UK's No.1 Assignment Help, Trusted Since 2018
Get Expert-crafted assignments
Looking for Plagiarism-Free Answers for Your US, UK, Singapore, New Zealand, and Ireland College/University Assignments?
Talk to an Expert| Category | Assignment | Subject | Finance |
|---|---|---|---|
| University | University of Auckland | Module Title | PROPERTY 385 Special Topic - Money Land and Housing |
Number of group members: Minimum 2, Maximum 5 Self-assign on Canvas -> People -> Groups for Assignment at
https://canvas.auckland.ac.nz/courses/144873/groups#tab-27531 by 17 March 2026.
This group assignment requires students to produce a rigorous, evidence-based investigation into housing affordability issues in New Zealand. Housing affordability remains one of the most significant socio-economic challenges facing New Zealand. Over the past decade, housing prices and rents have experienced substantial volatility, particularly during and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Policy responses have ranged from large-scale urban upzoning initiatives to restrictions on foreign purchases and substantial interest rate adjustments. Has New Zealand’s housing become more or less affordable? Why?
This assignment requires students to:
The emphasis is on evidence-based reasoning, not opinion. Arguments must be supported by empirical data, credible literature, and clear analytical logic.
Several New Zealand institutions have produced influential evidence-based
reports on housing affordability that serve as strong exemplars for this assignment.
For example, Auckland Council (2014) analysed land supply and planning
constraints in Auckland, while The Treasury (2013) evaluated patterns and
trends of house prices, expenditures and home ownership over time and across groups based on two surveys.
These reports demonstrate clear problem framing, transparent data use,
critical policy evaluation, and evidence-based conclusions. They reflect the
professional standards expected of property and policy analysts.
However, they are all very outdated (published more than 10 years ago).
This assignment mirrors such real-world consultancy practice, requiring
students to produce structured, data-driven analysis comparable to professional reports on housing affordability issues.
1. Survey Data – mainly for Chapter 2
(available here, and guest presented in week 3)
About 100 raw data from a recently completed survey of young New Zealanders examining:
2. Stats NZ Customised Census Dataset – mainly for Chapter 3
(available here and presented in week 4)
Students are expected to analyse these datasets independently and integrate findings into the report.
Chapter 1: Introduction and Literature Review
Chapter 2: Public Perceptions of Housing Affordability
Using the provided survey data to discuss, but not limited to, the following:
This chapter should critically discuss how perceptions may differ from objective affordability metrics.
Chapter 3: Measured Housing Affordability Trends
Using the customised Stats NZ dataset to discuss, but not limited to, the following:
This chapter presents the actual affordability trajectory and examines
distributional differences across income groups.
Chapter 4: Causes of Affordability Changes
Identify and evaluate drivers of housing affordability changes, supported by evidence.
These may include:
Arguments on at least ONE core cause must be supported by empirical evidence
(quantitative or qualitative).
Chapter 5: Evaluation of Policy Measures and Proposed Solutions
Critically assess at least ONE policy intervention attempted in the past decade, including:
For each policy considered:
Students must also propose ONE alternative solution.
Proposal must include:
Chapter 6: Conclusion
By completing this assignment, students will be able to:
* updated on 28 April 2026 from price-to-income ratios to mortgage-to-income ratios.
| Section | Description | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Introduction & Literature Review | Context, theoretical grounding, use of credible sources | 3 |
| 2. Perception Analysis | Quality of survey analysis and comparison with other sources | 6 |
| 3. Measured Affordability Analysis | Accuracy, clarity, depth of data interpretation | 6 |
| 4. Causal & Policy Evaluation | Strength of evidence, analytical reasoning, policy critique | 6 |
| 5. Solutions Evaluation & Novel Solution | Strength of evidence, analytical reasoning, policy critique, novelty | 6 |
| 6. Conclusion | Coherent synthesis and implications | 3 |
| Criterion | Description | Marks |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Structure & Oral Communication | Logical flow, clarity of key findings Clarity, confidence, engagement, professional tone |
2 |
| 2. Non-verbal Communication | Body language, eye contact, dress code, etc | 2 |
| 3. Visual Support | Effective slide design, good use of graphics and illustrations | 2 |
| 4. Engagements | Collegiality, Collaborativeness, Coherence, Classroom Engagements | 4 |
Academic Integrity
This is a group project. Collaboration within groups is expected; however:
| Rubric for Assignment AoL | ||
| Criteria | Ratings | Pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeIntroduction
Introduce background information and literature review |
3 PtsAbove Standard (8-10)Advanced Student has shown detailed background information on the topic and current status, with strong supporting evidence from reliable sources, including government reports, court case reports, academic research papers, etc.
2.25 PtsProficient (6.5-7.5)Proficient Student has provided enough background information on the topic and current status, with some good supporting evidence. 1.8 PtsBasic (5-6)Basic Student has provided some good background information on the topic and current status, with little or weak supporting evidence. 1.35 PtsDeveloping (0-4.5)Not Satisfied Student has failed to provide reasonable background information on the topic |
3 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomePerception Analysis on Survey Data
Identify the respondents’ perception to the topic and their relationships with respondents’ attributes. |
6 PtsAbove Standard (8-10)Advanced Student has demonstrated with detailed information on the perception analysis with good charts showing the findings on patterns, correlations, and/or interrelationship, with strong supporting evidence.
4.5 PtsProficient (6.5-7.5)Proficient Student has demonstrated with some good information on the perception analysis with clear charts, with good supporting evidence. 3.6 PtsBasic (5-6)Basic Student has demonstrated with little or weak information on the perception analysis with poor charts, and with little or weak supporting evidence. 2.7 PtsDeveloping (0-4.5)Not Satisfied Student has failed to provide reasonable information on the perception analysis, or with no charts, or with no supporting evidence. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeCausal & Policy Evaluation
Explain which alleged cause(s) is/are the major cause(s) of the issues. (AoL 3.2) |
6 PtsAbove Standard (8-10)Advanced student has evaluated the theories and latest information that can explain with convincing evidence the major cause(s) of the issues.
4.5 PtsProficient (6.5-7.5)Proficient student has evaluated the theories or latest information that can explain with good evidence the major cause(s) of the issues. 3.6 PtsBasic (5-6)Basic student has evaluated the theories or latest information that can explain with little or weak evidence the major cause(s) of the issues. 2.7 PtsDeveloping (0-4.5)Not Satisfied Student has failed to evaluate the theories or latest information to explain or with no evidence the major cause(s) of the issues. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeSolutions Analysis and Proposed Solution
Discuss the effectiveness of the solutions implemented in the past decade, and a proposed new solution for the future. (AoL 1.1) |
6 PtsAbove Standard (8-10)Advanced Student has demonstrated with professional knowledge on how the implemented solutions have helped solve the problems and proposed a novel one for the future, with strong supporting evidence or rationale.
4.5 PtsProficient (6.5-7.5)Proficient Student has provided with relevant information on how the implemented solutions have helped solve the problems and proposed a novel one for the future, with good evidence or rationale. 3.6 PtsBasic (5-6)Basic Student has provided with little or weak information on how the implemented solutions have helped solve the problems and proposed a novel one for the future, with little or weak evidence or rationale. 2.7 PtsDeveloping (0-4.5)Not Satisfied Student has failed to provide reasonable information on how the implemented solutions have helped solved the problems, and proposed a novel one for the future, with no reasonable evidence or rationale. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeMeasured Affordability Analysis
Apply appropriately the concepts and analytic skills to analyse the topic based on the chosen metric(s). |
6 PtsAbove Standard (8-10)Advanced Student has applied the concepts and analytic skills, with professional evidence.
4.5 PtsProficient (6.5-7.5)Proficient Student has applied the concepts and analytic skills, with good evidence. 3.6 PtsBasic (5-6)Basic Student has applied the concepts and analytic skills, with little or weak evidence. 2.7 PtsDeveloping (0-4.5)Not Satisfied Student has failed to apply appropriately the concepts or analytic skills, or with no evidence. |
6 pts |
| This criterion is linked to a learning outcomeConclusion and Overall Written Communication
Conclusion, Title and Contents (Overall content structure, design and use of tables and graphics, writing purpose, context, etc) |
3 PtsAbove Standard (16-20)Advanced Student has concluded with a coherent synthesis of the report and drawn important implications from the findings. Student has consistently adhered to the assignment instruction guidelines; the essay is well-written with professional use of graphics and tables; APA 7th referencing is used; there is excellent attention to detail, with no or minor mistakes and omissions.
2.33 PtsProficient (12-15.5)Proficient Student has concluded with a good synthesis of the report and drawn some implications from the findings. Student has adhered to most of the assignment instruction guidelines with a fair use of graphics and tables, but there are some mistakes and omissions in referencing and grammar, spelling, and punctuation; parts of the essay lack conciseness and cohesion. 1.8 PtsBasic (10-12)Basic Student has concluded with little or a weak synthesis of the report and drawn no or little implications from the findings. Student has adhered to some assignment instruction guidelines with little or weak use of graphics and tables, but there are many mistakes and omissions in referencing and grammar etc. Parts of the essay are difficult to follow; there are examples of filler text, repetition, colloquial language. 1.42 PtsDeveloping (0-9.5)Not Satisfied Student has NOT made an appropriate conclusion, or withOUT a synthesis of the report or has NOT drawn implications from the findings. Student has ignored most, or all assignment instruction guidelines and made use of poor or no graphics or tables. The standard of referencing, grammar, spelling, and punctuation are well below expectations. The essay is difficult to comprehend. |
3 pts |
sdsa
Hire Assignment Helper Today!
Let's Book Your Work with Our Expert and Get High-Quality Content
cx bnf,dgfdmngfmd,gfmgf
