NZHTA Special Pānui 29 October
29 October 2025
Tēnā koe Minister Stanford,
We acknowledge the early and constructive involvement of the New Zealand History Teachers’ Association (NZHTA) in the Ministry of Education’s refresh of the Social Sciences learning area. Dr Bronwyn Houliston contributed history-specific expertise as part of the Social Sciences Contributing Group, representing NZHTA during the initial stages of redevelopment.
However, this collaboration did not continue. Subsequent drafts were developed without consultation or input from the Contributing Group, and NZHTA has not been meaningfully engaged in the curriculum draft released today. Dr Houliston’s contributions to the curriculum development process are not reflected in the current draft.
NZHTA has serious concerns about the Social Sciences Curriculum draft released today. Our initial concerns are as follows:
● The Ministry has interpreted ‘knowledge rich’ in the Social Sciences to mean ‘knowing lots of facts’. A ‘knowledge-rich’ curriculum in the Social Sciences should build conceptual understanding through rich case studies and content. The draft released today lacks this focus, offering factual content without the necessary conceptual, or contextual, depth.
● The replacement of curriculum strands with the domains of History, Civics and Society, Geography, and Economic Activity, risks fragmenting the Social Sciences and undermining Social Studies as a cohesive subject. Replacing conceptual strands with disciplinary domains and a high level of prescribed content, will make developing integrated units for teaching extremely challenging.
● The volume of prescribed material at each year level is unmanageable within the time allocated to the Social Sciences in schools (from 2027, 1 hour per week for Years 0-8 and 3 hours per week for Year 9-10 as recommended by the newly released Te Mātaiaho). The history domain alone would require unprecedented resourcing.It is unclear how the Ministry intends to resource such explicit prescribed content. To date NZHTA has had no discussions with the Ministry regarding the resourcing of the new curriculum.
● The draft curriculum prioritises breadth over depth. For example, the chunking of New Zealand history into large chronological timeframes such as ‘New Zealand 1840-1914’ (Year 9) will result in surface level study. Asking Year 7 students to study Te Tiriti o Waitangi and 1852 Constitution Act, the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution in one academic year is unrealistic and developmentally inappropriate. The sheer amount of content included in the Social Sciences curriculum draft will lead to cognitive overload for students and teachers alike.
● The curriculum follows a rigid chronological structure to the detriment of the learning that would take place. It does not recognise that some historical events are more complex than others. For example, the origins of World War One are much more complex and conceptually based than those of World War Two, yet they are to be taught in Year 9 due to the chronological sequencing of the curriculum.
● The curriculum draft leaves little space for teachers to adapt teaching and learning to meet the needs of their students and local contexts. This will lead to a fundamental shift in teacher practice through this less flexible and more prescriptive approach.
NZHTA has worked constructively with the Ministry of Education as a Network of Expertise, supporting teachers with resources for the Aotearoa New Zealand Histories Curriculum and earlier versions of the refreshed Social Sciences Curriculum.
We are committed to collaborating with the Ministry of Education to ensure future curriculum development is grounded in disciplinary knowledge and pedagogical best practice. We believe Aotearoa New Zealand has the subject expertise needed to achieve this and strongly urge meaningful engagement with the Social Sciences teaching community and subject associations in reviewing and redrafting the curriculum to ensure it is fit for purpose.
Ngā mihi,
Craig Thornhill
NZHTA Chairperson