Planning Auckland’s Future

Overview

In Lesson 17 of 24 in Auckland: Sustainable New Home, students move from exploring urban sustainability issues to planning their common assessment: a multimodal proposal titled “A Sustainable Home for Auckland and the Pacific.” They develop a focused inquiry question, identify stakeholders, select useful sources and plan how they will collect evidence.

Learning intentions

• WALT develop a focused inquiry question about making Auckland a sustainable home.
• WALT identify stakeholders with different perspectives on Auckland’s future.
• WALT choose relevant and reliable sources for an investigation.
• WALT plan how evidence will be collected and used in a multimodal proposal.
• WALT practise writing, reading, listening, speaking and interpreting visual information in an inquiry context.

Success criteria

• I can write a question that is focused, researchable and connected to sustainable urban development.
• I can identify stakeholders and explain why their perspectives may differ.
• I can choose relevant sources and record what evidence each could provide.
• I can create a clear evidence-collection plan for my proposal.

Curriculum links

• Geography — Urban change and sustainability: explaining that sustainable urban development aims to reduce resource use and waste output.
• Geography — Sustainable urban initiative in New Zealand: describing location and the urban challenges addressed by a project.
• Geography — Sustainable urban initiative in New Zealand: evaluating how successful an initiative has been.
• Social Sciences Years 9–10: understanding the changing nature of places and how societies function and change, with a focus on New Zealand’s place in a globalised world.

Lesson structure (70 minutes)

1. 0–8 min · Hook and connection. Teacher opens with the provocative opening question: “Who gets to decide what makes Auckland a sustainable home?” and displays a contrasting visual of Auckland transport, housing, water or waste. Students silently note one sustainability challenge, then share with a partner using the stem: “Auckland could be more sustainable if…”. Invite two or three responses and connect them to previous learning about urban challenges.

2. 8–18 min · Introduce the common assessment. Teacher uses the assessment overview to explain the proposal title, audience and purpose: students will recommend practical ways Auckland can become a sustainable home for people and the environment, with connections to the Pacific where appropriate. Clarify that a multimodal proposal may combine written explanation, maps, images, data, diagrams, audio or spoken presentation. Students annotate the inquiry planning worksheet with the assessment purpose, possible topics and one question they currently have.

3. 18–30 min · Model strong inquiry questions. Teacher models turning a broad topic into a focused question, for example: “How can Auckland reduce waste?” becomes “How could community food-scrap collection reduce household waste in South Auckland?” Use the question-building examples to compare questions for focus, place, issue, stakeholders and evidence. Students improve two sample questions on their worksheet, then draft two possible questions of their own. Provide question stems such as “To what extent could…?”, “How might… benefit…?”, and “What are the effects of… on…?”

4. 30–43 min · Stakeholder perspectives. Teacher introduces stakeholders relevant to Auckland’s sustainability decisions—mana whenua, Auckland Council, residents, rangatahi, businesses, public-transport users, developers and Pacific communities—and models how interests may differ. Students work in pairs or individually to select at least three stakeholders for their proposed inquiry and complete: “This stakeholder may support/oppose this idea because…”. Pairs briefly share one perspective while listeners record one new idea.

5. 43–56 min · Sources and evidence planning. Teacher demonstrates matching a source to an evidence need: a council report for policy, a map for location, survey responses for community views, or trustworthy data for change over time. Students use the Source Notes organiser alongside their worksheet to record at least three potential sources, what each may show, and one limitation or question about reliability. They then complete an evidence plan identifying what they need to find out, how they could collect it, and which format might communicate it effectively.

6. 56–65 min · Conferencing and refinement. Teacher conferences with students, checking that each question is neither too broad nor answerable with a simple fact. Students explain their question and planned evidence to a partner, who gives feedback using: “Your question is focused because…” and “You could make it clearer by…”. Students revise their question and identify their individual or pair pathway, allocating roles such as researcher, source checker, visual designer or speaker.

7. 65–70 min · Plenary and exit check. Teacher displays the planning checklist and closing prompt. Students complete the final section of the inquiry planning worksheet: their revised question, three stakeholders, one source and one evidence-collection method. Select a few students to share questions aloud; collect worksheets to identify who is ready to begin research next lesson.

Resources

• the full planning inquiry slide deck
• the inquiry planning worksheet
• the Source Notes organiser
• Projector or interactive display
• Whiteboard and markers
• Student devices or access to school library resources
• Examples of maps, data displays, council information and community perspectives
• Highlighters or coloured pens

Assessment

• Listen to paired explanations and use questioning to check whether students understand the difference between a topic and a focused inquiry question.
• Review draft questions, stakeholder choices and source plans during conferencing; give immediate feedback and note students needing support with language or narrowing scope.
• Collect the completed worksheet as an exit check. Look for a researchable question, at least three stakeholders, a relevant source and a realistic evidence-collection method.

Differentiation

• Provide question stems, a word bank with terms such as sustainable, stakeholder, evidence, impact and initiative, and colour-coded examples distinguishing broad and focused questions.
• For Pasefika and Bengali English-language learners, allow students to discuss ideas first in a familiar language or with a supportive partner, then rehearse key sentences in English. Use visuals, teacher modelling, repeated instructions, sentence frames and vocabulary checks.
• Address the ELLPs writing and visual strands through structured planning boxes, modelled responses, maps and infographics; address reading through short, clearly chunked source extracts; and listening and speaking through partner rehearsal, role allocation and oral explanations before writing.
• Offer individual or pair pathways. Confer with students who need help selecting a manageable topic, and provide an exemplar proposal structure without requiring students to copy its content.
• Students requiring additional support may select from a prepared list of local sustainability issues and complete one section at a time. Advanced learners should compare local and Pacific-scale systems, formulate a question connecting both, and anticipate conflicting stakeholder perspectives.

Extension

• Develop an inquiry question linking an Auckland issue, such as transport, housing, water or waste, with a Pacific-scale concern such as climate mobility, ocean health or resource security.
• Add a predicted argument to the evidence plan: identify which evidence might support the proposal and what evidence could challenge it.
• Sketch a possible multimodal structure showing where written explanation, data, maps, images and spoken commentary will work together.