Ethical Well-being Inquiry

Overview

Today students practise analysing a contemporary ethical issue in relation to well-being using a structured approach: differing perspectives, underlying ethical foundations, and implications for hauora (well-being) for directly affected people, others, and society.

Learning intentions

• WALT explain a contemporary ethical issue and why it creates a dilemma for people and society.
• WALT analyse differing and opposing perspectives and the reasons behind them.
• WALT link the issue to well-being (hauora) and health concepts to show how perspectives affect outcomes.
• WALT assess implications of current related health practices for those directly affected, others, and society.
• WALT communicate a critical analysis using evidence and clear reasoning.

Success criteria

• I can describe the ethical dilemma and the well-being impacts on those directly affected.
• I can explain at least two opposing perspectives and the reasons/values behind them.
• I can analyse implications for others and wider society, linked to well-being concepts.
• I can use clear evidence and connect my ideas to health concepts (hauora, socio-ecological thinking, health promotion, attitudes and values).

Curriculum links

• AS91464 — Analyse a contemporary ethical issue in relation to well-being (critical account through perspectives and implications).
• Health and Physical Education (Health Education) — hauora, socio-ecological perspective, health promotion, attitudes and values.
• NCEA internal — analysis based on a structured critical account of ethical dilemmas and impacts on well-being.

Lesson structure (60 minutes)

1. 0–6 min · Warm-up (hook). Teacher presents a short scenario prompt on screen or handout: “Should New Zealand schools require proof of vaccination for students?” Students do a quick individual write: “What well-being values are in tension here?”
2. 6–16 min · Mini-teach: what ‘ethical issue + well-being’ means. Teacher defines “contemporary ethical issue” as current and debated, and “analysis” as explaining opposing perspectives and implications of health practices for well-being. Teacher models a simple ethical dilemma map: values/rights/beliefs, and possible harms/benefits to well-being. Students take notes using a provided template with headings: Issue, Perspectives, Implications.
3. 16–30 min · Case study groups (discussion). Students in groups of 4–5 receive one case pack with roles (e.g., vaccinated student/whānau, unvaccinated student/whānau, school leader, public health worker, student peer). Each group must identify: (a) what the ethical dilemma is, (b) two perspectives that oppose each other, and (c) the reasons/values behind each perspective. Teacher circulates with guiding questions: “What makes this ethical (not just legal)?” “What assumptions are being made about well-being?”
4. 30–42 min · Ethical dilemma analysis (structured writing). Each student completes an “analysis paragraph plan” for AS91464:

• Sentence 1: ethical issue + why it’s a dilemma for well-being
• Sentence 2–3: perspective A and reasons/ethical foundation
• Sentence 4–5: perspective B and reasons/ethical foundation
• Sentence 6–7: implications of current practices for directly affected people and others (link to hauora and socio-ecological perspective)
• Sentence 8: implications for society (health promotion lens; attitudes and values) Students use sentence starters supplied by teacher (e.g., “One perspective argues that… because…”)

5. 42–52 min · Gallery walk (peer feedback). Students post their paragraph plans on desks or walls (or share digitally without internet). Pairs swap and give feedback using two prompts: “Which perspective is clearest?” “Which implication is most strongly linked to well-being?” Teacher reminds students to keep feedback respectful and focused on reasoning.
6. 52–60 min · Exit ticket (formative assessment). Students answer:

• “Name one opposing perspective and one value that likely shapes it.”
• “Describe one implication for well-being for people directly affected OR wider society.”

Resources

• AS91464-style analysis template (one per student): Issue / Perspectives / Ethical reasons / Implications for well-being
• Case study pack on vaccination proof in schools (age-appropriate, NZ context) with role prompts
• Scenario prompt sheet for warm-up
• Highlighters or pens for coding “values/ethical reasons” vs “well-being impacts”
• Peer feedback sheet with the two prompts used in gallery walk
• Projector/board or printed slide for mini-teach definitions and model paragraph plan

Assessment

• Formative during the lesson: teacher observation checklist (use of opposing perspectives, links to well-being implications).
• Peer feedback during gallery walk: evidence of clearer reasoning and stronger well-being connections.
• Exit ticket: quick check for each student’s ability to identify opposing perspective(s) and at least one implication linked to well-being.

Differentiation

• Support: provide sentence starters, a filled example of one “perspective” sentence, and a reduced template with word banks (hauora, rights, trust, fairness, stigma, access, community responsibility).
• Support for literacy: allow students to plan orally with a partner before writing; offer a paragraph plan with suggested sentence frames.
• Extension: students add a third perspective (or nuanced sub-perspective) and explicitly connect to health promotion (e.g., reducing barriers, increasing informed choice, strengthening trust) and socio-ecological levels (individual, school, whānau, community).
• EAL/SEN considerations: allow use of key terms from the template; provide role cards with simpler wording and allow audio rehearsal of paragraph plan.

{optional adjustment if needed}

If time runs short, Step 4 becomes “write 5–6 key sentences” rather than 8, ensuring each analysis includes: two opposing perspectives + at least two implications linked to well-being.