Judging Social Action

Overview

In this second lesson of Te Tiriti, Tribunal and Debate, students evaluate the hīkoi against the Treaty Principles Bill as an example of social action in Aotearoa New Zealand. They use dated evidence to make a balanced judgement about participation, impact and democratic action, building on prior learning about Te Tiriti, the Bill and parliamentary processes.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• explain why people participated in the hīkoi, who it addressed and what it sought to achieve
• verify key events in a timeline using reliable, dated sources
• evaluate strategies, communication methods, impacts and limitations
• make an evidence-based judgement about the hīkoi’s effectiveness and relationship to other forms of democratic participation

Success criteria

• I can identify the claim, evidence and opinion in a source.
• I can use three dated sources and distinguish reliable evidence from uncertainty.
• I can explain more than one perspective, including a counterargument or limitation.
• I can reach a justified judgement about the hīkoi’s effectiveness.

Curriculum links

• Geography — Future planning: actions by governments, institutions and individuals to prepare for future challenges.
• Geography — Future planning: planning for environmental, economic and social changes.
• Geography — Case study of a local place: applying place-making ideas to explain change and likely future change.
• Social sciences learning: examining how people participate in democratic processes and how decisions affect communities and places.

Lesson structure (50 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Reconnect and establish respectful inquiry. Teacher opens the opening question and lesson goals and asks, “How can people influence a decision when they are not the decision-makers?” Revisit the Treaty Principles Bill and parliamentary stages from Lesson 1, then establish that students will examine evidence rather than speak for Māori or assume all participants held identical views. Students complete a quick think-pair-share and agree to challenge ideas, not people; racist or dehumanising claims are not acceptable.

2. 5–12 min · Build the evidence toolkit. Teacher uses the source-reading and reliability slides to model a short source check: identify date, creator, intended audience, purpose, claim, supporting evidence and what remains uncertain. Clarify the difference between a fact, an interpretation and an opinion, and explain that a photograph or statement may show participation without proving impact. Students annotate the model source using the worksheet colour key: blue for evidence, orange for interpretation and red for uncertainty or opinion.

3. 12–27 min · Investigate a dated source set. Teacher forms five groups of five and distributes the hīkoi source-set and evaluation matrix. Each group receives a dated set including speeches, established news reporting, photographs or video stills, social-media or organisational statements, and parliamentary or public responses. Students verify the brief timeline—including organisers, route or locations, public gatherings, and arrival or engagement at Parliament—against the supplied reliable references and mark any detail that cannot be confirmed as uncertain. They then record the source’s voice, audience, goal, method of participation and evidence of intended or actual impact.

4. 27–36 min · Structured kōrero and democratic judgement. Teacher displays the kōrero prompts and evaluation criteria and conferences with groups, asking: “Whose voices are represented?” “What evidence indicates effectiveness?” “What limitations or unintended effects exist?” and “How did the hīkoi complement voting, submissions, media communication or parliamentary debate?” Students take turns as facilitator, evidence-checker, recorder, critical friend and reporter. Every contribution must refer to a source, a clearly identified perspective or a reasonable uncertainty.

5. 36–46 min · Individual evidence-based response. Teacher explains the final task using the response task and success-criteria slides: “How effective was the hīkoi, and what does it show about participation and democratic action in Aotearoa New Zealand?” Students write 250–350 words or record a similarly developed presentation. They must use three dated sources, explain at least one impact and one limitation, acknowledge a counterargument or uncertainty, and distinguish evidence from opinion. Students may use the matrix and vocabulary bank while composing.

6. 46–50 min · Share, assess and close. Teacher invites two or three students to read a judgement or play a short recording, ensuring no student is positioned as a spokesperson for a group. Students complete the reflection prompts on the plenary and exit questions: “My strongest evidence was…” and “One point I need to verify or qualify is…”. Collect written responses or note presentation submissions for assessment.

Resources

• the hīkoi inquiry and judgement slide deck
• the hīkoi source-set and evaluation matrix
• Dated excerpts from speeches and organisational statements
• Established news reports and dated photographs or video stills
• Parliamentary or public responses
• Reliable timeline-checking material from Parliament, Archives New Zealand, official organisational statements and reputable media
• Projector or interactive board
• Coloured pens or highlighters
• Headphones or a quiet recording space for alternative presentations

Assessment

• Circulate during source analysis and check whether students identify date, creator, audience, purpose and evidence rather than treating every claim as fact.
• Use the evaluation matrix to assess timeline verification, representation of perspectives, evidence of impact, limitations and links to democratic participation.
• Collect the 250–350-word judgement or recorded presentation. Check for three dated sources, a justified conclusion, a counterargument or uncertainty, and clear separation of evidence from opinion.

Differentiation

• Provide simplified source extracts, a vocabulary bank, sentence starters (“The source suggests…”, “This is limited because…”, “Overall, the hīkoi was effective to the extent that…”) and a colour-coded claim/evidence/opinion key.
• Read complex texts aloud, offer enlarged or dyslexia-friendly copies, allow audio recording or speech-to-text, and provide teacher conferencing or a scribe where appropriate.
• Allocate purposeful group roles and permit students to pass during kōrero; Māori students are not expected to represent Māori perspectives or disclose personal views.
• For EAL learners, pre-teach terms such as hīkoi, audience, strategy, impact, limitation, representation and democratic participation, with visual examples and paired rehearsal.
• Advanced learners compare evaluations across media, analyse representation and methodology in a parliamentary submission, or compare the hīkoi with another social movement while evaluating differences in context and strategy.

Extension

• Students investigate whether public attention, parliamentary debate or later political responses provide stronger evidence of impact, explaining the limits of causal claims.
• Students compare the hīkoi with another Aotearoa social movement and present a short evidence-based judgement about which participation methods were most effective.