: Te Rä o ANZAC
Loading Images

Approach: Team 
Focus:   Planning information gathering and appropriate questions
Resources:  E 2 ngä whärangi whakautu A4; whärangi whakautu A3; käri tohutohu mä te röpü; käri pätai mä te takirua; pene miramira
Kupu:
Questions/instructions: 
I tënei mahi, ka äta whakaaro koutou mö te rangahau i te rä whakamaumahara o ANZAC. Tuatahi, ka whakawhitiwhiti whakaaro koutou mö te rä o ANZAC. Tuhia ö koutou whakaaro me ö koutou möhiotanga katoa mö te rä o ANZAC.
Hoatu te whärangi whakautu A3 me te pene.
Tuhia ö koutou möhiotanga katoa mö te rä o ANZAC ki tënei pepa. Tuhia ngä whakaaro katoa. Anei ëtahi tohutohu.
Pänuitia te käri tohutohu ki te röpü. Tukuna he wä mahi.
Inäianei, ka mahi takirua koutou ki te whiriwhiri he aha atu ngä körero mö ANZAC hei rangahau mä koutou. Tuhia ëtahi pätai rangahau e whä. Käore koutou i te möhio ki ngä whakautu mö ënei pätai. Anei ëtahi tohutohu.
Pänuitia te käri tohutohu (takirua) ki te röpü.
E rima meneti hei whiriwhiri, hei tuhi i ä koutou pätai.
Whakaritea ngä röpü takirua – ngä äkonga 1, 2; ngä äkonga 3, 4. Hoatu he whärangi whakautu ki ia takirua, he pene räkau, he käri tohutohu hoki. Tukuna kia 5 meneti hei mahi i tënei kaupapa.
Inäianei ka mahi ä-röpü anö koutou. Mä ia takirua e whakaatu, e pänui hoki ä räua pätai e whä. Kätahi ka äta whiriwhiri i ngä pätai tino pai rawa atu hei äwhina i tä koutou mahi rangahau mö ANZAC. Whiriwhiria kia toru anake ngä pätai, ka miramira ai ki te pene miramira nei.
Hoatu he wä hei whiriwhiri mä te röpü i ngä pätai e toru.
Tënä pänuitia mai ä koutou pätai e toru.
 
% responses
Brainstorm process:
Involvement –
all members contributed substantially
42
3/4 or 2/3 members contributed substantially
33
1/4, 1/2 or 1/3 members contributed substantially
25
Acceptance –
all ideas received constructively
75
majority of ideas received constructively
8
half or less of ideas received constructively
17
Rejection –
no member has all or most of their ideas rejected
83
one member had all or most of their ideas rejected
17
two or more members had all or most of their ideas rejected
0
Selection of final three questions:
Collaboration –
decisions made by consensus, involving constructive dialogue
0
decisions made by consensus, quick agreement without much discussion
67
decisions made without consensus, through initiative of one or two members
25
decisions made after disagreement, with disagreements clearly not resolved (at least one person unhappy about decision)
8
Questions selected:
First Question –  
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
25
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
67
gave irrelevant information or information already available in brainstorm
8
Second Question –
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
33
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
58
gave irrelvant information or information already available in brainstorm
8
Third Question –
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
8
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
83
gave irrelvant information or information already available in brainstorm
8

Commentary:
Generally, the discussion process required for the successful completion of this task was conducted effectively by the students. The final questions selected by the groups were mainly questions that would give relevant new information but were likely to be limited to simple factual questions (when, who, what, etc.) rather than questions that would give richer information (how, why, if, etc.)
 
Loading Images