1 Introduction
In Aotearoa New Zealand, the provision of Indigenous-centred initial teacher education (ITE) within the academy is a very recent development, and a response to an increasing demand to prepare teachers for the Te Kura Kaupapa MÄori system of education.1 In this system, the MÄori language is the medium of instruction, underpinned by a philosophy predicated on MÄori knowledge, culture and values as being central. As a movement, Te Kura Kaupapa MÄori represents the realisation of MÄori aspirations for what counts as education, and the rejection of a colonial system that has successfully undereducated MÄori learners for generations.
A brief history of MÄori education within the colonial/neo-colonial context is outlined, in order to understand the significance of what has been achieved
2 Historical Overview of MÄori Education
New Zealand was colonised by the British during the 19th Century. In 1840 some 500 chiefs signed a founding covenant, the Treaty of Waitangi, with the British Crown. The Treaty gave permission for British citizens to enter and settle in New Zealand, and to establish governance, but with the guarantee that tribes would maintain sovereignty over lands, waterways and resources, while also receiving the benefits of British citizenship (Orange, 1987). Since the signing, the Treaty was never honored by the Crown, which has been the source of contention by MÄori tribes ever since (Kawharu, 1989).
From the early 19th century, the first systems of schooling were the mission schools established by Christian missionaries, who Ranginui Walker (2004) describes as the advance guard of colonisation. The missionary schools flourished as the MÄori ardently sought the opportunities the new world offered. In customary society, knowledge acquisition was highly valued. There was a stratified system of learning, where higher forms of knowledge were only accessible to selected authorities, through specialised schools of higher learning called WÄnanga. The success of mission education was due in large measure to MÄori as the language of instruction, which minimised cultural dislocation â in terms of the realities of MÄori lifeways and what they were learning in these schools (Jahnke, 2021). Through the medium of the MÄori language, MÄori people were able to make sense of the scriptures from a MÄori perspective.
However, as far as the missionaries were concerned, education was simply a mechanism for civilising the ânativesâ, which aligned with 19th Century thinking and colonial practice aimed at assimilating indigenous peoples to a âcivilisedâ way of life. By the early years of the 20th century, MÄori language had been banned from the school precincts, MÄori knowledge was outlawed as a result of the 1908 Tohunga Suppression Act, and the school curriculum, imported
In 1981, in response to the urgent need for MÄori language survival, MÄori leaders proposed an educational revolution by establishing early childhood MÄori language immersion centres called Te KÅhanga Reo. Within a year MÄori participation in early childhood soared as Te KÅhanga Reo were established by MÄori communities throughout the country and outside of the State system. The government refused to acknowledge MÄori aspirations and to provide state funding for a separate MÄori system of education, despite MÄori adults contributing to state taxes. But the State was powerless to stem the revolution, and the proliferation of Te Kohanga Reo that sprang up across the nation. Two years later, MÄori education leaders unanimously passed a remit declaring the existing schooling system to be failing MÄori learners, and urged MÄori people to resist and withdraw from State education by establishing an alternative schooling model called Te Kura Kaupapa MÄori, based on the principles underlying Te KÅhanga Reo (Smith, 1991); that is, a system of education for MÄori, by MÄori, predicated on MÄori language, culture and values.
The remit was confirmed by the Waitangi Tribunal2 in 1985 who found that, not only had the Governmentâs education policy seriously harmed the MÄori language, but that the combined effects of these policies on MÄori children rendered them âuneducated by normal standardsâ (Waitangi Tribunal, 1986, p. 1). The Waitangi Tribunal ruled that the education system âis being operated in breach of the Treatyâ and recommended an urgent inquiry into the education of MÄori children (Waitangi Tribunal, 1986, p. 38). The damning outcomes of the Tribunalâs report led to the Government finally agreeing to fund the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system of schooling,3 although with significantly less resources than provided to English medium schools.4
In the intervening years, this alternative system remains a contested space (Tomlins-Jahnke, 2019). State resourcing of Te Kura Kaupapa MÄori remains low in comparison to mainstream schools, and tensions about what counts in the education of MÄori children, in terms of the New Zealand curriculum, also remain contested. Many MÄori parents have opted to send their children
The degree to which the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system offers autonomy, in terms of decisions about what counts in the education of MÄori learners, has led to high levels of achievement and success in gaining relevant qualifications to enter higher education. Graduates of Kura Kaupapa MÄori are a new generation of high achieving ânativeâ speakers of the Te Reo MÄori/MÄori language who are confident, secure in their identity as MÄori, and accomplished in two worlds. Despite their entire education being delivered through the medium of the MÄori language, many Kura Kaupapa MÄori graduates go on to higher education including universities in Great Britain, Canada and the USA, studying diverse disciplines such as law, medicine, fine arts, political studies, and Indigenous development. Studies have found that graduates of Kura Kaupapa MÄori are more likely to complete tertiary qualifications than their peers educated in English medium/mainstream schools (Crooks & Flockton, 2001). Furthermore, the characteristics that underpin MÄori underachievement in mainstream schooling such as high suspension, truancy and dropout rates simply do not exist in Kura Kaupapa MÄori.
The success of Kura Kaupapa MÄori was confirmed by a recently launched report Te Kura Huanui: The Treasures of Successful Pathways, which found that Kura Kaupapa MÄori education provided models of excellence for MÄori education. Key conditions found to be essential for MÄori learners to enjoy and achieve success were:
Mana MÄori motuhake â being MÄori
Tikanga MÄori â ethical practice and customary protocols
Whanaungatanga â relationships and connectedness
Ako â Teaching and Learning
Kanohi Whakakite â leaders as visionaries (Ministry of Education, 2021a).
One of the architects of Kura Kaupapa MÄori, Kathy Dewes, reminds us âin the 1980s MÄori mobilized against the imminent linguistic and cultural extinction ⦠Forty years later we are grateful the government was now acknowledging that MÄori could do it for themselvesâ (Wiltshire, 2021).
The grassroots revolution in MÄori schooling that emerged in the 1980s was also a revelation in the mindset of MÄori leaders and educationalists, and their resistance to State oppression in favor of transformative action. And it is this legacy, this mindset of transformative action and vision, that is the inspiration and motivation behind the development of an alternative Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE programme.
3
Offering MÄori-centred ITE programmes within the Academy, where MÄori educators decide what counts in the preparation of graduate teachers for Kura Kaupapa MÄori, requires an alternative model of provision to that of the standard ITE programmes offered by tertiary providers. At Massey University two MÄori ITE Programmes are offered by the School of MÄori Studies and not, as is the usual practice, by the Institute of Education. The situatedness of the programmes within a MÄori-centred academic environment is purposeful and political. The MÄori education faculty need to control how the programmes are provided to MÄori communities, within the boundaries of state legislation and university regulations. Furthermore, to maintain the integrity of the programmes and to ensure the safety of the MÄori faculty, the programmes need to be located where the MÄori language, culture, values and ways of being are norms taken for granted, such as within a MÄori studies department. Outside of these conditions, the MÄori faculties located in mainstream departments risk exposure to institutional bias and Eurocentric attitudes (Kidman & Chu, 2015), thereby creating more barriers to establishing MÄori-centred qualifications. In Aotearoa New Zealand, university-based Indigenous degree programmes are extremely rare. The barriers to accepting Indigenous disciplines as legitimate for stand-alone qualifications remain deeply embedded in Eurocentric imperatives. They are imperatives whereby Indigenous knowledge is subject to the wider politics associated with western hierarchies of knowledge â what counts as valid knowledge? Whose knowledge counts, who decides, and on what basis? And central to the academy, as Foucault (1980) argues, relates to what discourses can be expressed about knowledge; who can speak, when can they speak, and with what authority?
The development and provision of alternative Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE programmes draws on the experiences of university-based MÄori academics collaborating in partnership with school principals and leading teachers of Kura Kaupapa MÄori. Drawing on practitioner approaches and experiences, what was found to work successfully was the model centred on establishing authentic partnerships between the MÄori community and the academy. Furthermore, the transformation of ITE in the preparation of graduate teachers for the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system required the university taking into account the aspirations of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori community, that their children are educated through the medium of the MÄori language.
We cannot have a sustainable socio-economic revolution within MÄori communities without a prior or simultaneous education revolution.
Such a revolution must build on our own models of transformation that appropriately respond to our aspirations to engage with the whole world while simultaneously growing our cultural and iwi citizenship responsibilities. (G. H. Smith, 2015, p. 6)
The Kura Kaupapa MÄori system of education remains seriously under-resourced by the Government, so staffing and resource capacity at all levels are a constant challenge (Ministry of Education, 2019). After all, compared with over 170 years of mainstream English medium education, Te Kura Kaupapa MÄori have been in existence for a mere forty years. Until recently, the teaching workforce comprised fluent MÄori-speaking teachers trained in mainstream ITE programmes, and teacher supply has become an increasing challenge. Currently there is a small pool of expert practitioners leading the field as principals and lead teachers. At Massey University, access to these experts for the development of Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE has been achieved through a professional partnership and collaboration with Te RÅ«nanga Nui o NgÄ Kura Kaupapa MÄori o Aotearoa (TRN). TRN is a council of expert lead teachers and principals including the original architects and pioneers of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system. They advocate on behalf of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori sector, with the Government and other agencies, on all matters to do with state education policy, procedures and practices.
An initial approach by the MÄori faculty to the TRN leadership in 2009 sought assistance to co-construct an ITE programme for Kura Kaupapa MÄori. This approach was based on the assumption that as practitioners and architects of the system, TRN were the experts with long experience working in the sector, transforming whole communities through Kura Kaupapa MÄori education. And without their combined level of expertise, experience, knowledge and skills, a programme that made sense to the Kura Kaupapa MÄori sector could not be achieved.
From the outset, an authentic collaborative partnership was forged which proved to be integral to conceptualising and co-constructing two Kaupapa MÄori immersion ITE programmes over the course of a decade. This was achieved through strengthening relationships with participating Kura Kaupapa MÄori, their learners and the wider community, including local tribal networks. The MÄori faculty capitalised on the unique learning management systems and structures of the university, where changes were sought by the administration to accommodate a preferred MÄori-centred approach to programme delivery.
The community partnership method for delivering Kura Kaupapa MÄori immersion ITE programmes within the academy is a pragmatic and positive solution to the preparation of graduate teachers for the Kura Kaupapa MÄori
Since the 1980s the provision of MÄori medium ITE evolved as part of the national growth of MÄori teacher education within Colleges of Education. The Kura Kaupapa MÄori programmes however, are purposely situated within the multidisciplinary research and teaching environment of MÄori Studies. Underpinning this model are at least six key principles that characterise the strength of the programmes as a necessary alternative, and which contribute to student success, but also transform the lives of the graduates, their families and their communities. So, what are the factors or key principles that have contributed to the success of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE model of provision?
The first is the principle of partnership which was established between the university and TRN and remains a key to the success of the programmes. For the university, the relationship with TRN is paramount in terms of the authenticity of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE programmes that have been co-constructed collaboratively, and the acceptability by the MÄori community of such programmes being university based. There remains deep distrust among the MÄori community of MÄori programmes that are located within a university, particularly with the assimilatory agenda such institutions support, the power and control they wield over what knowledge counts, and the Eurocentric systems they support and perpetuate (Tomlins-Jahnke, 2019).7 An important factor for the TRN supporting the university is the strong relationship that has been built up over many years. Paradoxically, many of the TRN members
The second principle is that of the Te Reo MÄori/MÄori language which is applied as the language of instruction for every course in the programmes. There is a correlation between pedagogy and practice relevant to Kura Kaupapa MÄori in the preparation of teachers for the sector. Despite programme entry criteria requiring fluency in the MÄori language, extending proficiency is a major emphasis. The assumption is that the Te Reo MÄori/MÄori language is the most relevant medium through which core values are best communicated, and the curriculum, based on MÄori knowledge and culture, are understood. The programmes provide intensive MÄori language learning grounded in MÄori values and perspectives, as expressed through the philosophy of Te Aho Matua. Preparation of graduate teachers includes Kaupapa MÄori pedagogical practices that also take account of tribal variances in dialect, customs and traditions that are practiced within the various Kura Kaupapa MÄori. Over the duration of their study, students are exposed to a range of MÄori language experts, teaching professionals and linguists.
The third principle is the application of Te Aho Matua, the philosophical and theoretical foundation of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system. It is the only philosophy of education to emerge from Aotearoa New Zealand. Te Aho Matua is legislated by the government (Education Act 155A Te Aho Matua) and TRN are attributed as the guardians. All Kura Kaupapa MÄori must subscribe to this philosophy, and it is what differentiates Kura Kaupapa MÄori from any other type of school. Te Aho Matua is embedded within the curriculum of the programmes in order to orient students in their development as graduate teachers, and in their preparation for teaching in Kura Kaupapa MÄori settings. An underlying assumption of Te Aho Matua is that quality teaching occurs when teachers are culturally competent within the MÄori world, are self-aware and critically reflective of their practice and role within the kura/school, with the learners, their whÄnau/families, hapÅ«/subtribe, iwi/tribes, and within other national and global contexts. Thus, curriculum planning, design and co-construction of every course within the programmes reflect Te Aho Matua.
The fourth principle of access and participation is applied by offering the programmes through mixed modality; that is online via the universityâs
The fifth principle of field-based support is applied at the point of selection and entry when students are assigned a kura hÄpai, or host school. Kura hÄpai volunteer to host students for the duration of their studies, thereby providing the benefits of a professional and family-centred environment. Some students are rural based, often with limited or no access to the internet, so in these instances kura hÄpai provides students with access to computer and video conferencing facilities. Teachers in kura hÄpai also offer students professional support and mentoring. This arrangement is a key facet of field-based delivery which serves to ensure the retention of students studying at a distance. Strong support for students from their kura hÄpai contributes to their retention, and to students successfully completing their programme of study.10
The sixth principle is that of quality and excellence. Besides the regular university systems for ensuring quality assurance and excellence, a Board of Studies called Te Pae Aho was established, with a critical role of overseeing quality assurance and excellence in terms of Kura Kaupapa MÄori ITE, MÄori language proficiency, and the governance of the programme in accordance with MÄori customs and values. It was also a strategy to protect the programmes from institutional interference. The Board comprises renowned, high profile, expert elders and retired university faculty members, who are not only cognisant of MÄori immersion education because they are also pioneers of Kura Kaupapa MÄori,
4 Conclusion
Developing and implementing Kaupapa MÄori ITE programmes has been complex and challenging. Complex because the programmes are taught through the medium of the MÄori language, in collaboration with a community organisation, and where all the courses are written in MÄori, which has posed challenges for university administrators, systems and processes that are typically Eurocentric. The programmes require specialist expertise of the university faculty who are fluent speakers of the MÄori language, who have taught in Kura Kaupapa MÄori as past principals and/or lead teachers. The Adjunct Faculty are specialist community-led experts from TRN. Within the university, the programmes are purposely located in the School of MÄori Studies, rather than at the Institute of Education, where mainstream ITE programmes are typically based. This can be problematic for an institution where perceived duplication may be present, and where there is often little understanding of the differences between western English medium ITE versus indigenous/MÄori medium ITE.
The combined effects of the mixed mode delivery of distance ITE courses in the MÄori language, aimed at the preparation of graduate teachers for the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system of education from within a western research-led university, ultimately results in various levels of contestation in terms of complying with, and adapting to, university structures and processes, some of which are often in opposition to Kaupapa MÄori practices (Tomlins-Jahnke, 2019). These challenges have led to the development of unique structures, for example the programme design, and processes such as student selection, that are specifically tailored for Kaupapa MÄori ITE. This outcome has been achieved through being independent of Eurocentric imperatives in the provision of ITE, and by adhering to a set of principles in the implementation of an alternative Kaupapa MÄori model of teacher education.
The overall vision for the future of MÄori education ultimately lies with positive outcomes for all MÄori families. These are families who are self-managing, they are MÄori speaking, especially within the home, they live healthy lifestyles and participate fully within society. Our families will confidently participate in the MÄori world, within the wider society and global contexts. They will be economically secure as cohesive, resilient, and nurturing family units.
The demographic projections to 2050 indicate a browning of the Aotearoa New Zealand nation, where the populations of MÄori and Pacifica peoples are
The preparation of teachers for Kura Kaupapa MÄori is critical for the future sustainability of this alternative system of education. Among the strategic goals identified by esteemed MÄori leader and past Deputy Pro Vice Chancellor of Massey University, Professor Sir Mason Durie, in terms of the general direction of MÄori education in the future, is ensuring the fulfillment of MÄori potential by accepting student interests and aspirations as central to learning, and how educational systems are constructed (Durie, 2002). And when MÄori potential is realised, as we are finding in the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system, we can expect all MÄori students to be successful, to be equipped for a changing environment they can contribute to, and from which they gain benefits. This means they will be skilled in understanding, negotiating, and shaping a changing world. They will be well prepared to live and work successfully in a high-tech society. They will be passionate about learning, excited by discovery and undaunted by change (Durie, 2005).
Like the graduates of the Kura Kaupapa MÄori system of education, MÄori students will want to be MÄori, they will want to engage in the MÄori world, to speak the MÄori language, and utilise cultural references throughout their learning. MÄori success will be the norm, and there will be zero tolerance for students not reaching their potential.
Acknowledgments
This paper is based on keynote given into this IPED-project 16 April, 2021.
Notes
The two systems of education in Aotearoa New Zealand are Kura Kaupapa MÄori or Maori language immersion schools, and English medium mainstream schools.
The Waitangi Tribunal is a permanent commission of inquiry established by an Act of Parliament in 1975. The Tribunal investigates and makes recommendations on claims brought by the Maori regarding actions or omissions of the Crown since 1840, that breach the promises made in the Treaty of Waitangi.
See for example the Te Kohanga Reo Waitangi Tribunal Claim (WAI 2336) to address, among others, increasing operational funding and guaranteeing pay equity for teachers of Te KÅhanga Reo. In February 2022 Te RÅ«nanga Nui o ngÄ Kura Kaupapa (TRN) filed an urgent Waitangi Tribunal claim alleging the Crown had breached the Treaty in its obligations to Kura Kaupapa MÄori. The claim sets out, among others, that Kura Kaupapa MÄori are prejudicially affected by acts and omissions of the Crown legislation, policy and regulatory frameworks.
As of July 2021 2.8% of the total school population were enrolled in MÄori medium education (Ministry of Education, 2023).
MÄori medium refers to various levels of teaching through the medium of MÄori language, from bilingual classrooms in mainstream schools to full immersion classes in Kura Kaupapa MÄori.
Many Kura Kaupapa MÄori Principals and their communities were not supportive of TRN partnering with a mainstream university to deliver ITE programmes aimed at producing graduate teachers for their sector due in large part to the history and struggle of establishing and maintaining Kura Kaupapa MÄori. Personal Communication, Whaiti Chair, TRN 2012.
Personal Communication, TRN members.
Contractual Agreement between Massey University and Te RÅ«nanga Nui o NgÄ Kura Kaupapa MÄori o Aotearoa. Minutes of Toi Kura Meetings held from 2012â2021 attended by TRN adjunct faculty.
Graduate Destination records show high percentages of students who return to their kura hÄpai as full-time teachers were closely nurtured and supported by their kura hÄpai throughout their study in the programme.
References
Crooks, T., & Flockton, L. (2001). Assessment results for MÄori students, 2000. Music. Reading and speaking. Aspects of technology. EARU. University of Otago. Educational Assessment. Research Unit. https://nemp.otago.ac.nz/PDFs/collated_PDFs/NEMP_20_Maori_Students_2000.pdf
Durie, M. (2002). The parameters of Maori development. Paper presented at the Contesting Development, Conference of the Aotearoa New Zealand Development Studies Network, Palmerston North.
Durie, M. (2005). Creating the space. Secondary futures activity report. Wellington.
Education Act 155A Te Aho Matua. Parliamentary Counsel Office Wellington. Wellington. https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1989/0080/latest/DLM182448.html#:~:text=Te%20Aho%20Matua%20is%20a,schools%20designated%20under%20section%20155
Foucault, M. (1980). Language, counter-memory, practice: Selected essays and interviews. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Jahnke, H. T. (2021). Indigeneity and higher education: A Maori perspective and experiences developing kaupapa Maori education initiatives within the Academy. Virtual keynote address to University of Lapland. Online workshop Arran - the achievements, advancement and recognition of Sami education. https://www.ulapland.fi/loader.aspx?id=3090573d-6506-4cfa-91a0-98fdbe1ba0e8
Kawharu, I. H. (Ed.). (1989). Waitangi. Maori & Pakeha perspectives of the Treaty of Waitangi. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
Kidman, J., & Chu, C. (2015). MÄori scholars and the university. Victoria University of Wellington. https://maramatanga.devr.net/sites/default/files/project-reports/Kidman%20Chu%20Fernandez%20Abella-%20Maori%20Scholars%20Final%20report%202015.pdf
Ministry of Education. (2019). Summary of education portfolio budget 2019 initiatives. Wellington: NZ Government.
Ministry of Education. (2021a). Te Kura Huanui: The treasures of successful pathways. Wellington: NZ Government.
Ministry of Education. (2021b). Education counts. Wellington: NZ Government.
Ministry of Education. (2023). MÄori language in schooling. Wellington: New Zealand Government. https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/statistics/maori-language-in-schooling
Orange, C. (1987). The Treaty of Waitangi. Wellington: Allen & Unwin.
Smith, G. (1991). Reform and Maori cducational crisis: A grand illusion. Monograph No: 3. The University of Auckland.
Smith, G. H. (2015). He kupu whakataki. Foreword. In G. H. Smith, R. Tinirau, A Gillies, & V. Warriner (Eds.), He Mangopare amohia. Strategies for Maori economic development (pp. 6â9). Whakatane, New Zealand: Te Whare Wananga a Awanuiarangi.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies. Research and Indigenous peoples. London & New York: Zed Books Ltd.
Tomlins Jahnke, H. (2003). Ko te Amorangi ki mua: Profile of MÄori dducation in Ngati Kahungunu & Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Matauranga plan 2003â2005. Hastings: A report to the Ministry of Education for Ngati Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated.
Tomlins-Jahnke, H. (2011). Colonial theories of the state: MÄori/state relations. In H. Tomlins-Jahnke & M. Mulholland (Eds.), Mana tangata: Politics of empowerment (pp. 13â43). Wellington: Te whÄnau o HUIA.
Tomlins-Jahnke, H. (2019). Contested spaces: Indigeneity and epistemologies of ignorance. In H. Tomlins-Jahnke, S. Styres, S. Lilley, & D. Zinga (Eds.), Indigenous education: New directions in theory and practice (pp. 83â102). Alberta: Alberta University Press.
Waitangi Tribunal. (1986). Report of The Waitangi Tribunal on The Te Reo Maori claim (Wai 11). Wellington New Zealand.
Walker, R. (2004). Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou:Struggle without end. Revised edition. Auckland: Penguin Books.
Wiltshire, L. (2021, July 8). New report highlights success of MÄori-medium education for rangatahi. Stuff. https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/125680056/new-report-highlights-success-of-morimedium-education-for-rangatahi