🧺 Te Kete Ako

Awa Moderation Notes

Aromatawai Ōrite · Consistent, Fair Assessment Across Classes

Ingoa Kaiako / Teacher Name

Akomanga / Class

Rā / Date

UseTeacher moderation — before, during, after assessment

Year LevelYear 7–9

Pair withPoster Rubric · Oral Rubric · Exemplars

CurriculumEnglish · Science · Level 3–4 Assessment

Ngā Whāinga Akoranga · Learning Intentions

Apply rubric criteria consistently across all student work — poster and speech
Identify and use anchor exemplars (Developing / Meeting / Exceeding) for calibration
Recognise genuine cultural responsiveness in student work and reward it appropriately
Collect and archive moderation evidence that can be used for reporting and future reference

Paearu Angitu · Success Criteria

All teachers in the syndicate apply the rubric at the same standard — grades don't vary by more than one level for the same work
Three anchor exemplars (one per level) are selected and photographed before marking begins
Cultural responsiveness — genuine integration of tikanga and kupu Māori — is explicitly rewarded, not treated as optional decoration
Students receive specific, rubric-referenced written feedback on at least one criterion

Hononga Marautanga · Curriculum Alignment

English — Assessment Practice

Level 3–4: assess student ability to present ideas for audience and purpose; evaluate effectiveness of evidence selection and communication; assess quality of persuasive intent and delivery.

Te Marautanga / NZ Curriculum — Principles

Treaty of Waitangi principle: assessment must recognise and reward authentic engagement with mātauranga Māori, tikanga, and te reo — not treat these as add-ons but as core evidence of depth and understanding.

Te Ara o te Aromatawai · Moderation Process (Recommended)

Step 1 — Before assessment begins: Meet with syndicate/department colleagues to review the poster and oral rubrics together. Agree on what "Meeting" looks like for each criterion. Use the Poster Exemplar and Oral Exemplar as shared reference points. This is calibration — 30 minutes before assessment begins saves hours of disagreement afterward.

Step 2 — Select anchor exemplars: Each teacher independently identifies one Developing, one Meeting, and one Exceeding poster and speech from their class. Photograph these. Compare across teachers and negotiate where you agree. These become your class's benchmark examples.

Step 3 — Independent marking: Mark your own class independently using the rubric. Where you're unsure, compare to the anchor exemplars — not to other students in the class (norm-referencing), but to the criteria (criterion-referencing).

Step 4 — Comparison and recalibration: Where two teachers grade the same moderated sample differently by more than one level, review the rubric criteria together. The conversation is the calibration — the goal is not uniformity but shared understanding of the standard.

Step 5 — Archive: Keep completed rubrics + photographed anchor exemplars. These feed future moderation and can be shared with students as exemplars (with permission) in subsequent years.

Ngā Ārowhai Ōrite · Consistency Checks

☐Poster and speech are assessed using the SAME four criteria (Message, Evidence, Kupu Māori, and Design/Delivery) — not different criteria across teachers

☐At least one data point or specific observation is required in both the poster and the speech — vague claims ("the awa is polluted") without evidence do not meet the "Evidence" criterion

☐Kupu Māori criterion: "functional" means used in headings, labels, or calls-to-action — not as border decoration. "Tiakina tō awa" as a poster heading is Exceeding; "kaitiakitanga" in small text at the bottom is Developing.

☐Call-to-action must be explicit and realistic. "Save the awa" is too vague (Developing). "Write to the council at this address" or "Join our planting day on Friday at 3pm" is specific (Meeting/Exceeding).

☐Cultural responsiveness is rewarded in the rubric — genuine use of tikanga, te reo, and connection to local iwi/hapū elevates a student's mark, not just adds decoration. Be explicit about this in feedback.

Tauira Ōrite · Anchor Exemplar Reference

Use this table to record your agreed anchor exemplars before marking begins. Photograph each one for shared reference.

Level	Poster — what this looks like	Speech — what this looks like
Developing	Message unclear; few or no evidence items; no kupu Māori or used incorrectly; no call-to-action; hard to read layout	Reads from paper; message unclear; no data or vague claim; no te reo; hard to hear
Meeting	Clear message with CTA; 1–2 data points; at least 2 kupu used correctly; readable layout with headings	Good volume; some eye contact; clear message + CTA; at least 1 data or quote; 1–2 kupu used correctly
Exceeding	Powerful memorable message; multiple evidence types with explanation; kupu in headings and labels; striking layout with clear flow	Strong presence; natural pace + pauses; compelling CTA; multiple evidence types; kupu flows naturally

Ngā Hapa o te Aromatawai · Common Assessment Pitfalls

Rewarding effort over achievement. A student who clearly worked hard on a poster that is still Developing should receive Developing for the criteria — and rich, specific feedback. Don't inflate the grade. Give the genuine grade + the genuine support pathway.

Penalising bilingual mixing. Students who naturally move between English and te reo Māori are demonstrating a linguistic strength, not a weakness. Assess the content and quality of the language use, not the ratio of English to Māori.

Treating cultural elements as bonus extras. If a student's poster has a meaningful kupu Māori heading and a connection to local iwi, that IS the criterion — it's not extra marks on top. Check: is the rubric criterion for kupu Māori being applied, or being set aside?

Only assessing the final product. The Evidence Capture sheet and Gallery are also summative evidence of the investigation process. A student whose poster is weak may have done excellent evidence collection — the rubric should capture both the product and the process where possible.

Inconsistent safety standards. If a student's call-to-action suggests actions that would put students in danger near the awa (e.g., entering the water), note this in feedback even if the rest of the work is strong. Kaitiakitanga includes care for people as well as place.

Hanga Pukapuka · Moderation Record

Syndicate/department members present at calibration:

Key decisions made (e.g. what "Meeting" looks like for the Kupu criterion):

Any cases where grades differed by more than one level — what was the outcome?

Anchor exemplars archived at:

Aronga Mātauranga Māori

Moderation is an act of professional integrity and manaakitanga toward students. When teachers across classes apply the same standard, students can trust that their effort and learning is valued fairly — that their grade reflects the quality of their work, not the subjectivity of their teacher. This fairness is itself a tikanga: he tika (righteousness, justice) is one of the core values that underpins kaitiakitanga. We cannot ask students to act with integrity in their advocacy if we do not model integrity in our assessment.

The cultural responsiveness element of this rubric is not optional or decorative. The NZ Curriculum's Treaty of Waitangi principle requires that we recognise and reward authentic engagement with mātauranga Māori — not just acknowledge it. When a student weaves te reo into their advocacy speech with genuine understanding, when they attribute a quote to a kaumātua with full respect, when they connect their evidence to the mauri of the awa — these are acts of depth and competence. The rubric must reflect that.

Ngā Rauemi Tautoko · Support Materials

Resources already provided:

This moderation record sheet — complete at calibration meeting and archive with anchor exemplars
Poster Rubric (awa-poster-rubric.html) — the shared assessment tool for all poster moderation
Oral Rubric (awa-oral-rubric.html) — the shared assessment tool for speech moderation
Poster Exemplar (awa-exemplar-poster.html) and Oral Exemplar (awa-exemplar-oral.html) — use as starting anchor exemplars before class examples are selected

Aronga Rerekē · Differentiated Assessment Approach

Tīmata · Entry Level Students

Apply the same criteria but consider oral feedback instead of written. For students who presented in a small group instead of whole class, apply the same rubric — oral delivery in an intimate setting can still demonstrate all four criteria.

Paerewa · On Level Students

Full rubric assessment for poster and speech. Written feedback on at least two criteria. Give one specific, actionable next step — not "keep improving" but "your data would be stronger if you explained what pH 6.2 means for fish."

Tūāpae · Extension Students

Consider whether the standard rubric captures the full range of what extension students have achieved. A student who interviewed two sources, compared their perspectives, and wrote a speech that genuinely analysed the relationship between data and kōrero may be exceeding every criterion. Note this explicitly in feedback and consider how to stretch them further.

📋 Teacher Planning Snapshot

Ngā Whāinga Ako — Learning Intentions

Students will explore awa (river/water) as taonga, developing understanding of kaitiakitanga through water guardianship — connecting indigenous environmental knowledge with scientific and civic action.

Ngā Paearu Angitū — Success Criteria

✅ Students can explain the significance of awa in te ao Māori and their local community.
✅ Students can identify actions that reflect kaitiaki responsibilities for local waterways.

Differentiation & Inclusion

Scaffold support: Provide sentence starters and graphic organisers for inquiry tasks. Offer entry-level observation activities and extension challenges involving community advocacy or environmental data analysis.

ELL / ESOL: Pre-teach key te reo Māori terms (awa, kaitiaki, wāhi tapu, tūrangawaewae). Allow visual and diagrammatic responses. Bilingual glossaries strongly recommended.

Inclusion: Connect to students' own waterways and places of belonging. Neurodiverse learners benefit from structured field investigation templates and clear step-by-step inquiry protocols.

Curriculum alignment

Mathematics — Statistics: Students investigate questions by using the statistical enquiry cycle, collecting, displaying, and analysing data to draw conclusions and communicate findings.