Part 1: Choose and frame the proposal

WALT: use algebra to model a respectful preservation or revitalisation initiative.

Success criteria: I can define a need neutrally, identify measurable indicators, and explain what requires consultation and consent.

Our scenario is: _________________________________________________

We will not speak for, name or represent a community without permission.

Our proposal responds to a possible need for ________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

For example: number of participants, cost per person, travel access, or continuity over time.

a) _____________________________________________________________________

b) _____________________________________________________________________

c) _____________________________________________________________________

Who would need to guide, review or approve this proposal? What must not be recorded, shared or used without permission?

Checkpoint: We have a neutral need, measurable indicators, and a plan to seek guidance and consent.

Part 2: Build and test three algebraic representations

WALT: construct, solve and interpret algebraic models.

Success criteria: I can define variables, use at least three algebraic tools, show calculations, and explain whether the proposal is feasible.

Let _____ represent ____________________________________________

Let _____ represent ____________________________________________

Other useful variable: _____ represents ___________________________

Representation 1: ______________________________________________

Model and working:

Representation 2: ______________________________________________

Model and working:

Representation 3: ______________________________________________

Model and working:

In this context, the value __________________ means __________________________

Our proposal is feasible because ____________________________________________

One cost, participation, access or growth result we need to check is:

Checkpoint: We have checked our calculations and can explain what each important value means.

Part 3: Respectful communication and reflection

WALT: explain mathematical reasoning and communicate a culturally safe proposal.

Success criteria: I can explain assumptions and limitations, connect the proposal with kaitiakitanga, mana, access and intergenerational transmission, and respond to feedback.

Assumption: Our model assumes ____________________________________

Limitation: Our model may not show __________________________________

Improvement after advice or feedback: _____________________________

0–20 seconds: State the need and recommendation: _____________________________

20–60 seconds: Explain the three algebraic representations: ____________________

60–85 seconds: Explain feasibility, assumptions and limitations: _________________

85–110 seconds: Explain consultation, consent, kaitiakitanga, mana, access and intergenerational transmission:

110–120 seconds: Finish with our recommendation: ______________________________

Presentation format:

What algebra did I contribute?

What does one of our representations mean in context?

What is one limitation or assumption?

What is one improvement I would make after feedback?

Support choices

You may listen to the brief read aloud or use an audio version. Use speech-to-text, a calculator, spreadsheet or graphing tool, a quiet planning space, or rehearsed speaking notes if helpful. Use the sentence starters: “Our variable represents…” and “This model assumes…”

Extension: Change one assumption, compare the new result with the original, and explain how the recommendation changes.