Whose WW1? · Memory, place and national story

See the assessment rubric →

Your final job is not to “summarise World War One”. You have spent the unit building evidence. Now you must decide what belongs in a public story about the war and New Zealand identity — and explain what your choices leave out.

He pātai matua: How did the First World War change what it meant to be a New Zealander — and who got to define that identity?

Begin with place: use a teacher-supplied local carrier such as a Waikato memorial, school roll of honour, local service person, Online Cenotaph record, Papers Past item, or an iwi/hapū source where appropriate. A national story becomes more meaningful when you can see where it touches real places and people.
Historical reo as evidence: the Kaitāia 1916 memorial contains Māori and English inscriptions. When your kaiako supplies the carrier, treat both languages as evidence. Do not assume the English line is a complete explanation of the Māori wording; use the supplied translation / language notes and record uncertainty honestly.

Part A · Read one memorial carefully

1 · Source it / Nō hea tēnei?

What is the carrier? __________________________________________

Where is it / what rohe? __________________________________________

When was it created? __________________________________________

Who commissioned / created / maintains it? __________________________________________

How did this version reach us? __________________________________________

2 · Mātakitaki / notice before interpreting

Record what is actually visible: names, symbols, military units, dates, religious imagery, Crown / Empire / New Zealand symbols, iwi/hapū references, languages, spelling, quotations and omissions.

One thing I notice but cannot yet explain:

3 · Claim · evidence · limit

One bounded claim this memorial supports:

Exact feature / wording / evidence that supports the claim:

What the memorial cannot tell us by itself:

4 · Language is part of the source

If more than one language appears, ask:

5 · Who is centred? Who is difficult to see?

A memorial is a selection. Think about which experiences its form makes easy to remember and which are harder to see. Only name an absence if it changes what the memorial’s story can tell.

Part B · Local → national comparison

Our local carrier

What values / identity does it emphasise?

Kaitāia bilingual memorial

What becomes visible because Māori and English both appear?

ANZAC national story

Where does local evidence support or complicate the familiar national story?

Part C · Whose WW1? museum curation

Exhibition title: The First World War & the Making of New Zealand
Constraint: you may include only six verified stories / artefacts from the teacher-provided candidate set.

Your six should show that you understand the whole arc of the unit. Together they must span at least four different phases of the story, and your set must include evidence from both before 1916 and after the fighting stopped. You are not required to fill identity “quotas”; instead, you must explain the consequences of what you include and exclude.

Item / carrierWhy it belongsWhat can it establish?Whose perspective?What changes if it is omitted?

The exclusion test

Name two strong items you chose not to include.

Excluded itemWhy did you leave it out?What becomes harder to see because of that choice?

Part D · Final historical judgement

Use your National Identity Evidence Ledger and your exhibition choices.

My judgement: The First World War changed New Zealand identity by…

Evidence 1 + why it matters:

Evidence 2 + why it matters:

Evidence 3 + why it matters:

An important complication / counter-evidence:

Who had more power to define the public story — and whose experience is harder to see?

A strong answer does not have to say “WW1 created New Zealand” or “WW1 did not create New Zealand”. It should explain what changed, what remained, who experienced the changes differently, and what the evidence allows you to claim.

Success criteria · what quality looks like

Historical explanationI explain how and why events / choices connect. I do not just list facts in date order.
EvidenceI use specific verified carriers from different parts of the unit and explain why each piece supports my claim.
Source awarenessI distinguish what a source can establish from what I infer. I notice perspective, provenance and limits.
ComplexityI include at least one real complication, contradiction or piece of counter-evidence instead of forcing the whole war into one simple story.
Identity / powerI explain who had power to shape public ideas of New Zealand identity and where different Māori, Pākehā, Pacific, local or dissenting experiences complicate a single national story.
CurationMy six choices form a deliberate story. I can explain what my exclusions make less visible.
CommunicationMy judgement is clear enough that someone else can follow my reasoning. Presentation supports the history; decoration is not assessed.

Self-check before you submit

□ I used evidence from at least four phases of the unit.

□ My evidence includes something from before 1916 and something from after the fighting stopped.

□ I did not confuse WW1 with WW2 terminology / events.

□ I used at least three specific pieces of evidence in my final judgement.

□ I explained one complication / counter-evidence.

□ I explained at least one source limitation.

□ I can say what my exhibition leaves out and why that matters.

□ I did not claim one “Māori perspective”.

□ I did not treat a memorial as if it records every wartime experience.

Final reflection

Choose one:

You do not have to share personal or whānau military history to complete this reflection.

Research gateways