How have Māori challenged injustice, asserted rights and rebuilt rangatiratanga, and what actually causes social change?He pātai matua. Our question for the whole unit. No writing yet.
Te tuara · the conceptual spine
human rights ≠ civil rights ≠ Indigenous rights ≠ Te Tiriti rights ≠ tino rangatiratanga
Five things that get treated as the same word. They are not.Telling them apart is the discipline this whole unit is built on.
Kind of claim · 1 of 5
Human rights
Held by every person because they are a person.Not given by a government. Not lost by crossing a border.
Written down: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, proclaimed by the UN General Assembly in Paris on 10 December 1948.
A declaration sets a standard. It does not create a court. It is not a binding treaty.
Kind of claim · 2 of 5
Civil rights
A claim made on a particular state for equal treatment under that state's own law.To vote. To be free of discrimination. To be policed and judged evenly.
You only hold civil rights in a state that recognises you as a full member of it.
Kind of claim · 3 of 5
Indigenous rights
Held by peoples as Indigenous peoples. Collective, not one person at a time.Land. Language. Culture. Self-determination.
UNDRIP — the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, adopted 13 September 2007. 143 states in favour, 4 against, 11 abstentions.
The four against: Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the United States. Also non-binding. New Zealand announced its support in April 2010.
Kind of claim · 4 of 5
Te Tiriti rights
Rights arising from a particular agreement, between particular parties.Te Tiriti o Waitangi, 1840, between rangatira and the Crown.
Not universal. Not general.
The question is never “is this fair to everyone?” It is “did the Crown keep what it agreed to?”
Not a fifth item on the same list
Tino rangatiratanga
Authority arising from te ao Māori itself.
The other four are claims made on someone: a state, the UN, the Crown.
This one does not depend on being granted, recognised or declared by any of them.
The phrase appears in Article 2 of te Tiriti. It did not begin there, and te Tiriti did not create its meaning.
This unit compares tino rangatiratanga with the other four. It never flattens it into them.
Ngā pātai e whā · the four questions
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Asked in this order, of every claim, in every lesson.Question 4 is the one that sorts the five kinds.
Ngā tikanga o te akomanga · how we work
Named people and named organisations, never “Māori activists”
Every claim about the past carries a date, a name or a figure
You say where a fact came from
You never invent a quotation. If you cannot find what someone said, write what they did
You say what your evidence cannot establish
These are the assessment rules as well as the classroom rules.
Raupapa akoranga · the road
1 · The frameFive kinds of claim, four questions
2 · The causeLanguage, land, urbanisation
3 · LanguageThe 1972 petition
4 · Whenua, nationallyThe 1975 hīkoi
5 · Whenua, specificallyTakaparawhau
6 · The mirrorThe 1981 tour
7 · InstitutionsWhat they carry
8 · The argumentWhat causes social change?
ThroughoutOne evidence matrix, one row per case
Akoranga 1 · Lesson 1
WHAT IS A RIGHT?
five kinds of claim · four questions · the tool you keep
Do Now · a sentence to fix, not a fact
“Māori protested in the 1970s because they wanted their rights.”
Circle the word doing the most work and telling you the least.
Mahi ākonga · what you do
1 min · circle the vague word
3 min · write three questions you would have to answer before “their rights” means anything specific
1 min · do not answer yet. Hold it
Push past “which rights?” Think about who owes them.
Te Tiriti · Article 1 · in an authority's own words
English text
“Māori leaders gave the Queen ‘all the rights and powers of sovereignty’ over their land.”
≠
Māori text
“Māori leaders gave the Queen ‘te kawanatanga katoa’ or the complete government over their land.”
Copy both, exactly. Are they the same thing?
Quoted verbatim from NZHistory (Manatū Taonga), “Differences between the texts”. The source spells kawanatanga without a macron inside these glosses; the quotation follows the source.
Te Tiriti · Article 2
Māori text: “Māori were guaranteed ‘te tino rangatiratanga’ or the unqualified exercise of their chieftainship over their lands, villages, and all their property and treasures.”
English text: “Māori leaders and people, collectively and individually, were confirmed and guaranteed ‘exclusive and undisturbed possession of their lands and estates, forests, fisheries and other properties’.”
And why: “The word ‘sovereignty’ had no direct translation in Māori. Chiefs had authority over their own areas, but there was no central ruler over the country.”
Quoted verbatim from NZHistory (Manatū Taonga), “Differences between the texts”.
Mahi ākonga · pairs, 6 minutes
Run all four questions on each of these:
Sentence A
“Everyone has the right to speak their own language.”
Sentence B
“Te reo Māori should be taught in New Zealand schools.”
They sound similar. At which of the four questions do they come apart?
Sort the claims · groups of three · 8 minutes
A“No person should be imprisoned without being told what they are charged with.”
B“Māori and non-Māori voters should have equal say in who governs.”
C“Te reo Māori is a taonga and the Crown agreed to protect our taonga.”
D“This hapū has never stopped being the authority on this whenua, whatever the title deeds say.”
E“Indigenous peoples have the right to maintain and develop their own institutions.”
F“New Zealand should not host a sports team selected on the basis of race.”
For each: which kind of claim, made by whom, on whom? Write down disagreement rather than voting it away.
Whole class · the hard one
“This hapū has never stopped being the authority on this whenua, whatever the title deeds say.”
Does the authority in D come from te Tiriti, or from somewhere te Tiriti did not create?What changes about the claim depending on your answer?
Three minutes, not more
One bounded comparison
United States
The central demand was that a state apply its own law equally to citizens it had excluded. A civil-rights claim.
≠
Aotearoa
That claim is present. So are two the American frame has no room for: a claim under a specific agreement (te Tiriti), and an authority that was never the state's to grant.
Comparison is a tool. Equivalence is a mistake.
Open the matrix
Nine columns. One row per case study.Column 3 is today's lesson: which kind of claim, by whom, on whom.
Look at the seven row labels and predict, in pencil, which kind of claim each one will be.
You will be wrong about at least one. Finding out where is the point.
Rewrite the Do Now sentence so a reader knows which kind of claim and who it was made on. You do not know the history yet. Write the sentence shape, with blanks where the facts go
Name the tool: the four questions, from memory. No looking
One question: which of the five kinds do you least understand right now?
Akoranga 2 · Lesson 2
WHY RESURGENCE WAS NECESSARY
language · land · where people lived · and a policy in its own words
Do Now · three numbers, no context
95% → 25% → 5%
Three measurements of the same thing, taken in 1900, 1960 and 1975.What could be measured that changes like that, in one country, in 75 years?
The verified record
The proportion of Māori fluent in te reo Māori
about 95% in 1900
↓
about 25% by 1960
↓
about 5% by 1975
Te Ara, “Language decline, 1900 to 1970s”; NZHistory, “History of the Māori language”.
The mechanism
The native schools system, 1867 to 1969
From the outset the priority of those schools was the teaching of English.
The plan was to phase the schools out once English had taken hold in a community.
At first te reo Māori was allowed, in order to help teach English. Over time official attitudes hardened against any use of te reo.
Many Māori children were punished for speaking their first language at school.
Te Ara, “The native schools system”; NZHistory, “History of the Māori language”.
Mahi ākonga · pairs, 10 minutes
The chain: how does punishing a child for speaking a language at school produce that 95% to 5% line two generations later? Write the steps. Push past “they stopped speaking it”
The parents' decision: a parent punished at school for speaking te reo now has a child starting school. What might they decide, and why would that decision look like love rather than loss?
The second documented line
The move to the cities
Year
Proportion of the Māori population living in towns and cities
1945
26%
1956
35%
1966
62%
1986
nearly 80%
Which two dates show the fastest change? Roughly how many years from about a quarter to nearly two thirds?
Te Ara, “Urbanisation”.
Mahi ākonga · groups, 12 minutes
What changes for a community when most of its people move away from their marae, their whenua and their kaumātua within one generation?
Losses
List them.
New possibilities
List these too. Both columns, or the task is not done.
Then: Ngā Tamatoa and the Te Reo Māori Society were university-based groups in cities. The Ōrākei Māori Action Committee organised in Auckland. Using your two columns, explain why the movements of the 1970s were built in cities.
Policy in its own words
The Hunn Report, 1961
What it was: a 1961 report by Jack Hunn on the Department of Māori Affairs, making recommendations on social policy for Māori. After it, the “relocation” of Māori families from rural areas to the cities became official policy, supported with accommodation and employment assistance.
Its stated reasoning: the report's approach was assimilationist. It argued that integrating Māori into Pākehā society was the answer, rather than strengthening a separate cultural identity. It welcomed the growing urban Māori population as, in its own words, the
“quickest and surest way of integrating the two species of New Zealander”.
Te Ara, “The Hunn report”. Quoted here as an object of analysis, not as an endorsement of its language.
Mahi ākonga · 13 minutes
Read closely: what does the word “integrating” claim is happening?
Word against deed: using the language line and the urbanisation table, write what the policy actually produced. Is “integration” an accurate word for it? Defend with evidence, not with feeling
Provenance: who wrote this, for whom, and with what power behind it? Why is a government report different evidence from a newspaper article or a protest poster?
Ngā pātai e whā · asked of 1961
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Question 3 is the one this lesson answers.Who could deny te reo Māori a place in a school? Write the answer with a name in it: a policy, a department, a report.
Exit · 5 minutes · keep this one
Cause: which of the three lines mattered most in causing the movements of the 1970s? One sentence, with a figure in it
Prediction: what will those movements be about, and which of the five kinds of claim will they make?
Question: one thing you now want to know
You check the prediction at the end of Lesson 6. Do not lose it.
Akoranga 3 · Lesson 3
LANGUAGE AS RESISTANCE
14 September 1972 · one goal, three kinds of claim
Do Now · 5 minutes
Think of something you can do because of the language you grew up speaking. A joke you understand. A song. The way your family says something that does not translate.Write one specific example. Not “my culture” — one specific thing.
Then: if that language disappeared in two generations, what exactly would be gone? List three things. At least one should not be a word.
Named organisations, not “Māori activists”
Ngā Tamatoa“The Young Warriors”. Formed around 1970 by Māori students at the University of Auckland, based in Auckland.
Te Reo Māori SocietyEstablished in 1970 at Victoria University in Wellington. Pushed the university to support te reo Māori tuition.
Te Huinga RangatahiThe New Zealand Māori Students' Association, which gathered signatures alongside the other two.
Te Ara describes Ngā Tamatoa as bringing “a new and radical edge to Māori protest in its calls for the Treaty of Waitangi to be ratified”, with tactics including “nationwide petitions to have the Māori language taught in schools, and submissions on government policy”.
Te Ara / Te Tai. Note: Te Ara names two organising groups; NZHistory and Archives New Zealand name all three. This unit uses three and says so.
Named people
Hana Te Hemara JacksonOf Ngā Tamatoa. She instigated the petition, was one of its organisers, and presented it to Parliament on 14 September 1972. If you remember one name, this is the one.
Te Ouenuku ReneOf Ngāti Toa. NZHistory identifies him as the kaumātua leading the group that took the petition to Parliament. The petition was carried with kaumātua support, not by students alone.
Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i te ReoThe group that took the te reo claim to the Waitangi Tribunal in 1985 — the move that turned a schooling request into a Te Tiriti claim.
NZHistory (Manatū Taonga), “Te taenga mai o te petihana reo Māori”; Archives New Zealand.
Her own words · a real quotation
“the only real symbol of Māori identity … For us to be able to speak Māori is the truest expression of our Māori tanga. It is the substance of our Māori tanga. It is our link with the past and all its glories and tragedies. It is our link with our tīpuna.”
She does not say te reo is useful, or beautiful. What is she claiming it is?
Hana Te Hemara Jackson, submission on the 1972 Māori language petition, as reproduced by NZHistory and Te Ara from the Waitangi Tribunal's Ko Aotearoa Tēnei (Wai 262), volume 2, page 395. Spelling and spacing follow the source.
Mahi ākonga · 3 minutes
From now on, the phrase “Māori activists” is banned in this classroom.
Rewrite this sentence without it, using at least two names:
“Māori activists campaigned for te reo Māori in the 1970s.”
The verified record
14 September 1972
A petition delivered to Parliament that, in NZHistory's words, “challenged politicians to prioritise saving te reo Māori”.
Archives New Zealand records what it asked for: it “called for courses in Māori language and culture to be offered in all New Zealand schools”.
Over 30,000 signatures, gathered from across Aotearoa on around 1,500 sheets.
To mark the event, 14 September was declared Māori Language Day. Three years later this was expanded to Māori Language Week.
NZHistory (Manatū Taonga); Archives New Zealand, “Māori language petition quick facts”.
Archives New Zealand records one more thing
“Most of the people who signed the petition were not Māori.”
Does that make the claim stronger, weaker, or different? Push past “it shows people cared” — think about who a petition is trying to persuade.
Archives New Zealand, “Māori language petition quick facts”.
One goal · three different kinds of claim
Move 1 · the petition, 1972Ngā Tamatoa, Te Reo Māori Society and Te Huinga Rangatahi ask Parliament to have te reo Māori taught in schools. 30,000+ signatures.
Move 2 · the Tribunal claim, 1985–86Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i te Reo lodge Wai 11: te reo is a taonga the Crown guaranteed to protect under Article 2 of te Tiriti, and had failed to protect.
Move 3 · kōhanga reo, 1982 onwardsWhānau establish Māori-language early childhood settings, run by whānau. They do not ask.
Mahi ākonga · groups of three · 10 minutes
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Take one move each. Run all four questions. Then teach your move to the other two.Then name the kind of claim each move is making. Expect argument about Move 3 — that argument is the lesson.
The comparison · 5 minutes
Which move produced a change in law?
·
Which produced a change in what children could actually do on a Monday morning?
Are they the same move?What does that tell you about how social change works?
Build the chain · then test whether it is really a chain
When
What happened
Who
14 Sept 1972
Te reo Māori petition delivered to Parliament, 30,000+ signatures, asking for te reo in schools
Ngā Tamatoa · Te Reo Māori Society · Te Huinga Rangatahi · Hana Te Hemara
13 April 1982
Pukeatua Kōhanga Reo, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, takes its first tamariki on Easter Tuesday. Four more open soon afterwards
Elders including Jean Puketapu and Iritana Tawhiwhirangi
by 1985
Within three years there are more than 300 kōhanga reo
Whānau
1985
First kura kaupapa Māori — Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi, West Auckland
1985–86
Wai 11 te reo claim lodged and heard; the Tribunal's 1986 report recommends Māori become an official language
Ngā Kaiwhakapūmau i te Reo
20 July 1987
Māori Language Act 1987 declares te reo Māori an official language, confers a right to speak Māori in certain legal proceedings, and establishes Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Māori
Parliament
2016
The 1987 Act is repealed and replaced by Te Ture mō Te Reo Māori 2016 / Māori Language Act 2016, which now carries official-language status
Parliament
NZHistory; Te Ara; Māori Language Act 1987 (legislation.govt.nz) — assent 20 July 1987, repealed 30 April 2016.
Exit · 6 minutes
Claim: one sentence about the 1972 petition naming at least two of the groups or people, and what was asked for
Kind: which kind of claim was the 1985 Tribunal case making, and what gave it its authority?
Limit: one thing today's evidence does not tell you
Then fill the Lesson 3 row of your matrix. Column 3 is the one to get right.
Akoranga 4 · Lesson 4
WHENUA & THE LAND MARCH
Te Hāpua to Parliament · 14 September to 13 October 1975
Do Now · 5 minutes
Fifty people set out to walk about 1,000 km. Their leader is 79 years old. It will take a month.
What would you have to believe to start that walk? And what does the method — walking, slowly, through towns — achieve that one big rally in Wellington would not?
The verified record
Te Rōpū Matakite o Aotearoa‘Those with Foresight’. Launched at a hui convened by Whina Cooper at Māngere Marae in early 1975.
Whina CooperA Te Rarawa leader. She had been the inaugural president of the Māori Women's Welfare League in 1951. She was 79.
Te Ara records that she “took the first steps, holding the hand of her mokopuna Irene”.
NZHistory and the National Library name Whina Cooper as a Te Rarawa leader; another summary says Ngāpuhi. This unit names Te Rarawa and no more.
The hīkoi
After six months of planning, fifty marchers left Te Hāpua in the far north on 14 September 1975 for the walk to Wellington.
NZHistory gives the distance as 1,100 km on one page and 1,000 km on another. Say so; do not pick silently.
The hīkoi grew as it travelled, rallying behind the catch-cry ‘Not one more acre of Māori land’.
It carried no banners and no signs. Only a pouwhenua, a land-marker post, and a flag.
It reached Parliament on 13 October 1975.
NZHistory, “Whina Cooper leads land march to Parliament”; National Library of New Zealand. The slogan is printed by NZHistory without a macron inside the quotation; the quotation follows the source.
Mahi ākonga · 7 minutes
A protest march that carries no signs is unusual. This one carried a pouwhenua instead.
What does a land-marker post say that a placard cannot?
‘Not one more acre of Māori land’ is not a request for something new. What is it a claim about?
At Parliament, 13 October 1975
A petition
Many people asking a decision-maker to do something. Its force comes from numbers. 60,000 signatures says a lot of people want this.
vs
A memorial of rights
A formal statement of rights that are asserted to already exist. Its force does not come from how many people agree. It comes from what is asserted, and on what authority.
Te Ara records what the memorial asked for: “the repeal of all statutes through which Māori land could be alienated, with remaining tribal land invested in Māori in perpetuity”.
A document signed by 60,000 people was presented to the Prime Minister, Bill Rowling. NZHistory calls it a petition; Te Ara calls it a memorial of rights. Attribute each phrasing to the source that uses it.
What happened next
“Rowling promised that steps would be taken to address these concerns, but some protesters were not happy with his response. About 60 people set up a Māori embassy on Parliament grounds.”
What does that tell you about how the promise was received?
Te Ara, “Ngā rōpū tautohetohe”.
Real historical method · not a trick
How many people were at Parliament on 13 October 1975?
NZHistory (Ministry for Culture and Heritage)
≈ 5,000
vs
National Library of New Zealand
≈ 40,000
Both are New Zealand government heritage institutions. Both are describing the same afternoon.
Mahi ākonga · 12 minutes
Groups, 7 min: three reasons two careful sources could give such different figures. Think about who counts, when they count, and what they are counting — the marchers, the crowd at Parliament, or everyone who joined at any point
Alone, 5 min: write one sentence about the crowd for your final inquiry that is true given both sources
The best sentences name the disagreement rather than hide it.
Ngā pātai e whā · asked of the hīkoi
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
The hīkoi carried a petition and a memorial of rights.Which kind of claim is each one making? Can one march make two kinds of claim at once? Argue it, then fill the Lesson 4 row.
Exit · 6 minutes
Claim: one sentence about the hīkoi using at least two exact facts — a date, a name, a number or a place
Limit: one sentence about something today's sources cannot settle
Question: what happened after 13 October 1975? Write the question you would investigate
Akoranga 5 · Lesson 5
TAKAPARAWHAU BASTION POINT
one hapū · one headland · 506 days
Do Now · 5 minutes
“They were trespassing on government land.”
·
“They were standing on their own whenua.”
What would have to be true for each sentence to be correct?Name two kinds of evidence that would settle it. Then hold your answer — both sentences were said about the same people on the same day.
Name it properly
TakaparawhauThe Māori name for the headland overlooking the Waitematā Harbour in Auckland, also known as Bastion Point. Use both names, and notice which one each source chooses first.
Ngāti Whātua ŌrākeiThe hapū whose whenua this is. Not “Māori” in general and not “protesters” — a specific people with a specific relationship to this specific land.
Ōrākei Māori Action CommitteeThe group that organised and held the occupation. NZHistory calls it the Committee; Te Ara calls it the Group. Both are government sources. Note the variance.
Joe HawkeOf Ngāti Whātua. Led the Ōrākei Māori Action Committee and the occupation. He had already taken the Ōrākei claim to the Waitangi Tribunal.
Mahi ākonga · 8 minutes
Rewrite this sentence so that every vague word is replaced with a specific one:
“Some Māori protesters occupied some land in Auckland in the 1970s.”
Then: why does it matter, for understanding this event, that you know it is Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei and not “Māori” in general? Give a reason connected to the kind of claim being made.
The verified record
506 DAYS
Protesters occupied Takaparawhau / Bastion Point in early 1977, on 5 January, after the government revealed that expensive houses would be built on former Ngāti Whātua reserve land.
Ngāti Whātua maintained the land had been unjustly taken from them, and were angered by plans to subdivide it for private housing.
Under the banner of the Ōrākei Māori Action Committee, led by Joe Hawke, they refused to leave.
NZHistory, “Occupation of Bastion Point begins”. The 506-day figure is confirmed independently by Te Ara.
The verified record
25 May 1978
The government sent a massive force of police and army personnel to evict the occupiers.
222 protesters were arrested.
Their temporary meeting house, buildings and gardens were demolished.
Te Ara puts the scale of the force at 800 police and the New Zealand army, evicting over 200 protesters.
NZHistory, “Bastion Point protesters evicted”; Te Ara.
Mahi ākonga · 8 minutes · the hardest task in the unit
In law on 25 May 1978, the occupiers were removed from land the Crown treated as its own.
They said the land had been unjustly taken and remained theirs.
Both of those are accurate descriptions of that day.
Write two sentences explaining how that is possible, and what it tells you about the difference between what is legal and what is right.
And it starts earlier than you think
Year
What happened
1977
The very first claim ever heard by the Waitangi Tribunal was lodged by Joe Hawke of Ngāti Whātua, about his rights to tribal land at Ōrākei. The Tribunal rejected his arguments. The occupation began the same year
1978
222 arrests. The buildings demolished
1987
The Tribunal reported on the Ōrākei claim again — this time as Wai 9, heard under the jurisdiction extended in 1985 to cover grievances back to 1840. Now it found for Ngāti Whātua
Same claim. Same land. Same person. Lost in 1977, won in 1987.
Te Ara, “Waitangi Tribunal”; Waitangi Tribunal report index. Te Ara dates the Ōrākei report 1984; the Tribunal's own index says 1987. This unit follows the Tribunal.
The 1987 recommendations
That Bastion Point “should remain public open space, but be administered jointly by Ngāti Whātua and the Auckland City Council”.
And “an award of $3 million to Ngāti Whātua – the first cash payment recommended as part of a treaty settlement”.
The government accepted all the Tribunal's findings, and announced the return of Takaparawhau to Ngāti Whātua.
In your matrix, the Limitations column matters here. What did that settlement not undo?
Te Ara, “Waitangi Tribunal”. This unit does not state the exact date or legislation of the land's return, because it was not confirmed against the settlement legislation.
Ngā pātai e whā · asked of the occupation
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
The occupiers were not asking for land. They were saying it had been unjustly taken and was still theirs.Which kind of claim is that? Notice it is not the same claim as “the government should be fairer to Māori”.
Exit · 6 minutes
Claim: one sentence about Takaparawhau naming the hapū, the leader and one exact figure
Limit: one sentence about what today's evidence cannot establish
Question: one question you would put to the Waitangi Tribunal record
Akoranga 6 · Lesson 6
THE 1981 SPRINGBOK TOUR
56 days · a country divided · and one uncomfortable question
Do Now · 5 minutes
A full house. A rugby ground in Hamilton. The teams are ready.The game is called off, and it is not the weather. What would it take to stop a rugby match in New Zealand in front of a full crowd?
Keep your prediction.
The verified record, in NZHistory's own words
“Rugby Park was packed for the first Saturday game of the controversial tour. More than 500 police officers were present in the city. The authorities were unaware, however, that protest organisers had bought several hundred tickets for the game. Shortly before kick-off, several hundred others tore down a boundary fence and poured into Rugby Park from a nearby street.”
Quoted verbatim from NZHistory (Manatū Taonga), “Anti-Springbok protesters block Hamilton match”.
The verified record, continued
“Police formed a cordon around this group, which had linked arms in the middle of the field. They eventually arrested about 50 of them, but were concerned about their ability to hold back angry rugby fans. Meanwhile, Pat McQuarrie had stolen a light plane from Taupō and was thought to be heading for the stadium. With his intentions unclear, the police cancelled the match.”
“Spectators attacked protesters as the police ushered them from the ground.”
Quoted verbatim from NZHistory (Manatū Taonga), “Anti-Springbok protesters block Hamilton match”.
Mahi ākonga · 10 minutes
Sequence: put these in order — the ticket purchases, the fence, the people on the field, the police cordon, the arrests, the aircraft, the cancellation, the attacks on protesters
Then: which of these was planned weeks in advance?
Compare: buying several hundred tickets in advance is not spontaneous. Which movement from Lessons 3, 4 and 5 does this most resemble?
What it meant somewhere else
Te Ara records: “President Nelson Mandela remembered that when in his prison cell on Robben Island he heard that the Hamilton game in 1981 had been called off due to protests, it was as if ‘the sun had come out’.”
One minute of quiet on this, then move on.
Te Ara, “Ngā rōpū tautohetohe”.
The verified record, in NZHistory's own words
“For 56 days in July, August and September 1981, New Zealanders were divided against each other in the largest civil disturbance seen since the 1951 waterfront dispute. More than 150,000 people took part in over 200 demonstrations in 28 centres, and 1500 were charged with offences stemming from these protests.”
At least two matches were cancelled: Hamilton on 25 July, and the midweek game scheduled for Timaru's Fraser Park, cancelled on 7 August. The tour otherwise went ahead, including three tests.
NZHistory, “The 1981 Springbok tour” and its tour diary. This unit does not state the total number of matches on the tour, because no NZHistory page confirmed a figure.
Named groups
HARTHalt All Racist Tours, formed in 1969. Te Ara records that it “had significant Māori input”. John Minto was its national organiser in 1981 and became one of the public faces of the movement. The long batons used by riot police that year were nicknamed “Minto bars”.
The Patu SquadBased in Auckland and led by Māori activists Ripeka Evans, Donna Awatere and Hone Harawira. A core of around 100 members, mostly Māori.
Red Squad and Blue SquadSpecialist police units deployed during the tour.
Also activeCARE (Citizens Association for Racial Equality) and NAAC (National Anti-Apartheid Council).
Te Ara, “Ngā rōpū tautohetohe”; NZHistory, “Battle lines are drawn”.
Two minutes, worth spending
In 1977 a Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting adopted the Gleneagles Agreement, in which member governments promised to “discourage” sporting contact with South Africa.
Despite Gleneagles, Prime Minister Robert Muldoon made clear his government would not allow political interference in sport in any form.
The NZRFU took that as a green light and invited the South Africans in September 1980.
A government can keep the letter of an agreement and still produce this.
NZHistory, “Gleneagles Agreement”.
He pātai uaua · no answer key
Why were New Zealanders willing to confront apartheid overseas while Māori continued to challenge racism and colonisation at home?
There is no answer key. There is a standard: every claim is supported from your matrix.
Before you generate explanations, correct one thing
The anti-tour movement was not something Pākehā did while Māori watched.
HART “had significant Māori input” from its formation in 1969.
The Patu Squad was led by Ripeka Evans, Donna Awatere and Hone Harawira, with a core of around 100 mostly Māori members.
So the puzzle is not “why did Pākehā care about South Africa and not about here”.Restate it more precisely before you try to answer it.
Mahi ākonga · groups of four · 14 minutes
8 min: generate at least four different explanations. Push past the first one. Consider distance; what a person has to give up; whether the problem is somebody else's; what “racism” is understood to mean
6 min: rank them from most to least convincing, and defend your top one using something from your evidence matrix — a date, a number, a state response
Ngā pātai e whā · asked of the anti-tour movement
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Opposing apartheid is a claim about how a state treats people under its own law, made about another country.What kind of claim were Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei making at Takaparawhau? Does the kind of claim help explain the difference in response?
Exit · 6 minutes
Look back: find the prediction you wrote at the end of Lesson 2. Were you right? Where were you wrong?
One sentence: your best current answer to today's question, with one piece of evidence in it
Limit: what would you need to know to answer it properly?
Akoranga 7 · Lesson 7
PROTEST BECOMES INSTITUTIONS
what an institution carries · and what it cannot
Do Now · 6 minutes
10 October 1975
The Treaty of Waitangi Act receives the Royal assent.
→
13 October 1975
The Māori Land March reaches Parliament.
The Act became law three days before the marchers arrived.What does that do to the story “the land march caused the Waitangi Tribunal”?
The verified record
The Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975
Royal assent, 10 October 1975. Its own long title says it is an Act
“to provide for the observance, and confirmation, of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi by establishing a Tribunal to make recommendations on claims relating to the practical application of the Treaty and to determine whether certain matters are inconsistent with the principles of the Treaty”.
Quoted verbatim from the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (legislation.govt.nz).
The ten-year gap
The Tribunal could investigate claimed breaches only from 10 October 1975, the date the Act was passed. It could not look at anything before that.
Te Ara records that the minister, Matiu Rata, had proposed 1900 as the cut-off, and that his colleagues rejected even that.
Look back at Lessons 2, 4 and 5. Which grievances in this unit were shut out by that limit?Name at least two.
Te Ara, “Waitangi Tribunal”; Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975 (legislation.govt.nz).
The change
Section 6(1) of the Act was replaced on 6 January 1986 by section 3(1) of the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985.
The Tribunal could now consider matters “passed at any time on or after 6 February 1840”.
The amending Act is dated 1985. The change to section 6(1) took effect on 6 January 1986. Either is defensible provided you can say which you mean.
Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, whole Act view (legislation.govt.nz) — “Section 6(1): replaced, on 6 January 1986, by section 3(1) of the Treaty of Waitangi Amendment Act 1985 (1985 No 148)”.
The comparison that shows what the rule actually did
Wai 11 · te reo
Lodged and heard in 1985, before the extension took effect on 6 January 1986.
It did not need the extension, because it alleged an ongoing failure to protect te reo, not a historical grievance.
vs
Wai 9 · Ōrākei
Rejected in 1977. Upheld in 1987.
It needed the extension, because the wrong it complained of was already old.
Write one sentence explaining the difference between those two kinds of claim, and why a jurisdiction rule treats them differently.
The standing limit, and the one exclusive power
What it cannot do
Where the Tribunal finds a claim substantiated, it recommends action to the Crown. Te Ara: “it could only make recommendations to the government on its findings and had no power to enforce them.”
What only it can do
Te Ara: the Act “made the tribunal the only official body with the authority to determine the meaning and effect of Te Tiriti o Waitangi, taking into account both its English and Māori versions.”
Hold that beside Lesson 1. The two texts do not say the same thing, and somebody had to be authorised to say what they mean.
Te Ara, “Waitangi Tribunal”.
The other path
Kōhanga reo
Pukeatua Kōhanga Reo, Wainuiomata, Lower Hutt, first intake on Easter Tuesday, 13 April 1982. Four more opened soon afterwards. Initiated by elders, among them Jean Puketapu and Iritana Tawhiwhirangi. More than 300 within three years. By 1994, 14,500 children were attending more than 800.
Kura kaupapa Māori
The first, Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Hoani Waititi, established in West Auckland in 1985. State schools operating within a whānau-based Māori philosophy, delivering the curriculum in te reo Māori. Recognised in the Education Act 1989; from 1990 the Ministry of Education supported the establishment of new kura.
NZHistory, “First kōhanga reo opens”; Te Ara, “Kaupapa Māori education”.
Mahi ākonga · 15 minutes
6 min: two-column comparison of the Tribunal path and the kōhanga path — who starts it, who has to agree, how long it takes, what it produces
4 min: one kōhanga reo in April 1982 became more than 300 within three years. The petition took from 1972 to 1987 to reach legislation. What does the difference in pace show?
5 min: kura kaupapa Māori are state schools, and kōhanga reo sought and received state funding. When a movement's institution becomes part of the state system, what is gained and what is risked?
The judgement work
What they did carry
Te reo Māori became an official language in 1987 and gained a commission to promote it. Historical claims back to 1840 could be heard from January 1986. At Takaparawhau, a claim rejected in 1977 succeeded in 1987 and the government accepted every finding. Children could be educated entirely in te reo from 1982 onwards.
What they did not
The Tribunal recommends; it cannot order. Legal recognition of a language is not the same as people speaking it. Land held as public open space under joint administration is not land never taken. And an institution can absorb a movement's energy into paperwork — a real risk, not a cynical one.
Ngā pātai e whā · asked of the Tribunal
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Column 3 is unusual for this row. The Tribunal is not itself making a claim — it is the place claims are made.Note what kind of claims it hears, and on what authority it hears them.
Exit · 6 minutes
Verdict: did institutions solve these struggles, or change them? One sentence, including one date
Evidence: the single strongest piece of evidence for your verdict
Against yourself: the strongest piece of evidence against it
If you cannot find one, your verdict is probably too confident.
Akoranga 8 · Lesson 8
WHAT CAUSES SOCIAL CHANGE?
the matrix becomes an argument
Do Now · 8 minutes
You have been filling the matrix down, one row at a time. Today you read it across.
4 min · cover everything except the Method column and the Change achieved column. Which method appears most often in the rows where real change was achieved?
4 min · find one row where a lot changed and one where very little did. What is different — the method, the state's response, the kind of claim, or the timing?
Which mattered most to Māori resurgence?
A · ProtestMarches, occupations, direct action. It changes what the public sees and what politicians can ignore. Evidence: 1975, 1977–78, 1981.
B · WhenuaLand is the material base. Without it, everything else is symbolic. Evidence: the land march, Takaparawhau, the return of land.
C · Language and cultureA people that keeps its language keeps the frame it thinks in. Evidence: 1972, kōhanga reo, kura kaupapa, 1987.
D · Law and institutionsOnly law changes what a state must do. Evidence: the Treaty of Waitangi Act 1975, the 1985 extension, the 1986 Tribunal finding, the 1987 Act.
Mahi ākonga · 15 minutes
5 min · the corners of the room are A, B, C, D. Stand in the one you currently believe. Standing is a commitment
7 min · in your corner, build the strongest case using specific evidence — dates, names, figures. Two minutes of your case must be evidence
3 min · before you speak, name the strongest attack the other corners will make, and prepare the answer
Structured argument · 20 minutes
Each corner gets two minutes
Every claim carries a date, a name or a figure. A claim without one is stopped and asked for evidence
Each corner puts one question to one other corner. The best questions attack the evidence, not the position
Anyone convinced by another corner moves, and says which single piece of evidence moved them
Changing your mind on evidence is the highest-scoring move in this room.
Prompt for these if they do not appear
The 1972 petition asked, and it took fifteen years to reach the 1987 Act. One kōhanga reo in April 1982 became more than 300 within three years, without asking anyone
At Takaparawhau, protest was defeated in 1978 and the claim was upheld in 1987 by an institution. So which one worked?
The Treaty of Waitangi Act became law three days before the land march arrived, which complicates any simple “protest caused the law” story
The fifth answer
“It was the interaction between them.”
Probably right. Worthless unless you can show the mechanism.
The rule: you may argue this only if you can name a specific point where one factor made another one possible.
“They all helped each other” does not count.
Mahi ākonga · pairs, 11 minutes
Find one real hinge in your matrix: a moment where one kind of action made a different kind possible.
“Because happened in , became possible in .”
Three pairs share. The class tests each one: a real causal link, or two things that happened near each other?
Let students find these rather than supplying them
The extension of the Tribunal's jurisdiction back to 1840 turned the Ōrākei claim from a 1977 rejection into a 1987 success.
The 1986 Tribunal finding on te reo preceded the 1987 Act.
Kōhanga reo created a generation of speakers that official-language status alone could not have produced.
ONE TO CORRECT GENTLY → a student may say the jurisdiction extension also made the Wai 11 te reo claim possible. It did not. Wai 11 was lodged and heard in 1985, before the extension took effect, because it alleged an ongoing failure rather than a historical grievance. The contrast between the two claims is a stronger hinge than the one they were reaching for.
Ngā pātai e whā · across the whole matrix
Question 1Who has the right?
Question 2Who recognises it?
Question 3Who can deny it?
Question 4What gives that right authority?
Read Question 4 down every row of your matrix.Did the kind of claim shape the response it received? That is an Excellence-level move in the rubric.
Plan the inquiry · 12 minutes
How did Māori activism contribute to the Māori resurgence of the 1970s and 1980s?
Thesis, 4 min: one sentence that actually answers the question and takes a position. “Many factors were important” is not a thesis
Evidence, 5 min: three rows from your matrix, from at least two different case studies. For each, the one date, name or figure you will use
Objection, 3 min: the strongest objection to your thesis, and one line on how you will answer it
How have Māori challenged injustice, asserted rights and rebuilt rangatiratanga, and what actually causes social change?
You now have a matrix, a frame and an argument. That is the answer to the first half. The second half is yours to write.
Te mahi · what you produce
Your thesis — one sentence that answers the question and takes a position
Three evidence paragraphs — each built on one matrix row, from at least two different case studies, each with an exact date, name or figure
One objection — the strongest argument against your thesis, and your answer to it
One limit — something your evidence cannot establish
Around 500 to 700 words, or the equivalent as a recorded presentation, a structured slide set or a documented poster. The format is negotiable. The four parts are not.
Ngā ture · non-negotiable
Named people and organisations. The phrase “Māori activists” scores nothing
Every claim about the past carries a date, a name or a figure
You say where a fact came from. “It says in the lesson” is not a source
You do not invent quotations. If you cannot find what someone said, write what they did
Tino rangatiratanga is not used as a synonym for “Māori rights”, “sovereignty” or “independence”
Where we started, and where we finish
human rights ≠ civil rights ≠ Indigenous rights ≠ Te Tiriti rights ≠ tino rangatiratanga
Eight lessons ago these were five words that sounded the same.Which one can you now explain best? Which one would you still struggle to explain to someone in Year 9?
He kōrero pono · the method, not a disclaimer
Where sources disagree, you were told
About 5,000 or about 40,000 at Parliament in 1975. 1,000 km or 1,100 km. Petition or memorial of rights. Committee or Group.
Where a fact could not be confirmed, it was not stated
The number of matches on the 1981 tour. New Zealand's 1981 population. The exact date the land at Takaparawhau was returned. Iwi affiliations the sources do not agree on.
Every lesson page carries a sources block naming exactly which institution established each fact. That is where you find out, and it is what you are being asked to do yourself.