCP procedures, food poisoning information, and cleaning procedures reinforced by signage/posters.
   
   Weaker responses included the discussion of training programs in relation to OHS/worker safety rather than food hygiene/safety, proposing strategies which were not relevant.

Question 12 – Food manufacture

1. Better responses identified and outlined most of the functions of packaging, including to protect from contamination, to preserve the food or to inform the consumer.
   
   Weaker responses listed the types of packaging available with no reference to any function, for example cardboard, glass bottle and can.
2. 1. This part of the question was done well by most candidates.
   2. Better responses made the relationship evident between the packaging material chosen and the storage and distribution of the selected food. These responses identified the packaging material and how the material was suited to the selected food and its storage and distribution. For example, cardboard cartons for apples, which have cardboard cushioning to protect the food and are able to be stacked for distribution. These responses addressed both storage and distribution distinctively, making clear links to the product for both the consumer and manufacturer/retailer. They also provided an explanation of the positive characteristics/features of the food packaging/material and linked those characteristics to the suitability for both storage and distribution, justifying their suitability for the package/food product identified. Weaker responses provided general information about packaging such as, ‘keep product fresh’ and ‘convenience’.
   3. Better responses provided a clear explanation of the characteristics and features of the packaging material and made a judgement of the actual impact of the packaging material identified. Some responses in this mark range explained the characteristics and features of the packaging material chosen with an explanation of the effect on the environment. Weaker responses provided general information about the packaging material and/or the environment.

Question 13 – Food product development

1. Better responses identified two market research types such as primary and secondary, qualitative and quantitative research and then provided characteristics and features of each type. Frequently, responses included primary research such as gathering original data through methods such as consumer surveys, or observations, while others talked about secondary research such as analysing research undertaken by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.
   
   Weaker responses recognised and identified a market research method for food product development or gave general information on market research. Frequently a survey was identified as a way of determining consumer preference by candidates.
2. Better responses described a feasibility study as a way of determining whether the frozen confections would be profitable and whether their manufacture was technologically possible. Better responses then distinguished between the financial and technical aspects by providing characteristics and features of each. These responses made reference to financial considerations such as calculating a break-even point based on the product costs compared to the quantity of sales required for Fastfruit to recover costs and make a profit. They also included technical considerations such as the suitability of existing equipment, new processes/machinery required and/or staff training required.
   
   Weaker responses sketched a feasibility study in general terms or provided general information such as mentioning cost or machinery. Some candidates could not distinguish between what they were asked in parts (a) and (b). These candidates tended to repeat content about market research in part (b) or interchange their content for market research and feasibility studies in parts (a) and (b).
3. Better responses clearly stated tests that could be conducted at the prototype stage, relevant to the new food product in the question. These responses referred to a range of prototype tests in their explanation including:
• evaluation of the various sensory properties of the frozen confections using a trained panel of evaluators
• consumer tests to reduce the risk of failure
• packaging tests to verify the ability of the packaging to protect and preserve the frozen confections during their storage and distribution
• storage trials to confirm storage conditions/temperature for the frozen product, the shelf-life of the frozen confections.
Responses justified why and/or how these tests would be conducted during the prototype development of this new product, establishing a clear link between each prototype test and the frozen confections.

Responses in the mid range named and described tests that are conducted on prototypes. Many responses in this mark range listed various aspects of sensory testing (related to colour, flavour and texture) that could be conducted during prototype testing but did not explain why and/or how this would be performed. Some responses did not relate these aspects to the product provided in the question.

Part B

Question 14 – Contemporary food issues – Nutrition

1. Better responses to this question provided characteristics and features of advertising practices used by fast food outlets to sell their products. These responses described the type of advertising practice used, supporting their answer with examples. Samples of this included:
   • advertising in prime time slots to persuade target-specific consumers, eg McDonalds Angus Beef Burger in the evening to target adults, McDonalds Happy Meal advertised in the afternoon to target children
   • using celebrities to endorse products, eg KFC using the Australian Cricket team
   • promoting health issues, eg McDonalds Healthy Choice menu with endorsement from the Heart Foundation.
   • offering gimmicks, eg Happy Meal toys.
   Weaker responses provided general information about advertising practices. Examples included listing types of advertisements such as billboards, TV, radio, newspapers, flyers.
2. Better responses to this question made clear the relationship evident between the advertisement and its influence on attitudes towards both milk and body image.
   
   Weaker responses described the advertisement as a woman’s figure filled with milk. They identified the components of the advertisement without demonstrating an understanding of the relationship between them and the influence on attitudes, for example the measuring tape means that this is a diet milk

Question 15 – Contemporary food issues – Marketplace

1. Better responses correctly named the agency that controls food labelling.
2. Better responses interpreted the food label and demonstrated an understanding of nutritional claims. They identified nutritional labelling claims from the diagram provided such as ‘Rich in Omega-3’ and ‘98% Fat Free’ and described how this information needed to be supported on a food label, for example in the Nutritional Information Panel. They identified that labels needed to be truthful and inclusions such as the National Heart Foundation Tick need to be endorsed by the Foundation before the tick symbol can be included on a package.
   
   Weaker responses listed some legal labelling requirements such as the ‘use by date’ and ‘name of manufacturer’ without any understanding of nutritional claims.
3. Better responses discussed the marketplace trend of using ‘quality’ descriptors in food product marketing practices with insight and clear understanding. Weaker responses demonstrated little understanding of how these terms were used as quality descriptors on food labels.

Section III

Question 16 – Food manufacture

1. Better responses came from candidates who were able to sketch in general terms the reasons for preserving foods. An example would be: ‘foods are preserved to ensure that seasonal fruits are available all year round, such as the summer fruit mangoes being frozen to allow consumers to access them throughout the winter months’. Better responses gave several reasons for preserving food supported by relevant examples.
   
   Mid-range responses in this part came from candidates who provided a list of reasons for preserving food such as to keep food longer and to improve quality, without sketching the reasons in general terms.
   
   Weaker responses gave only general information about preservation without outlining the reasons for preserving food.
2. Better responses provided characteristics and features of the causes of food deterioration and spoilage supported by appropriate examples. Within the characteristics and features, these responses described the cause and its effect on food in terms of spoilage/deterioration and supported each with relevant examples. Better responses covered environmental factors (such as temperature, moisture, vermin, sunlight, humidity), microbial factors (such as bacteria, moulds and yeast), physical factors (such as damage from handling, transport, vertical and horizontal impact) and chemical factors (such as enzymatic factors).
   
   Mid-range responses outlined the causes of food deterioration and spoilage. These responses also supported their answer with an example. These responses often listed the causes of food deterioration and spoilage then suggested in general terms how each caused the food to spoil. An example would be ‘incorrect storage, like leaving food out of the fridge will cause food to go off, eg milk will sour if left out of the fridge’. Many candidates in this range limited themselves to environmental causes or microbial/bacterial factors.
   
   Weaker responses listed the causes of food deterioration and spoilage or provided general information about food deterioration and spoilage.
3. Better responses made a careful and appropriate choice regarding the chosen food item, therefore enabling them to propose many preservation methods. They proposed many suitable preservation methods for their chosen food and clarified more than one principle for each preservation process proposed. 
   
   Weaker responses listed preservation processes for the selected food and/or outlined one preservation process for a selected food. Very weak responses merely provided information on preservation.

Question 17 – Food product development

1. Better responses identified the three types of food product development, gave an outline of each and provided appropriate examples. Some candidates could not provide examples of ‘new to the world’ products.
2. Better responses identified and described the four internal factors affecting food product development. They provided direct links between internal factors and specific examples of food product development, for example ‘companies in a strong financial position may be able to spend more money on research and development resulting in a new to the world product or line extensions that require minimal changes to production facilities’.
3. Better responses identified and provided reasons/drivers behind a manufacturer’s decision to develop new food products. Better responses provided relevant examples for each reason and showed a good use of the correct terminology. The majority of responses focused on consumer demands, health and convenience as the main drivers.

Section IV

Question 18 – Contemporary food issues – Nutrition

The better responses provided reference to a specific group, including a comprehensive breakdown of the nutrition/health issues for this group, supported by a relationship between these issues with relevant and accurate strategies for achieving optimal health. Such responses were well supported by relevant examples. The better responses used accurate, technical and appropriate terminology. These responses were well structured and provided evidence of planning and/or mind mapping the answer.

The better responses selected a group that provided scope for expanding the relationship between the issues and the strategies, in order to obtain higher marks. These better responses often selected the groups Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders, adolescent girls/teenagers or pregnant/lactating women. In addition to strategies by individuals to achieve optimal health, such responses also included strategies by the government and health professionals.

Mid-range responses selected a specific group. They often provided ‘promotional’ strategies in a marketing environment such as TV advertising. Typically they selected a group that sometimes limited the depth of their responses, for example food intolerances such as coeliac disease. These responses usually addressed nutritional issues for the group but lacked clear solutions and strategies. A lack of specific or accurate detail about how the nutritional considerations should be addressed or rectified was a characteristic feature of the responses. They often outlined, rather than explained the nutritional issues or promotional strategies. Typically, the information provided in these responses was more general, providing less characteristics and features of the groups and their nutritional issues.

The weaker responses did not understand the meaning of ‘aspects of nutrition’. They usually did not choose a group, rather they provided more general and basic information on nutrition. Some weaker responses discussed nutrition considerations but not how these could be addressed. Conversely, some provided very general marketing-type promotional strategies. Most of the weaker responses did not provide examples. Often a disease was confused with a specific group.

Question 19 – Contemporary food issues – Nutrition

Better responses defined key terms such as heredity, diabetes and cardiovascular disease and explained the relationship between heredity and impact of diet for each disorder. They distinguished between the different types of diabetes and explained cardiovascular disease in detail. Better responses identified high intake of saturated fats, salt and sugar as risk factors and also included sedentary lifestyles and lack of physical activity as a risk factor. Detailed dietary plans were included and low GI foods and new products in the marketplace available to assist the management of these diseases were identified, such as ‘Logicol’. The correct use of terminology was a feature of these answers. Many answers made the correlation between obesity levels and the prevalence of these disorders and used terminology such as over-nutrition, simple and complex carbohydrates and glycemic index.

Many responses in the mid-range did not address all aspects of the question. Many simply described the disorders without linking hereditary and/or dietary factors and some failed to include a dietary plan. Some responses did address all areas of the question but in a very brief and simplified way and the incorrect use of terminology was common, particularly in mixing up types of diabetes. A number of responses used the word ‘hereditary’ in the introduction of their answer but did not define or explain its impact on either diabetes or cardiovascular disease.

Weaker responses only addressed one aspect of the question, either heredity or dietary factors, or provided limited general information on healthy eating, including listing healthy food. Many responses in this range showed confusion about the disorders by linking diabetes to the liver instead of the pancreas. Weaker responses often made generalisations that were inaccurate and information was presented in a very simple format without using examples to consolidate points.

Question 20 – Contemporary food issues – Marketplace

Better responses made evident the relationship between environmental, economic, social and ethical implications of a marketplace trend. A marketplace trend was clearly identified with relevant examples provided in the response to support the trend discussed. An example would be the marketplace trend of ecologically sustainable production methods using organic farming. Better responses discussed all implications relating to this trend such as:

• environmental – reduced need for pesticides
• economic – organic produce can be more expensive to buy and therefore organic farms can be quite profitable; however, yields may be lower
• social – organic foods may be safer for human consumption due to the absence of pesticides
• ethical – organic methods reduce concern for destruction of the environment, preserving it for future generations.

Mid-range responses did not provide enough detail on the implications of their trend, or social and ethical implications were not covered in sufficient detail. Weaker responses did not address a marketplace trend or had little understanding of implications.

Question 21 – Contemporary food issues – Marketplace

Better responses explained the relationship between a cradle-to-grave analysis and cost benefits. Examples were provided and the process of developing a product from raw materials through to waste was fully discussed. Better responses included an analysis of food production costs, including economic, social and environmental costs.

Mid-range responses provided characteristics and features of a cradle-to-grave analysis or cost benefits, while weaker responses had little understanding of the concept of cradle-to-grave or cost benefits.

2010177