Lesson Plan — "Sing it in English"

Year 10 Social Studies · Rights, Resistance & Māori Resurgence in Aotearoa — the language lesson, taught the day before the te reo revitalisation inquiry is due. Written onto the EDPRAC 612 handbook template (Section 8, pp. 24–25).

This is my own lesson, re-expressed on the required template. It is an older lesson of mine — the 1999 Rugby World Cup anthem — placed here because it is the smallest, most public, most recent instance of the thing the whole unit is about: a right being exercised in a place it had never been exercised before, and the country deciding how to react. The afternoon block is inquiry completion. Every historical claim below is quoted verbatim from NZHistory (Ministry for Culture and Heritage), checked 29 August 2026. Curriculum objectives are quoted verbatim from the live curriculum set, under both the 2007 NZC and Te Mātaiaho, listed separately rather than blended.
Year 10 Social Studies
NZC Level 5 · Te Mātaiaho Phase 4 (Years 9–10)
Sing it in English
Rights, Resistance & Māori Resurgence — language as resistance, taught before the inquiry hand-in

NZC 2007 · Social Studies · Level 5
"Understand how cultural interaction impacts on cultures and societies."
Supporting: "Understand how the Treaty of Waitangi is responded to differently by people in different times and places."

Te Mātaiaho 2025 · Social Sciences · Phase 4 · Knowledge
"Factors shaping its identity over time." (from the Aotearoa New Zealand national-identity strand)

Both are current: the 2007 objectives remain mandatory while Te Mātaiaho phases in. They are listed separately, never blended — my associate teacher can point to whichever the department records. The 2007 objective is the closer fit: one anthem, two languages, one very public interaction.

Thinking — separating what happened from how people felt about it, then asking why the feeling was that strong.
Using language, symbols and texts — an anthem as a text with two versions, a translation date, and a legal status; reading the complaints as texts too.
Participating and contributing — the afternoon inquiry: their own question, their own evidence, handed in tomorrow.
Lesson Design Dimensions
  • Say what happened at the 1999 Rugby World Cup and why it was a test case for te reo Māori in public life — and date the Māori version of the anthem correctly (1878, not 1999).
  • Apply the unit's four questions to a real, recent, non-violent case: Who had the right to sing it in te reo? Who recognised that right? Who tried to deny it? What gave it authority?
  • Explain, with one piece of evidence, why the public reaction changed within a few years — and connect that change to the 1972 petition, kōhanga reo and the Māori Language Act they met in Lesson 3.
  • Finish the te reo revitalisation inquiry to hand-in standard.

Recognition is not the same as a right. The Māori anthem existed for 121 years before 1999. Nobody had to grant it. What 1999 tested was whether the country would recognise it when it was used without asking. The unit's question 2.

The complaint was not "that is wrong" but "I cannot understand it". That is the lesson in one sentence: a language people do not know reads, to them, as an exclusion — which is exactly what generations of Māori speakers had lived.

Language as identity · language loss and revitalisation · public space and who it belongs to · the four questions of a rights claim · symbolic action versus legal change · the difference between "unauthorised" and "unlawful".
Reading a short historical account for fact versus reaction; applying an analytic frame to a fresh case; sourcing a claim; finishing an inquiry against a brief and a deadline.
The clip of the 1999 anthem, played once cold; a two-column fact/reaction read of the NZHistory account; the four questions applied to the case in pairs; one dated fact from Lesson 3 (the 1972 petition, or the 1987 Act) placed beside 1999 to explain the change; then the inquiry block, with the brief on the board and the hand-in criteria read aloud.

Follows: Lesson 3, Language as Resistance — Ngā Tamatoa and the 1972 Petition, and the chain 1972 → 1982 (first kōhanga reo) → 1986 (Waitangi Tribunal WAI 11) → 1987 (Māori Language Act). Students arrive knowing te reo was made an official language twelve years before 1999. Today asks: so why did people still complain?

Leads to: the inquiry hand-in tomorrow. This case is the kind of evidence a strong inquiry uses — a dated event, a documented reaction, a documented change. I will say that out loud before the afternoon block.

  • The fact/reaction columns in their books — can they keep the two apart?
  • Question 4 (authority): the honest answer is "nothing formal — it has never been formally authorised, it just became commonplace" (NZHistory). A student who reaches that has understood the unit's hardest distinction. Name it aloud when it happens.
  • The inquiry itself: I circulate with the brief and check every student has a question, at least two dated pieces of evidence, and a source for each. That is tomorrow's hand-in, not a surprise.
The 1999 anthem clip (NZHistory, New Zealand's national anthems — the same page carries the account) · the NZHistory paragraph printed one between two · the four questions on the board from Lesson 1 · the inquiry brief and hand-in criteria · the class's Rights Frame & Evidence Matrix.
Lesson Pedagogy Dimensions

Select, sequence, and pace the lesson considering priming, transitions, cognitive strengthening, and assessment for learning.

Timing Concept(s) / Skills Content and Learning Activities Assessment for Learning
0–5 min Prior knowledge, cold Do Now. Play the 1999 anthem clip with no introduction. Then one question on the board: "What year do you think the Māori words to this were written?" Write a year. No talking. The spread of guesses. Most will say 1990s–2000s. The gap between their guess and 1878 is the lesson's energy.
5–15 min Fact versus reaction The account. Read the NZHistory paragraph together. Two columns in books: what happened / how people reacted. Facts to land: Bracken's poem set to music 1876; Māori translation 1878 by Thomas H. Smith "at the request of Prime Minister Sir George Grey"; anthem status 1977; 1999 RWC, All Blacks v England, Hinewehi Mohi sang it "only in te reo Māori"; "Many viewers complained that this was inappropriate because most New Zealanders did not speak (or understand) Māori"; Mohi: "it seemed a perfectly natural thing to do." Whether "1878" goes in the fact column and "inappropriate" in the reaction column. Students who put the complaint in the fact column have not separated them yet — ask them which column "perfectly natural" goes in.
15–30 min The four questions, on a fresh case Apply the frame. In pairs: Who had the right to sing it in te reo? Who recognised it? Who tried to deny it? What gave it authority? Push on question 3: nobody stopped her — so what does "deny" look like when it is a complaint, not a law? And on question 4: the Māori version "has never been formally authorised but has become commonplace." Listen for the distinction between unauthorised and unlawful arriving. That is the concept. If a pair says "she wasn't allowed to", stop the room and ask who says so.
30–40 min Change over time Why it changed. "Support soon grew … A campaign backed by the government, the Māori Language Commission and sporting bodies promoted the correct singing of the anthem with word sheets." Ask: the Māori Language Commission — where did that come from? Back to Lesson 3: the 1987 Act created it. Place 1972 → 1987 → 1999 → now on one line. The reaction changed because the ground under it had already moved. Can they name one dated thing from Lesson 3 that made 1999 survivable? That is the evidence move their inquiry needs tomorrow.
40–45 min Bridge to the inquiry Exit line, then pivot. One sentence: "In 1999 the complaint was ______; by now it is ______ because ______." Then the brief goes on the board and the hand-in criteria are read aloud: a question, at least two dated pieces of evidence, a source for each, a conclusion that answers the question. The exit sentence, collected. It is a miniature of the inquiry's own structure.
Afternoon block Inquiry completion Finish the te reo revitalisation inquiry. Silent start, then working. I take the brief around the room. Students who are done early: source-check each other against the criteria — swap, and find the one claim without a date or a source. By the end of the block every student has met the four hand-in criteria or knows exactly which one they have not. Nobody is surprised tomorrow.
Finish the inquiry if not complete. Due Tuesday. Nothing new.
Reflection / Evaluation

Template fields from University of Auckland, Faculty of Arts and Education. (2026). EDPRAC 612 GDTSE Practicum Handbook (updated 17 July 2026), Section 8, pp. 24–25. Lesson content is my own. Historical claims are quoted from NZHistory (Ministry for Culture and Heritage), New Zealand's national anthems, and the Te Akomanga note that the Māori version "has never been formally authorised but has become commonplace" — both checked 29 August 2026. Curriculum statements are verbatim from the live curriculum set (ids 90768, 90767, 47984).