Lesson-by-lesson teaching sequence

One continuous resource, twelve default teaching blocks. Each block is a pedagogical episode inside the same deck — open it directly: the classroom deck (174 slides, six phases). Kaiako support: teacher companion · phase map. Shorter timetables can split blocks; longer periods can combine them. Do not sever the cumulative inquiry.

Each block includes a functional bilingual cue, a signature student action, a product worth keeping, and a deliberate connection to the National Identity Evidence Ledger.

Week 1 · Ngā take / causation · Phase 1 · deck ph-o

Why did Te Pakanga Tuatahi o te Ao begin?

Lesson 1 · Phase 1 · deck ph-o

Naming the war & reading Europe

Driving question: How can names and maps shape the story before we learn any “facts”?

Functional reo: He pātai / question · mātakitaki / view · whakaaro / thinking.
Signature move: rank four names for the conflict, then map Europe 1914 before teaching MAIN.
  1. Great War / First World War / “war to end all wars” / Te Pakanga Tuatahi o te Ao.
  2. Know-think-wonder baseline.
  3. Notice empires and borders; predict how a local crisis might spread.
Keep: naming sheet + annotated Europe map + first alliance prediction.
Naming the warEurope 1914

Lesson 2 · Phase 1 · deck ph-o

The Powder Keg

Driving question: Who or what deserves the most responsibility for war?

Functional reo: kōrero / discuss · tuhia / write.
Signature move: allocate 100 responsibility points, encounter evidence, then reallocate.
  1. MAIN as a memory scaffold, not a verdict.
  2. Fact-check militarism; interrogate imperialism and nationalism.
  3. Assassination / July Crisis as trigger.
  4. “I used to think… now I think…” revision.
Keep: before/after causal weighting + one evidence-based explanation.
MAIN Cause Chain

Week 2 · Choice / Empire / Aotearoa · Phase 2 · deck ph-a

Why did Aotearoa New Zealand go?

Lesson 3 · Phase 1 · deck ph-o

At war with Britain — choosing active participation

Driving question: Was New Zealand British, New Zealand, or both?

Kupu in context: Empire / Emepaea only where carried by historical sources; avoid decorative translation.
Signature move: classify evidence as mostly British / emerging NZ / both-complicated.
  1. Dominion status and constitutional dependence.
  2. Samoa as active NZ imperial participation.
  3. Recruitment rhetoric as identity evidence.
Keep: first entries in National Identity Ledger.
Empire & identity sortIdentity Ledger

Lesson 4 · Phase 2 · deck ph-a

Would You Go?

Driving question: Why might people living in the same country make different choices?

Functional reo: He aha tō whakaaro? / What do you think? Use orally; students may answer in the language they can reason best in.
Signature move: historically situated identity cards; decision → evidence → revision.
  1. Reasons for volunteering and pressures on non-volunteers.
  2. Māori responses introduced as varied and iwi-contextual.
  3. Māori/Native Contingent; Ngata and Pōmare as distinct recruitment voices.
  4. Revisit the role decision.
Keep: reasoned enlistment decision + evidence that changed or strengthened it.
Māori service evidenceIdentity Ledger

Week 3 · Experience / total war · Phase 3 · deck ph-b

What was the Great War actually like?

Lesson 5 · Phase 2 · deck ph-a

Gallipoli: event before legend

Driving question: Why can an unsuccessful campaign become a powerful national story?

Functional reo: mātakitaki / view · kōrero / discuss.
Signature move: reconstruct strategic purpose and terrain from evidence before discussing ANZAC memory.
  1. Predict campaign objective from map.
  2. Terrain / landing evidence.
  3. Real-person dossier begins.
  4. Separate military outcome from later meaning.
Keep: claim + evidence + source limit about Gallipoli.
War experience sources

Lesson 6 · Phase 2 · deck ph-a

One War, Different Lives

Driving question: Is there really one “New Zealand war experience”?

Kupu in context: whenua and tūrangawaewae appear only when discussing historically grounded relationships to land / return, not as decorative “values words”.
Signature move: compare evidence dossiers across infantry, Māori Pioneer Battalion, nursing / home-front and whānau experience.
  1. Somme / Passchendaele and human cost.
  2. Pioneer Battalion as core NZ war story.
  3. Women / healthcare and total-war transformation.
  4. Economy, scarcity, rural disruption and land pressures.
Keep: mini evidence biography + “whose experience is still missing?” Ledger entry.
Māori serviceSource analysis

Week 4 · Contested loyalty · Phase 4 · deck ph-c

Who had to fight — and who could refuse?

Lesson 7 · Phase 3 · deck ph-b

Can the state demand military service?

Driving question: What makes conscription legitimate — or illegitimate?

Functional reo: pānui / read · whakaaro / thinking.
Signature move: build historical context before moral judgement.
  1. Volunteer / conscript / conscientious objector.
  2. Military Service Act and state power.
  3. 1863 invasion → raupatu → Kīngitanga → 1917 conscription.
  4. Actual relationship Tāwhiao → Te Puea grounds continuity across generations.
Keep: context chain + initial conscription position.
Conscription evidence

Lesson 8 · Phase 3 · deck ph-b

Te Puea, Pōmare, Ngata: Māori futures under pressure

Driving question: Can leaders care about Māori futures and still disagree about service?

Cultural guardrail: do not define mana motuhake as generic independence or rangatiratanga as generic choice. If those concepts are used, anchor them to the cited historical argument.
Signature move: decision hearing. Advise a historically situated Waikato whānau using multiple sources, including press framing.
  1. Te Puea: Waikato resistance in context.
  2. Pōmare: citizenship / service strategy.
  3. Ngata: third Māori political strategy.
  4. Papers Past: detect loaded colonial framing.
  5. Return to continuum: can refusal be loyalty?
Keep: advisory paragraph + evidence / limitation note.
PerspectivesIdentity Ledger

Week 5 · Peace / power · Phase 5 · deck ph-d

Who gets to make the peace?

Lesson 9 · Phase 3–4 bridge · deck ph-b–ph-c

The peace table is not equal

Driving question: Whose goals matter most after the fighting ends?

Functional reo: kōrero / discuss · tuhia / record.
Signature move: Big Four role cards with incompatible goals; students rank non-negotiables before talks begin.
  1. Armistice ≠ treaty.
  2. Many nations, unequal influence.
  3. Security / punishment / trade / territory / League / empire.
Keep: delegation priority sheet.
Big Four

Lesson 10 · Phase 4 · deck ph-c

You Make the Peace

Driving question: Can peace satisfy justice, security and national interest at once?

Signature move: negotiate first; Versailles is evidence revealed afterwards.
  1. 100 influence points + mid-negotiation constraint.
  2. Compare with selected treaty terms.
  3. Repair war-guilt / reparations oversimplifications.
  4. Massey signature: 1914 ↔ 1919.
  5. Ask who was absent / underpowered.
  6. Revisit “war to end all wars”.
Keep: negotiated treaty + reflection on power and representation.
Versailles negotiation

Week 6 · Aftermath / memory / identity · Phase 6 · deck ph-e

What did Te Pakanga Tuatahi o te Ao leave behind?

Lesson 11 · Phase 4 · deck ph-c

Nationhood, whenua, Samoa & memory

Driving question: Did the war make New Zealand more independent — and what did that new power cost others?

Historical reo: the bilingual Kaitāia 1916 memorial is treated as a source in its own right. Students see the Māori text, an accessible translation, and ask what language / wording makes visible.
Signature move: test “birth of a nation” against contradictory evidence.
  1. Return to Week 1 baseline.
  2. Human cost, returned-soldier settlement, land and tūrangawaewae.
  3. 1918 influenza in NZ and Samoa.
  4. Samoa mandate / NZ colonial power.
  5. Memorials as evidence; bilingual memorial source.
  6. Competing ANZAC interpretations.
Keep: supports / complicates evidence sort.
Memorial inquiry rubricIdentity Ledger

Lesson 12 · Phases 5–6 · deck ph-d–e31

Whose WW1? / Whose Te Pakanga Tuatahi o te Ao?

Driving question: If only six stories could represent the war in Aotearoa, what would you keep?

Signature move: local-to-national museum curation. Selection itself becomes historical interpretation.
  1. Rohe lens: local memorial / honour board / Online Cenotaph person.
  2. Choose six stories / artefacts; justify inclusion and name what exclusion does.
  3. Finish Identity Ledger.
  4. Return to the four names for the war.
  5. Final response to governing inquiry.
Keep: mini-exhibition + final interpretation + final naming rationale.
Whose WW1?Naming revisit

Teacher adaptation: support access without reducing intellectual ambition. Read sources aloud, chunk text, pre-teach only necessary vocabulary, model one evidence row, allow oral rehearsal, provide audio, and pair strategically. Extension should add source complexity, historiography or a local archival hunt — not just more writing.