Each trip includes easy-reading and standard-level background pages. Students build enough knowledge to ask real questions before the field trip content begins.
Shelley filmed daily diaries at Scott Base and in the field. Students travel with her — to sea ice camps, research huts, and the Dry Valleys — through her eyes and her camera.
Live and recorded conversations with Antarctic researchers. Students submitted questions and got direct answers from scientists doing real work at the time. The recordings are in the archive.
Each trip includes activities, quizzes, and structured inquiry tasks linked to the NZ Curriculum. Use the resources as a class, in groups, or for independent inquiry.
Antarctica is 5,000 kilometres away. What students saw and heard there still affects everything that happens here. What is the connection between Antarctic ice and the weather outside your classroom window today?
| Level | Years 3–6 | Years 7–10 | Years 11–13 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | I can describe one thing I saw or heard in the LEARNZ resources that I couldn't have learned from a book or a picture. | I can describe the key scientific work taking place in Antarctica and explain why that work requires scientists to be there in person. | I can characterise the scientific questions being investigated at Scott Base and explain why Antarctic field conditions are essential to answering them. |
| 2 | I can explain one connection between what happens in Antarctica and something that affects my life in New Zealand. | I can explain how changes in Antarctic sea ice connect to global climate systems and identify the specific mechanisms the LEARNZ scientists described. | I can construct an account of Antarctica's role in global climate regulation and identify where the science is well-established and where genuine uncertainty remains. |
| 3 | I can say one thing AI told me about Antarctica and whether it matched what I saw and heard in the LEARNZ resources. | I can identify where AI's account of Antarctic climate science matched what LEARNZ scientists described and where AI generalised or omitted what direct expert testimony provided. | I can critically evaluate AI's account of Antarctic climate science against the LEARNZ scientists' own descriptions of their work, identifying points of accuracy, oversimplification, and absent nuance. |
| 4 | I can explain why watching a scientist do real work in Antarctica gave me something different from reading about it. | I can explain what access to real scientists doing real work in real conditions adds to understanding that textbooks and AI-generated summaries cannot provide. | I can articulate the epistemological difference between AI-synthesised climate knowledge and the direct scientific testimony available through the LEARNZ archive — and explain the evidential weight of each. |
| 5 | I can say one question I have about Antarctica now that I didn't have before I started the LEARNZ trip. | I can identify a scientific or environmental question raised by the LEARNZ resources and propose what investigation would be needed to answer it. | I can propose a research question arising from the LEARNZ material, identify appropriate primary and secondary sources, and explain what a well-evidenced answer would contribute to understanding Antarctica's role in global climate systems. |
The International Antarctic Centre, Ōtautahi Christchurch companion protocol covers ten curriculum-aligned programmes across Social Science, Science, and Environmental Conservation. Use this protocol to build context before the visit, or to extend inquiry after it.