📚 Unit Plans → 🌍 HIS 2.3: Perspectives → 📄 Self-Check Criteria Sheet — HIS 2.3 Lesson 9
Year 12 Tikanga-ā-Iwi / Social Sciences
← Back to Lesson 9 | 🖨️ Print

Self-Check Criteria — Aromatawai Whaiaro

Level 2 History · HIS 2.3 · Keep on your desk while writing — check each paragraph as you finish it
A
Achieved — Each perspective paragraph must have ALL of these
✓ The group is named specifically — not "protesters" or "the government" but their actual name.
✓ Their perspective (belief/view) is stated clearly — what did this group think or believe about the event?
✓ At least one piece of evidence is included — a source with a creator/author name AND a date.
✓ The evidence supports the perspective you described.
M
Merit — Also explain WHY (in addition to Achieved)
✓ Your paragraph explains WHY this group held their view — not just what they believed.
✓ The explanation connects to context, values, identity, or historical experience — the deeper reason.
✓ You have used "because" (or "which reflects" / "this demonstrates") in the explanation.
✓ Your introduction has a thesis — a claim about why perspectives were irreconcilable.
E
Excellence — Also analyse irreconcilability (in addition to M)
✓ Your paragraphs explain perspectives from the inside — you understand why a group held this view, not just that they were wrong or right.
✓ Your conclusion analyses — it names the core value clash or framework difference, not just "they disagreed."
✓ Your conclusion explains WHY agreement was impossible — the deeper framework clash (e.g. sport as political vs. sport as neutral).
✓ Your conclusion makes a significance claim — why does this event matter for Aotearoa today?

Useful sentence starters — Kuputaki āwhina

A "[Group] believed that…" / "[Group] maintained that…" / "[Group] argued that…"
M "…because [explanation of why]." / "This reflects their [identity/values/experience]…" / "This perspective is explained by…"
E "In conclusion, the perspectives were irreconcilable because [groups] operated from fundamentally different frameworks — [Group A] understood [concept] as [X], while [Group B] understood it as [Y]."
E "This event remains significant for Aotearoa today because…"

After each paragraph — pause and check:

1
Have I named the group specifically?
2
Have I stated their perspective clearly?
3
Have I included evidence with an author/creator and date?
4
Have I explained WHY they held this view (not just what they wanted)?
5
Is this perspective genuinely different from my previous paragraph?

📋 Teacher Planning Snapshot

Ngā Whāinga Ako — Learning Intentions

Students will engage with this resource to develop NCEA Level 2 historical thinking skills — examining how and why different groups held distinct perspectives on significant events in Aotearoa New Zealand's past, and constructing analytical essays using the PEE (Point–Evidence–Explanation) framework.

Ngā Paearu Angitū — Success Criteria

Differentiation & Inclusion

Scaffold support: Provide PEE sentence frames and perspective analysis templates for entry-level access. Students new to historical essay writing benefit from annotated exemplars showing the difference between describing and explaining a perspective. Extend capable writers by asking them to explain the enduring significance of the perspective clash — why does it still shape Aotearoa today?

ELL / ESOL: Pre-teach key historical vocabulary (perspective, corroboration, reliability, significance, agency) with visual glossaries. Allow oral explanation of perspective analysis before written essay drafts. Sentence starters and argument frames lower the language barrier without reducing the historical thinking demand.

Inclusion: Essay writing is cognitively demanding — chunk the process across multiple sessions with formative checkpoints. Neurodiverse learners benefit from explicit essay structure guides and colour-coded paragraph planning. Oral history discussion forums are a valid alternative assessment pathway for students who need them.

Mātauranga Māori lens: This achievement standard centres events where Māori perspectives have historically been marginalised or misrepresented. Placing tangata whenua perspectives as the primary lens — not as "the other side" — is an act of historical justice. Whakapapa provides a framework for understanding why events like the NZ Wars, land confiscations, and the Dawn Raids were not isolated incidents but linked expressions of colonial power. Tino rangatiratanga and mana motuhake frame what was at stake. Students develop empathy and critical historical consciousness together.

Prior knowledge: Students should have foundational knowledge of the relevant historical events (NZ Wars, Treaty of Waitangi, Dawn Raids, or other case study). Familiarity with the PEE structure supports engagement with essay-focused resources.

Curriculum alignment