Subject adaptation · Years 11–13 · English / Literacy · Field-Based STEM · Tony Jones
AI can write a sophisticated textual analysis. At NCEA level, the difference between a submitted essay and an owned argument is whether the student can account for the decisions inside it. The Decision Vignette creates that evidence in 90 seconds.
During a formal essay task on a studied text, the teacher conducts a vignette at the drafting stage. The student names one structural or language decision they made, the textual evidence that drove it, and one interpretive uncertainty they are carrying. The teacher's recorded sentence becomes part of the internal assessment authenticity record.
For Merit or Excellence level extended writing, the vignette asks the student to account for a moment where their analysis went beyond the obvious or challenged their initial reading. The student names the decision, identifies the specific textual evidence, and states what the text still does not fully support. At this level, the uncertainty statement is the most diagnostic part of the vignette.
The three prompts are fixed: decision, evidence, uncertainty. Do not substitute or expand them. Their simplicity is what makes them impossible to prepare for in advance and what makes the student's response genuinely diagnostic.
Where English involves te reo Māori or te ao Māori contexts, the vignette should be adapted to honour the student's cultural and community knowledge as a legitimate form of evidence. A student drawing on whakapapa or tikanga to explain a textual decision is demonstrating ownership in the fullest sense.
The Evidence Lock pairs naturally at the pre-drafting stage for extended writing. The Reconstruction Check works alongside this for longer tasks where both a process artefact and an in-lesson evidence point are needed.