This 8-10 lesson unit integrates Western STEM disciplines with Mātauranga Māori to create a powerful dual-knowledge approach to environmental science and sustainability. This is not a unit that "adds Māori" to science — it treats both systems as valid and distinct, asking students to hold both and navigate the tensions honestly.
Students explore how Indigenous knowledge systems offer complementary perspectives to conventional scientific methods, developing critical thinking skills that honour both epistemologies while addressing real environmental challenges in Aotearoa. The unit embraces ako — reciprocal learning — positioning students as co-creators of knowledge alongside kaumātua, scientists, and each other.
🎬 Video: Turning the Tide — Mātauranga-Led Restoration
RNZ spotlights hapū scientists combining water monitoring technology with whakapapa-based indicators to restore their awa — dual knowledge systems in action.
Before: Activate prior knowledge — what tech tools and mātauranga measures have students already used to read local environments? Assign viewing roles: data analyst, tikanga checker, systems mapper.
During: Pause when the rōpū describes water testing. Capture both scientific instruments and mātauranga indicators guiding their decisions. Track how storytelling and whanaungatanga support STEM findings.
After: Think-Pair-Share — which restoration move could be adapted in our own environmental project? Update investigation plans with one mātauranga measure to complement current data collection.
Ngā Whāinga Akoranga — Learning Intentions
- Explain how Mātauranga Māori and Western science represent distinct but complementary knowledge systems with different epistemological foundations
- Conduct scientific investigations that draw on both empirical methodology and Mātauranga Māori frameworks (whakapapa, tohu, kaitiakitanga)
- Critically evaluate claims by applying criteria from both knowledge systems, rather than defaulting to one as superior
- Design and present a community science project meaningful to local iwi and whānau
Paearu Angitu — Success Criteria
- I can describe at least two ways Mātauranga Māori and Western science answer the same question differently — and explain why both answers have value
- I can use field observation skills from both traditions in my investigation journal
- I can present community science findings to an audience that includes whānau or community kaitiaki
- I can write a reflection that honestly grapples with tensions between the two knowledge systems, not just celebrates harmony
Entry / On-level / Extension
- Entry: Focus on one local environmental site. Guided observation framework comparing what Western science notices vs. what Mātauranga Māori notices in the same location. Scaffolded reflection prompts and pre-structured field journals.
- On-level: Students design their own investigation question requiring both knowledge systems. Community science project with peer feedback cycles and an external presentation.
- Extension: Research an active debate where Mātauranga Māori and Western science have produced different findings (e.g., predator control, water quality indicators). Write a position paper navigating the tension honestly, with citations from both traditions.
Inclusion Guidance
- Cultural safety: Māori students may hold living knowledge of their iwi's tohu and kaitiakitanga practice. This is expert knowledge — invite it, do not appropriate it without permission. Check with students and whānau what can be shared in a classroom context and what must remain within the hapū.
- ESOL / ELL learners: Bilingual glossary card for key terms (whakapapa, tohu, kaitiakitanga, epistemology). The dual-system framing actually reduces disadvantage for EAL/D students — it legitimises diverse ways of knowing.
- Neurodiverse learners: Field journals can be visual, sketched, or audio-recorded. Investigation design is open for format choice. Long-term project work needs weekly micro-checkpoints to prevent overwhelm.
Science / Pūtaiao — Level 4
"Explain how living things are suited to their particular habitat and how they respond to environmental changes, both natural and human-induced."
Science, Level 4 — Living World
"Appreciate that science is a way of explaining the world and that science knowledge changes over time. Identify ways in which scientists work together and provide evidence to support their ideas."
Science, Level 4 — Nature of Science
Social Sciences / Tikanga-ā-Iwi — Level 4
"Understand how cultural practices reflect and express people's customs, traditions, and values."
Social Sciences, Level 4 — Culture and Heritage
Key Competencies
- Thinking: Students evaluate knowledge claims from two different epistemic traditions — developing metacognitive awareness of how they know what they know
- Relating to Others: Kaitiaki partnerships, community presentations, and peer feedback develop respectful collaboration across cultural contexts
- Participating & Contributing: Community science projects address real local environmental challenges — students contribute genuine findings, not simulated ones
- Using Language, Symbols & Texts: Students read and produce scientific reports, field journals, mātauranga narratives, and bilingual observation records
STEM and mātauranga Māori are not two cultures having a polite conversation — they are two epistemological frameworks with different origins, methods, and authority structures. These theorists made that argument rigorously and gave teachers the language to hold both with honesty.
- Lesson 1: Dual Knowledge Systems Lessons 1–2
- Lesson 2: Environmental Kaitiakitanga Lessons 3–4
- Lesson 3: Cultural Mathematics Lessons 5–6
- Lesson 4: Technology & Innovation Lesson 7
- Lesson 5: Community Science Lessons 8–10
| Lessons | Lesson | Big Question | Key Activity |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1–2 | Dual Knowledge Systems | "He aha te mātauranga?" | Map the assumptions, methods, and blind spots of Western science and Mātauranga Māori. Where do they converge? Where do they diverge honestly? |
| 3–4 | Environmental Kaitiakitanga | "He aha ngā tohu?" | Field investigation using both scientific data collection and Mātauranga Māori observation (tohu). Kaitiaki as co-investigators in local awa, bush, or coastal environments. |
| 5–6 | Cultural Mathematics | "He aha ngā tauira?" | Tukutuku patterns as geometry, whakapapa as biological classification, Māori navigation astronomy. Mathematics as cultural practice across both traditions. |
| 7 | Technology & Innovation | "He aha te hangarau?" | Waka design (hydrodynamics), pā architecture (engineering), hangi thermodynamics. Innovation as a continuous practice — not a Western invention. |
| 8–10 | Community Science | "He aha ā tātou mahi?" | Students design and implement a local environmental investigation using dual knowledge systems. Present findings to whānau, kaitiaki, and community. |
Investigation Journal (ongoing)
A running field journal documenting observations from both Western scientific and Mātauranga Māori perspectives throughout the unit. Assessed on: quality of observation, honest engagement with both traditions, and reflection on tensions encountered. Can be visual, written, or audio-recorded.
Community Science Presentation (Lessons 8–10)
Students design and implement a local environmental investigation, then present findings to whānau, kaitiaki, or community members. Assessment criteria:
- Quality of dual-knowledge methodology — does the investigation genuinely use both traditions?
- Communication clarity for a community audience (not just academic markers)
- Responsiveness to community feedback during and after the presentation
- Honest reflection on what each knowledge system contributed — and where they conflicted
Related Handouts & Resources
The core pedagogical challenge: Most science teaching implicitly frames Western science as the superior knowledge system and Mātauranga Māori as "cultural context." This unit requires the opposite framing. Resist the urge to present Mātauranga Māori as "interesting but not scientific" — that framing is the problem this unit is designed to solve.
On finding tensions, not just harmony: Students who only see "both systems agree" are missing the point. The most powerful learning moments come when the two traditions genuinely disagree — about what counts as evidence, about the relationship between observer and observed, about whose knowledge matters. Don't resolve those tensions prematurely.
Kaitiaki partnerships: Contact local hapū or iwi environmental rōpū before beginning Lesson 2. Kaitiaki should be co-investigators in the investigation design — not brought in to validate pre-determined student findings. This changes the power dynamic significantly.
The video (Lesson 1): Available at the YouTube embed in this page. Approximately 8 minutes. Worth showing twice — once for content, once for observation methodology.
🔗 Unit Progression & Next Steps
The 5 lessons in this unit, in teaching order:
📋 Teacher Planning Snapshot
📋 Teacher Planning Snapshot
Ngā Paearu Angitū — Success Criteria
To be populated in Phase 3: 3–5 success criteria, each tied to a Learning Intention. Use "I can..." language. Be specific to this unit, not generic.
- ✅ I can [LI 1 evidence] (LI 1)
- ✅ I can [LI 2 evidence] (LI 2)
- ✅ I can [LI 3 evidence] (LI 3)
Differentiation & Inclusion
To be populated in Phase 3: Specific scaffolds for this unit.
Entry-level learners: [What structure, resource, or task simplification helps?]
ELL / ESOL: [Pre-teach vocabulary, visual supports, home-language thinking time?]
Accelerated learners: [What depth or autonomy challenge?]
Neurodiverse / Inclusion: [Sensory, attention, processing adaptations? Strengths-based.]
Instructions for Phase 3: Differentiation is NOT generic (e.g., "pair with buddy"). It's specific to THIS unit's content and structure. Know your learners; adapt by evidence.