Seminar focus: who decides, and by what right?
Ākonga judge forms of decision-making against criteria they name before seeing the outcome. The task is legitimacy analysis, not designing a governance system.
- Deliberation move: criteria first → apply consistently → defend ranking → answer the strongest objection.
- Evidence: a criteria matrix and ranked judgement whose reasons precede its conclusion.
Ngā Whāinga Ako | Learning intentions
We are learning to judge public authority by explicit criteria rather than by whether we like a particular result.
- I can distinguish participation, speed, accountability and protection from abuse as different criteria.
- I can apply the same criteria to more than one decision process.
- I can explain why a system may be legitimate in one context and weak in another.
Preparation
Provide one copy per pair of the four fictional decision-rule cards below and one criteria matrix. Also provide access to current Elections NZ and New Zealand Parliament explainer pages so learners can distinguish a classroom model from the institutions Aotearoa actually uses.
Authority boundary: none of the fictional cards is presented as “the Māori model”. Māori governance is diverse, historically and presently, and local iwi/hapū structures require named sources and authority. Te Tiriti questions are handled through the primary text and appropriate interpretive sources, not by turning tikanga terms into generic constitutional labels.
60-minute runsheet
- Whakaoho — what makes a decision legitimate? (5 min): individually rank five criteria: participation, speed, accountability, protection of minority interests, and transparency. Circle the one you refuse to trade away.
- Aotearoa source check (10 min): pairs use Elections NZ and Parliament explainers to record three verified features of the current representative system: how representatives are elected, what MPs do, and how government/opposition roles create scrutiny. Record the source beside each claim.
- Four decision rules (8 min): read the fictional cards: elected-majority vote; consensus with a defined fallback; delegated emergency authority with time limit and review; independent expert board whose decision must be publicly justified and can be appealed.
- Criteria matrix (10 min): before receiving the case outcome, score each rule against the five criteria and write one uncertainty. Learners must use the same interpretation of each criterion across all four rows.
- Common case — relocate the community hub (12 min): a fictional town must choose one of two temporary community-hub sites after flooding. Site A opens sooner but is harder to reach without a car. Site B opens later but is beside public transport and accessible housing. Apply each decision rule to the same case and identify whose interests each process makes easiest to hear.
- Adversarial switch (8 min): defend your second-ranked decision rule as if it were your first. A partner may challenge only by pointing to the criteria matrix, not by saying the outcome feels wrong.
- Final ranked judgement (5 min): rank the four rules for this case and complete: “I rank ___ first because ___; its strongest weakness is ___; I would change my ranking if ___.”
- Exit — Te Tiriti question (2 min): write one question a public authority in Aotearoa would need to investigate about Te Tiriti obligations before treating the hub decision as complete.
Decision-rule cards | He tauira hanga
These are teacher-written comparison devices, not descriptions of whole political traditions.
Elected-majority vote
Representatives debate and a majority decides. The decision is published and representatives face voters later.
Consensus with fallback
The group seeks an agreement everyone can live with. If the deadline is reached, a previously agreed fallback process is used.
Delegated emergency authority
One office may decide during a defined emergency. Its power expires automatically and the decision is reviewed afterward.
Independent expert board
A specialist board decides using published evidence and criteria. It must explain the decision publicly and provide an appeal route.
Criteria matrix
| Decision rule | Participation | Speed | Accountability | Minority protection | Transparency | Uncertainty |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elected majority | ||||||
| Consensus + fallback | ||||||
| Emergency delegation | ||||||
| Expert board |
Te Tiriti and Māori governance | Source before analogy
Do not teach a single “rangatira model” as though one classroom paragraph can represent Māori governance. If learners investigate iwi or hapū governance, require a named organisation, source and context.
For this seminar, Te Tiriti enters as a public-authority question: what must be checked about kāwanatanga, tino rangatiratanga, participation and the interests of Māori affected by a decision? Learners locate the text and identify what further authority is needed rather than generating an answer from a generic definition.
Aromatawai | Evidence to collect
- Secure: criteria are defined before the case outcome; the same criteria are applied across all rules; the final ranking acknowledges a genuine weakness.
- Needs repair: the conclusion changes whenever the learner likes an outcome, or the criteria are rewritten after the ranking.
- Extension: identify a context in which your first-ranked rule should lose and explain which criterion changes the result.
Hononga Marautanga | Curriculum
Roles of Prime Minister, Cabinet, and official opposition in day-to-day governance. Drawn from elected members of Parliament.
Te Mātaiaho (2025) · Social Sciences · Phase 4 · Civics and Society · mandatory statement 21240. The Aotearoa source-check activity makes the representative roles visible before learners compare fictional decision rules.
Sources and checking
- Elections NZ — What is New Zealand’s system of government?.
- New Zealand Parliament — What does an MP do?.
- Waitangi Tribunal — Māori and English texts of Te Tiriti o Waitangi / Treaty of Waitangi.
- The four decision rules and community-hub scenario are fictional teaching cases, not descriptions of named governments or iwi structures.