Whakataurite Pakanga

Overview

In this lesson 8 of 20, students compare three NZ Land Wars using Māori comparative concepts and structures, focusing on similarities and differences between conflicts. They will practise building comparative sentences with “rite ana ki…” and “rere kē ai…”, and contrasts using “ā, engari…”.

Learning intentions

• Students will compare three Land Wars using Māori organizational thinking (whakataurite, whakataōhea) to organise ideas.
• Students will use key comparative language to show similarity and contrast in te reo Māori.
• Students will write a short comparative analysis that is coherent and supported with relevant details.
• Students will present comparative findings using an appropriate Māori presentation style.

Success criteria

• I can compare three conflicts and clearly state what is similar and what is different using Māori comparative structures.
• I can use “rite ana ki…” for similarities and “rere kē ai…” for differences accurately.
• I can use “ā, engari…” to make contrasts between points.
• I can structure my ideas so a listener/reader can follow my comparison easily.

Curriculum links

• Te Reo Māori achievement standards: demonstrating understanding and producing spoken/written te reo Māori using communicative strategies relevant to the NCEA senior curriculum.
• Communicating ideas in te reo Māori using appropriate grammar and vocabulary for purpose and audience.
• Using cultural and conceptual knowledge of Māori frameworks to organise and present information.

Lesson structure (45 minutes)

1. 3 Hook & language reminder Show three short sentence frames on the board: “Rite ana ki…”, “Rere kē ai…”, “Ā, engari…”. Students chorally read and quickly translate them to English to confirm meaning.

2. 8 Activate prior knowledge: three conflicts In pairs, students choose three Land War conflicts already used in the unit and list one key similarity and one key difference for each (dot points allowed). Teacher checks accuracy of te reo terms (e.g., conflict/war references taught earlier) and reinforces that comparisons must link back to “what is being compared”.

3. 12 Guided comparison chart (dyslexia-friendly) Give each student a color-coded chart with Māori headings (clear columns for: “Rite ana ki…”, “Rere kē ai…”, “Ā, engari…”). Students fill the chart for Conflict A vs B first using the bilingual templates (sentence starters + word bank). Teacher circulates and prompts with questions like “He aha te rite?” and “He aha te rere kē?”.

4. 7 Build comparative sentences Students convert their chart points into three comparative sentences in te reo Māori:

• Sentence 1: similarity using “rite ana ki…”
• Sentence 2: difference using “rere kē ai…”
• Sentence 3: contrast using “ā, engari…” Teacher provides live modelling: highlight how “ā, engari…” changes the direction of meaning.

5. 10 Whakataurite paragraph writing Using their completed chart, students write a short comparative analysis paragraph (approx. 6–8 lines) that compares all three conflicts. Requirement: at least 2 similarity statements, 2 difference statements, and 2 uses of “ā, engari…”. Teacher gives a simple success checklist on the board.

6. 3 Share-out: quick oral rehearsal Students do a “stand and talk” in small groups of 3: one student reads their best comparative sentence, others respond with “Ka pai! He rite tonu te whakaaro?” or “He pēhea te rere kē?”. Teacher listens for correct structure and immediately corrects common errors.

7. 2 Exit ticket (collected) Students submit one final comparative sentence for two of the conflicts (must include either “rite ana ki…” or “rere kē ai…” plus at least one key detail).

Resources

• Color-coded comparison chart handout (Māori headings and sentence stems)
• Bilingual comparison template (te reo Māori + English meanings)
• Word bank cards for comparative language: “rite ana ki…”, “rere kē ai…”, “ā, engari…”
• Timer on board for charting and writing stages
• Example model paragraph (teacher-made, anonymised)
• Marking checklist aligned to success criteria (student-friendly)
• Conflicts summary cards from earlier lessons in the unit (date/region/theme as reminders)
• Highlighters in two colours (e.g., blue = similarity, red = difference) to support dyslexia-friendly processing

Assessment

• Formative: teacher observation during chart completion and sentence crafting (focused on comparative structures).
• Formative: exit ticket sentence uses accurate comparative language and a relevant detail.
• Summative for this lesson: the written paragraph demonstrates comparison of three conflicts using “rite ana ki…”, “rere kē ai…”, and “ā, engari…”.

Differentiation

• Support for learners: provide the bilingual templates and a partially completed chart; allow sentence-by-sentence writing (not full paragraph) with teacher check-ins.
• Dyslexia-friendly reading options: provide an audio recording of the conflict summary cards and of the model paragraph; use larger font handouts; allow students to underline key sentence stems in colour.
• EAL/SEN support: allow a “first draft” using English for planning, then require only the comparative frames and key details to be in te reo Māori.
• Extension for fast finishers: require an additional comparative sentence (now 4–5 total) that includes a second contrast with “ā, engari…”, and one embedded reason phrase (e.g., “nā te…” or “mō te…” if previously taught).

Extension (optional)

• Advanced learners present findings using a traditional Māori presentation format: begin with a brief mihi/acknowledgement, then structure the comparison as “Rite ana ki…” points, followed by “Rere kē ai…” points, and end with one concluding contrast using “ā, engari…”.
• They submit a 30–45 second script in te reo Māori and are assessed on clarity, correct comparative structures, and logical organisation.