Social Sciences – Civics, Politics and Philosophy (Years 12–13)
Consultation Feedback Summary
June 2026
Note the survey questions are quite narrow and recorded via sliding scale BUT space is provided to load up additional feedback via PDF and comments
Q5. The pathways visual is helpful for students when choosing subjects.
Disagree to Not applicable / unclear
Responses do not explicitly engage with the pathways visual, which itself suggests limited clarity or usefulness.
Single academic pathway The subject is framed as highly academic and university-oriented, rather than connected to everyday civic participation
Limited pathway recognition There is limited evidence that the curriculum supports diverse civic, social, or applied trajectories.
Broader Social Sciences concern It reflects a broader shift away from the Social Sciences learning area and its purposes, limiting meaningful pathways for learners.
Narrow conception of civic participation Civic participation is primarily framed as formal, institutional, and analytical, with limited recognition of relational, community-based, or dialogic forms of engagement.
Q6. The strands accurately represent the associated knowledge and practice statements.
Strongly Disagree
Responses indicate that the strands do not adequately represent the nature of the discipline.
Key concerns
Narrow dominant framing The strands reflect a narrow, dominant philosophical framing with emphasis on formal logic and textual analysis and lack of recognition of oral, relational or community based ways of knowing.
Inconsistent with Social Sciences This is inconsistent with social sciences, which are characterised by sociocultural and relational ways of knowing and multidisciplinary approaches.
Overly restrictive models The application of "knowledge-rich" and "science of learning" models is restrictive.
Practices as outcomes, not processes Practices are framed rather than explicitly taught, scaffolded, and enacted processes.
Q7. The subject description aligns well with the knowledge and practice statements.
Disagree
There is a strong perceived misalignment between intent and enactment.
Active Vs Abstract
The subject description suggests active citizenship and engagement with society. However, the curriculum is experienced as abstract, text-heavy, and analytical — limited to reading and analysing "heavy" prescribed texts.
Gap in civic engagement
There is a gap between fostering active, engaged citizens and the curriculum's focus on theoretical reasoning, with limited opportunities for student agency or meaningful engagement with contemporary civic challenges.
Inclusion Vs Enactment While Māori and Pacific perspectives are referenced, these are often optional not embedded, and may be presented in generalised or decontextualised ways. This creates inconsistency and risks undermining Tiriti-aligned practice.
Q8. The knowledge and practice statements are appropriate for the intended year level.
Strongly Disagree to Disagree
Highly academic and theory-heavy
The curriculum is described as highly academic and theory-heavy and aligned to tertiary level study with large conceptual gaps.
Overlooking everyday civic life
Positioning the subject primarily as an academic discipline overlooks its role in helping students navigate everyday social and political life.
Significant demands
The curriculum places significant demands on learners without clear pathways to access, and does not adequately account for the diversity of senior students.
Q9. The knowledge and practice statements are sequenced to support progression across pathways.
Strongly Disagree
Limited progression across levels There is little evidence of clear progression across levels or integration across the strands.
Little explicit sequencing of practices There is little explicit sequencing of practices over time, and conceptual development is fragmented and insufficiently scaffolded.
Lack of coherence between phases There are concerns about lack of coherence between curriculum phases and inconsistencies in underlying design approaches.
Uneven knowledge integration Some areas (e.g. formal logic) are highly developed, while others (e.g. Indigenous knowledge systems) are episodic and not progressively built
Q10. Is there any content that is missing or not fully represented?
Sociocultural and disciplinary ways of knowing
Sociocultural perspectives and epistemic diversity. Social sciences approaches such as inquiry and multidisciplinary integration are underrepresented.
Contemporary and local civic contexts
Limited emphasis on local political realities and our relationships within the Pacific. Missing opportunities to engage with current civic issues and challenges.
Māori and Pacific perspectives
Positioned within dominant frameworks rather than as valid knowledge systems and presented in a general way not reflecting local, contextual and diverse nature of the knowledge systems.
Student agency and civic participation
Lack of focus on action, participation, and real-world civic engagement.
Balanced disciplinary framing
Lack of contemporary, applied, and locally grounded knowledge.
Q11. The Year 11–13 subjects are designed to be inclusive and accessible for all students.
Strongly Disagree
Highly academic and abstract
The curriculum is structured in ways that limit flexibility, responsive teaching, or localised curriculum design.
Partial acknowledgement
The clearer structure may support some learners, but overall the subject is not accessible for a wide range of students.
Risk of marginalisation
It privileges written discourse and marginalises oral and relational knoweledge systems. The curriculum does not adequately reflect the diversity of learners and contexts in Aotearoa.
Limited support for active citizenship
It does not support the development of informed, active citizens.
Summary
Narrow disciplinary framing
Eurocentric and academically oriented
Misalignment with social sciences purpose
Overly theoretical and text-heavy
Weak coherence and integration across strands and phases
Limited support for student agency and civic participation
Māori and Pacific perspectives not deeply embedded and optional
Note: Thanks to Social Sciences education experts who contributed to this snapshot.