Kaitiakitanga at the Coast

Overview

Students investigate how seafood gathering is managed in Aotearoa New Zealand. They interpret a short data set and compare customary practices, fishing regulations and local management approaches before reaching a supported conclusion about how well a proposed coastal management plan balances people’s needs and the health of the marine environment.

Learning intentions

• Understand why seafood gathering is regulated.
• Interpret primary and secondary data about seafood gathering and coastal pressure.
• Compare different management approaches, including rāhui, customary practices and legal regulations.
• Use evidence to evaluate a coastal management plan.

Success criteria

• I can explain at least two reasons for rules about gathering seafood.
• I can accurately identify patterns or trends in the data.
• I can describe how a management approach affects different groups.
• I can make a conclusion supported by evidence and suggest an improvement.

Curriculum links

• Geography — collect, present and analyse primary or secondary data to reach a conclusion about a geographical study question.
• Geography — interpret and evaluate coastal management plans.
• Geography — analyse data to evaluate the impact of coastal management plans.
• Social Sciences — communicate explanations and make decisions using evidence; develop the competencies of thinking, participating and contributing, and understanding language, symbols and texts.

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook and question. Teacher displays a photograph of a busy shellfish-gathering beach beside a protected coastal area using the opening coastal comparison slide and asks, “Who should decide how much seafood people can take?” Students make an individual choice, then briefly explain their thinking to a partner.

2. 5–12 min · Build background. Teacher uses the rules and responsibilities slides to clarify that regulations may protect species, habitats, food supplies and future access; introduce customary gathering, kaitiakitanga, rāhui, recreational rules, commercial fishing and marine reserves, making clear that exact rules vary by place and species. Students complete a quick three-column note: “Who is affected?”, “What is protected?”, and “What might be difficult?”

3. 12–25 min · Data investigation. Teacher distributes the seafood management data investigation and models reading one table or graph, identifying the title, units, highest and lowest values, and one possible explanation. Students work in pairs to analyse supplied data, such as shellfish numbers before and after a temporary closure, reported catch pressure, and community views about access; they answer questions and highlight evidence that indicates change.

4. 25–34 min · Management-plan evaluation. Teacher presents a fictional coastal proposal through the coastal management proposal and evidence slides: “For three years, limit daily gathering, establish a seasonal closure, monitor species numbers, and review the rules with mana whenua, local residents, fishers and scientists.” Students use the worksheet to identify strengths, limitations and likely impacts on each stakeholder group. Invite pairs to rank the proposal from 1 (not effective) to 5 (highly effective), with one evidence-based reason.

5. 34–41 min · Structured discussion. Teacher assigns pairs to small groups and displays the discussion and conclusion prompts. Students discuss: “Is this plan effective and fair?” Each group must use one data point, explain one stakeholder impact, and recommend either keeping, changing or adding one management action. Groups share one concise conclusion.

6. 41–45 min · Exit assessment. Teacher returns to the study question and asks students to complete the final section of the seafood management data investigation independently: “How effective is the proposal? Use two pieces of evidence and one recommendation.” Students hand in the response as they leave.

Resources

• the coastal management slide deck
• the seafood management data investigation
• Projector or interactive display
• Pens or highlighters
• Data set showing seafood-gathering pressure and management outcomes
• Local or fictional coastal management proposal
• Board or shared digital space for collecting conclusions

Assessment

• Listen for accurate use of terms such as kaitiakitanga, rāhui, regulation, conservation, stakeholder and evidence during paired and group discussion.
• Check worksheet data responses for correct identification of patterns, relevant evidence and recognition that management decisions have different impacts.
• Use the exit response to assess whether each student can reach a conclusion about effectiveness, support it with two data points and propose a realistic improvement.

Differentiation

• Provide a word bank, icons for stakeholder groups, a worked example and sentence starters: “The data shows…”, “This affects… because…”, and “The plan would be more effective if…”.
• Pair students strategically and allow oral recording or speech-to-text for students who need writing support; read data instructions aloud and check understanding of units and time periods.
• For EAL learners, pre-teach key terms with plain-language definitions and allow labelled diagrams or bilingual notes before writing.
• Challenge confident students to question the reliability or limitations of the data, distinguish correlation from causation, and propose how the plan could be monitored over a further three years.