Sunday, August 8, 2010

The Legacy of Waitangi

Keith Barton sent me a draft copy of what he has written about student’s understanding of the Treaty of Waitangi and it brought up a couple of key things. I had asked students what they thought New Zealand was like in the 1830s and we did an activity to deal with the misconceptions, but I didn’t ask them why they thought the Treaty of Waitangi was signed. Barton has found that when asked cold New Zealand students say it was because Maori wanted peace between the races and the Europeans wanted to rip Maori off. Both positions are overly simplistic and, according to Barton, make learning about the Treaty an unpleasant experience for all. Maori students come out thinking that their ancestors were powerless with no agency (of course there is no recognition that not all Maori did in fact sign the Treaty with this interpretation) and European students are made to feel guilty. All other students didn’t have ancestors there so it really is an irrelevant topic for them.

My students have been making posters on the Treaty of Waitangi and the key differences between translations and Maori and European reasons for signing it. Although we had done a class role-play which highlighted a more complex understanding of the event than the two commonly held assumptions, some of the imagery and that they are producing in their posters would suggest that this was a crucial step requiring some carefully chosen sources and activities. For example, one group’s poster had a Maori and Pakeha hand clasped together; a nice idea by two very able students – but missing the true nature of the event.

There are two ways to get around this. First, talking openly about the fact that we are learning about something controversial which we all recognise is often taught badly has proven quite successful so far. So, I have turned Barton’s short draft article critiquing the way the Treaty is taught into a resource which we will read together with lots of rhetorical questions for us to discuss. Secondly, we have touched on enough sources to expose some of the complexity surrounding this event that when we come to evaluate the posters together with my historical thinking rubric, we will be able to undo some of the damage my lack of knowledge has created. It would have been great to have had the historical thinking discussion before we made the posters – the exercise would have been much more of a learning experience.

No comments: