Te Tiriti and Public Debate

Overview

In this first lesson of a two-lesson unit, students build foundational knowledge about te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi, the Waitangi Tribunal and the Treaty Principles Bill. They distinguish between the original texts, later interpretations, Tribunal findings, proposals and opinions, preparing for a deeper debate and hīkoi case study in Lesson 2.

Learning intentions

Students will:

• explain why te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi is constitutionally significant in Aotearoa New Zealand
• distinguish between the Māori and English texts and later principles developed through Tribunal and court interpretation
• describe the Waitangi Tribunal’s role in investigating claims about breaches of te Tiriti
• use the SIFT framework to classify and evaluate claims in different sources
• place key Treaty and parliamentary events in chronological order.

Success criteria

• I can explain at least two reasons te Tiriti is important to Aotearoa New Zealand’s government and society.
• I can identify whether a claim is from a text, interpretation, finding, proposal or opinion.
• I can describe what the Waitangi Tribunal does and why its work matters.
• I can place the key events on a timeline and use evidence to support my explanation.

Curriculum links

• Geography — planning for environmental, economic and social changes, including actions taken to prepare for future challenges.
• Geography — applying theories of place-making to a local place and considering how it may change in the future.
• Geography — evaluating the likely success of initiatives responding to geographical challenges and opportunities.
• Economic Activity — understanding how institutions and public decisions affect people and communities; developing critical, informed decision-making.

The lesson develops critical thinking, communication, participation and contribution, and understanding of perspectives through respectful, evidence-based discussion.

Lesson structure (50 minutes)

1. 0–5 min · Hook and kōrero norms. Teacher opens with the provocative opening question: “How can one document written in 1840 still influence decisions in Aotearoa today?” Establish manaakitanga-centred norms: listen carefully, pronounce names correctly, use te reo Māori respectfully, challenge ideas rather than people, and allow different viewpoints. Clarify that rangatahi voices are not included as tokens but as evidence of civic participation and lived perspectives. Students make an individual prediction, then share with a partner.

2. 5–10 min · Build the concept map. Teacher uses the constitutional significance slides to introduce te Tiriti o Waitangi/Treaty of Waitangi as a founding constitutional document and explains that Aotearoa has no single written constitution. Clarify that the Māori and English texts are not identical translations and that both are important historical sources. Students contribute words and connections to a class concept map, including rangatiratanga, government, rights, responsibilities, whenua and decision-making.

3. 10–15 min · Prepare for rangatahi inquiry. Teacher introduces selected short, captioned Vimeo recordings of rangatahi presentations at Select Committee hearings. Explain the hearing context, the role of submitters and committees, and tikanga for listening and responding. Model respectful pronunciation and the inquiry prompts: Who is speaking? What issue is being addressed? What evidence is used? What values are expressed? Where is power located, and who is the audience? How might this influence public debate?

4. 15–27 min · Student-choice clip analysis. Students choose an issue and one teacher-selected clip, or select from a teacher-curated set. In pairs or small groups, they watch a chunked clip and complete a visual organiser using the six prompts: speaker, issue, evidence, values, power/audience and influence on public debate. Students record exact words or observable details rather than generalising about rangatahi. Captions, transcripts and replayed sections are available.

5. 27–38 min · Contrasting perspective and structured kōrero. Teacher shows a second short hearing clip presenting an alternative perspective, such as a committee member, official, opposing submitter or different rangatahi viewpoint. Groups compare the two submissions using evidence. Hold a structured kōrero, fishbowl or evidence-based debate: speakers respond respectfully, use the correct names and pronunciation, distinguish agreement from disagreement, and explain how each perspective may shape public debate. Observers track evidence, values, power and audience.

6. 38–45 min · Connect to te Tiriti and civic participation. Students connect the clips to te Tiriti, public decision-making and social action, including how submissions, hearings and collective action can influence institutions. Students may choose a different issue or clip for a brief comparison. Teacher checks that discussion does not treat one rangatahi voice as representing all Māori or all young people.

7. 45–50 min · Reflection and exit ticket. Students complete a final reflection: “How can rangatahi participate in civic processes, and what influence can their participation have on public debate?” They identify one piece of evidence from a clip, one difference between perspectives, and one question or action for further inquiry. Students also submit one accurate statement about the Tribunal or the relevant public decision-making process.

Resources

• the Te Tiriti, Tribunal and Bill context slide deck
• the SIFT source-analysis worksheet
• Short bilingual Treaty text extracts
• Teacher-selected, verified Vimeo recordings of rangatahi presentations at Select Committee hearings; add verified clip links here: [Verified Vimeo clip links to be added by teacher]
• A contrasting, teacher-selected, verified hearing clip presenting an alternative perspective; add verified link here: [Verified Vimeo clip link to be added by teacher]
• Captions and transcripts for all clips
• Clip-analysis visual organiser with prompts for speaker, issue, evidence, values, power/audience and influence on public debate
• Chunked/audio versions of source extracts and clips
• Printed or projected timeline dates
• Class concept-map space or whiteboard
• Approved official parliamentary and Tribunal information for checking dates and status
• Bilingual vocabulary and pronunciation support, including relevant te reo Māori terms
• Highlighters or annotation tools
• Fishbowl, kōrero or debate role cards and observation checklist

Assessment

• Listen for accurate and respectful use of text, interpretation, finding, proposal and opinion, as well as appropriate pronunciation and tikanga for listening and responding.
• Check group annotations and visual organisers for specific evidence about the speaker, issue, evidence, values, power/audience and influence on public debate.
• Assess the structured kōrero, fishbowl or debate for respectful comparison of perspectives, use of evidence, acknowledgement of uncertainty and avoidance of tokenising or generalising about rangatahi voices.
• Use the final reflection and exit ticket to identify whether students can explain how rangatahi participate in civic processes, compare submissions and connect public debate to te Tiriti and decision-making.
• Re-teach misconceptions about the texts, Treaty principles, the Bill’s status, hearing processes or the range of rangatahi perspectives before Lesson 2.

Differentiation

• Provide captions and transcripts, chunk clips into short sections, allow replay and pausing, and offer audio or teacher-read versions.
• Provide bilingual vocabulary, pronunciation support, sentence frames such as “The speaker uses ___ as evidence to suggest…”, and explicit modelling of respectful te reo Māori use and tikanga for listening/responding.
• Use visual organisers with icons for speaker, issue, evidence, values, power/audience and influence; provide a partially completed organiser or guided prompt cards where needed.
• Offer alternative response modes, including oral recording, written response, annotated transcript, diagram, visual presentation or teacher conference.
• Use mixed-ability roles such as clip navigator, evidence finder, vocabulary checker, tikanga observer, recorder and reporter; allow partner rehearsal before kōrero or reporting.
• Provide student choice of issue or clip while ensuring all options are accessible and do not position one rangatahi speaker as representing a whole group.
• For advanced learners, compare the reliability, purpose and audience of the submissions, evaluate evidence and representation of power, and explain how differing submissions might influence public policy.

Extension

• Students independently evaluate the source, purpose, audience, editing and evidence of two hearing clips, checking relevant claims against official parliamentary or other authoritative sources.
• Students analyse representation and power: whose voice is heard, who is absent, who controls the hearing process, and how the medium or audience may shape public debate.
• Students write a reasoned comparison of two submissions, weighing the strength of their evidence and values before reaching a justified conclusion about their likely influence on public decision-making.
• Students design a respectful civic-action response showing how rangatahi could participate in a hearing, submission process, consultation or other civic process.