📚 Unit Plans → 🌍 Community Action Project → 📖 Lesson 2: Research and Understand
Years 9–10 Social Studies

Research and Understand — Getting the Full Picture

Lesson 2 of the Community Action Project — ākonga weigh sources, gather evidence, and map the perspectives on their chosen issue.

🕘 Lesson at a Glance | Te Hōtaka

Do NowHook — opinion vs evidence⏱ 5 min1 · Weigh the sourceCan we trust it?⏱ 15 min2 · Dig for evidenceResearch the issue⏱ 20 min3 · Whose view?Map the perspectives⏱ 25 min4 · Full-picture briefPull it together⏱ 20 minExitEvidence and gaps⏱ 5 min

Lesson Overview | Tirohanga Whānui

An issue you feel strongly about isn't the same as an issue you understand. In this lesson each rōpū gets the full picture on the kaupapa they chose in Lesson 1. Ākonga learn to weigh a source before they trust it, dig for real evidence — including which council or body actually holds the decision — and map the different perspectives people hold, including perspectives that aren't theirs to speak for. They finish with a research brief that honestly separates what they know, and where they know it from, from what they still need to find out.

Learning Intentions | Ngā Whāinga Ako

  • Weigh a source for reliability — who made it, when, why, and whether we can check it against something else.
  • Gather evidence on our issue, including which body holds the decision, and record where every fact came from.
  • Map the different perspectives on our issue and name what we still need to find out.

⚡ Do Now

⏱ 5 min

On the board, two claims about the same local issue (invented for this exercise — the figures are illustrative, not real council data):

  • "Everyone knows the council doesn't care about our end of town."
  • "The council spent $2.4m in the northern ward and $0.3m in ours last year, according to its published budget."

Then make it real: the second statement is stronger only because it can be checked. Before the next lesson, find one published figure from your own council’s annual report or long-term plan that bears on your rōpū’s kaupapa, and note where you found it. A claim you can source beats a claim you feel.

  1. Choose (2 min): In your book, write which claim you'd trust more if you had to convince someone — and one word for why.
  2. Push it (3 min): What would you need to check before you fully believed the second claim?

Teacher: the two example figures are illustrative — swap in real numbers from your own council's published budget if you have them. The point is the difference between a feeling and a checkable fact, which is the whole lesson.

Activity 1 · Weigh the Source

⏱ 15 min

What it is: Before ākonga gather evidence, they need a way to tell strong sources from weak ones. They build the test, then apply it.

Run it

  1. Rank (5 min): In pairs, ākonga rank five sources about a local issue from most to least reliable — a resident's social-media post, a published council report, a local news article, a friend's word-of-mouth, and a business's press release.
  2. Find the test (5 min): What questions decided the ranking? Land the test together — who made it, when, why (whose interest does it serve), and can we check it against another source.
  3. Apply (5 min): Pairs re-rank using the test and name one source they'd want to corroborate before trusting it.

You'll need: the five source types on a slide or five cards per pair. No printed handout is required. Teacher: there's no fixed "right" order — a council report is usually strong but not neutral; the reasoning is what matters.

Activity 2 · Dig for Evidence

⏱ 20 min

What it is: Now the research is real and local. Rōpū investigate their chosen issue and, crucially, work out who actually holds the decision.

Run it

  1. Set the questions (4 min): Each rōpū writes three research questions about their issue — what's actually happening, how big is it, and who's responsible.
  2. Find who decides (8 min): Research which body holds the decision — a city, district, or regional council, a school board, or a government agency. Councils have real structures and responsibilities; in city and district councils a mayor leads the decision-making. Name the specific body and, if you can, the role or committee.
  3. Gather and log (8 min): Collect facts from at least two sources and record each one in an evidence log — fact · where it came from · how reliable (from Activity 1).

You'll need: devices for searching, and an evidence-log table (three columns) in each rōpū's shared doc or book. Teacher: the "who decides" step is the one that turns a complaint into an action plan — the decision-maker is who the action in Lesson 4 will target.

Activity 3 · Whose View? — Mapping Perspectives

⏱ 25 min

What it is: Almost every community issue looks different depending on where you stand. Ākonga map those views honestly before they design a response.

Run it

  1. List the players (5 min): Who holds a stake in this issue — residents, the council, a local business, rangatahi, kaumātua, mana whenua?
  2. Map the views (12 min): For each group, what do they likely want, and why? Where you can, find a real voice — a council minute, a quote in a news story, a submission — rather than guessing what a group thinks.
  3. Spot the gaps (8 min): Which perspectives do you not yet have a real voice for? Each gap becomes a research to-do for later.

🪶 Mātauranga Māori and tikanga boundary (local handoff required): where an issue touches whenua, wai, or a wāhi tapu, the mana whenua perspective is not one ākonga or this resource should invent. Treat it as a reserved voice — invite a kaiako Māori, a hapū representative, or a mana whenua guest to speak to it, and record it as a genuine gap until you can. Naming that honestly is part of getting the full picture.

Teacher: praise the groups who mark a perspective as "we don't have a real voice for this yet" — that honesty is stronger research than a confident guess.

Activity 4 · The Full-Picture Brief

⏱ 20 min

What it is: The lesson lands on a brief — the document Lesson 3 uses to design a response.

Run it

  1. Sort (5 min): Split the findings into two columns — what we know (with its source) and what we still need to find out.
  2. Write the brief (12 min): One page — the issue, the key evidence with sources, who holds the decision, the main perspectives (and which ones are still gaps), and the open questions.
  3. Name a gap (3 min): Each rōpū says aloud the single most important thing they still need to find out.

Teacher: a good brief is honest about its gaps, not just full of facts. Keep the briefs — Lesson 3 designs the response straight off them.

Exit · Evidence and Gaps

⏱ 5 min

Before they leave, each ākonga finishes these three sentences in their book:

  1. The strongest piece of evidence we found, and where it came from:
  2. The body that actually makes the decision about our issue is:
  3. One perspective we still need to hear before we act is:

Teacher: sentence 1 shows who can tie a fact to a source (not just "the internet"); sentence 2 shows who found the real decision-maker; sentence 3 is the honest gap to chase in Lesson 3.

🎯 Curriculum Links | Te Hononga ki te Marautanga

This lesson's focus: Ākonga research their issue and locate the body that holds the decision — learning that councils have real structures and responsibilities, and that in city and district councils a mayor leads the decision-making.

Civics and Society — Core Connection (Phase 4 | Years 9–10)

"Structure and responsibilities of city, district, and regional councils. In city and district councils, a mayor leads decision-making."

📑 See the Community Action Project unit overview for the full curriculum alignment → — Social Sciences · Civics and Society · Phase 4 · Years 9–10 (statement pulled verbatim from the live Te Mātaiaho curriculum).

📦 Materials & Resources

This is a research lesson, so the main resource is devices and time — nothing needs a printed handout.

  • Source cards (Activity 1): the five source types on a slide, or five cards per pair.
  • Devices (Activity 2): phones, tablets, or Chromebooks for searching — one between two is enough.
  • Evidence log (Activity 2): a three-column table (fact · source · reliability) in each rōpū's shared doc or book.
  • Research brief template (Activity 4): a one-page frame — issue, evidence + sources, who decides, perspectives, open questions.

Your own council's website is the best live resource here — its published budget, meeting minutes, and ward pages give ākonga real, checkable evidence about who decides and what's been spent. If a rōpū can't find their decision-maker, that's a genuine finding to bring to the class.

📊 Assessment Framework

Assessment here is formative — reading whether each rōpū can source its evidence and find the real decision-maker. The project's summative assessment sits across the whole arc.

What to look for, mapped to the learning intentions

  • Weighing sources (LI 1): in Activity 1, can ākonga justify a ranking with the test — who, when, why, can-we-check — rather than gut feel?
  • Evidence with sources (LI 2): does the evidence log tie each fact to a named source, and did the rōpū find the actual body that decides?
  • Perspectives and gaps (LI 3): does the brief map real perspectives and honestly mark the ones still missing — especially where a mana whenua voice is reserved?
Quick exit read: the three exit sentences tell you who can source a fact, who found the decision-maker, and which rōpū still have perspective gaps to chase in Lesson 3.
🚀 Extension Activities
  • Ask a real person: draft two or three questions and email or ring a local councillor, community board member, or council officer about the issue. A real reply is the strongest source of all.
  • Fact-check a claim: take a widely-shared claim about the issue (a social-media post, a rumour) and try to confirm or debunk it against a reliable source. Report what you found.
  • Compare the tellings: read a council report and a news story about the same decision. Where do they agree, where do they differ, and why might that be?
🔗 Unit Progression & Next Steps

Lesson 1 chose the issue; this lesson gives it a foundation of evidence and understanding. That research brief is what Lesson 3 designs from.

  1. Lesson 1 — Choose an Issue: find a real community issue worth acting on.
  2. Lesson 2 — Research and Understand (this lesson): weigh sources, gather evidence, map perspectives.
  3. Lesson 3 — Design a Response: turn the research brief into a realistic plan.
  4. Lesson 4 — Take Action: do the mahi, aimed at the decision-maker you found.
  5. Lesson 5 — Reflect and Evaluate: did it work, and how do we know?
  6. Lesson 6 — Share and Advocate: tell the story and push for the change to stick.

The "one thing we still need to find out" from each rōpū's exit ticket is the first job when Lesson 3 opens.

📋 Teacher Planning Snapshot

Ngā Paearu Angitū — Success Criteria

  • ✅ I can judge whether a source is reliable and say why. (LI 1)
  • ✅ I can find evidence about our issue and name the body that decides it, tying each fact to its source. (LI 2)
  • ✅ I can map the different perspectives and name the ones we still need to hear. (LI 3)

Differentiation for this lesson

  • Research load: pair confident and developing researchers; give a rōpū that's stuck a starter link to their council's website so the search doesn't stall.
  • Language / ELL: allow the evidence log and perspective notes in a first language; the reliability test works as four plain questions (who, when, why, can-we-check).
  • Care with sensitive issues: some issues touch students' own lives or whānau. Let ākonga research at a distance where they need to, and keep the framing on evidence and agency rather than blame.

Broader differentiation and the unit-wide framing live on the unit overview.