‘Hei Korowai’ (as a cloak) means that we, as educators and researchers, need to be mindful of Māori aspirations and sensibilities.

· The vertical strands (whenu) of the ethics korowai are identified as knowledge, customs, language and worldviews.

· The horizontal strands woven from the left of the research korowai (iho) reaffirm researcher bonds to the heavens, its principles, its knowledge of universe and beyond, the spiritual realm, and the unspoken beyond.

· The horizontal strands woven from the right (aho) are the strands that belong in the physical now, the reality of day-to-day living and practices … the processes and thoughts that lie within the realm of mankind, including each of our flaws.

· In the spaces where iho, aho and whenu meet and twist and bind are aroha, wairua, whenua and te reo, which are also inextricably intertwined.

I was a little disappointed with my third reflective entry of Kaupapa Maori principles, so I wrote another one. I ended up going back to the first one! So here is the second one. What do you think?

MindLab Week 27 critical reflection: culturally responsive pedagogies

The term ‘kaupapa’ can be associated with almost any organisation with reference to its policy and practices. Kaupapa Māori theory is founded from knowledge that has been built from prior learning, experiences, worldviews, and values and beliefs that have been handed down through the generations. Despite dilution through colonisation, these ideals have survived and continue to inform practice today. Contemporary Kaupapa Māori theory is developed from a foundation of Kaupapa Māori together with mātauranga (wisdom), and papatūānuku (the land).

Kaupapa Māori is literally ‘a Māori way’ of doing things. (Smith, G). In espousing these values, it is:

· Related to ‘being Maori’,

· Connected to Maori philosophy and principles,

· Taking for granted the validity and legitimacy of Maori,

· Taking for granted the importance of Maori language and culture, and

· Concerned with the ‘struggle for autonomy over our own cultural well-being’.

Smith goes further (1990): he states that to be Māori is normal (Taonga tuku iho).This includes the right to use Te reo Māori (the Māori language), matauranga Māori (Maori knowledge), tikanga Māori (Māori custom) and ahuatanga Māori (Māori characteristics) on a daily basis and to have these rights and customs accepted.

The issue for secondary schools is this: how do we adopt these cultural practices within the constraints of curriculum, timetables and a long history of doing organising our schools in a certain way? Sadly, the reality is that the systems we currently use are designed for the majority – who just happen to be European. Politics and educational philosophies tend to be a mirror of each other. Assimilation – the catch-cry of the dominant ethnicity – has been shown to have the potential to undermine the mental, physical, and economic well-being of ethnic minorities. How can we best assure the resilience of our Maori students? The cultural practices of the different ethnicities in New Zealand are not superior or inferior to each other; they are simply different. By being responsive to these differences we can overcome cultural bias.

What does ‘as Maori’ actually mean? In practice this tends to be lofty rhetoric. There is a difference between ‘as Maori’ and ‘of Maori.’ As Dr. Anne Milne states in her presentation, ‘of’ Maori focuses on NCEA results, stand-downs and suspensions. ‘As’ Maori focuses on Maori identity, language and customs. ‘As Maori’ needs to be everywhere, not timetabled twice a week, or when welcoming visitors…Milne talks not of Culturally responsive pedagogies but of Culturally sustaining pedagogies.

As educators, we need to be mindful of the need to:

· respect Māori values and beliefs

· value Māori knowledge

· to design any activity in a way that is acceptable to Māori communities through consultation

· support Māori aspirations.

Linda Smith argues that Western research has been instrumental in the marginalisation of indigenous peoples’ knowledge and as such has contributed in key ways to the maintenance and perpetuation of colonisation. In her hard-hitting book, Smith states that the word ‘research’ is ‘probably one of the dirtiest words in the indigenous world’s vocabulary. The past and and present may be spaces of marginalisation, but it is from these spaces that indigenous researchers are starting to address the wider issues of decolonisation. By taking this viewpoint; to think and act in terms of Kaupapa Māori while experiencing colonisation is to resist domination. Kaupapa Māori, therefore, is transformative.

What is also important is the recognition that Kaupapa Māori theory is not set in concrete; in fact it is very much a fluid and evolving theoretical framework (Smith). It is argued that dominant cultures tend to regard minorities as set in their ways and therefore unchanging; this is, in fact, incorrect. By developing and refining Kaupapa Māori theory, this becomes part of an evolutionary process that is long-term and requires intense reflection in order to grow to face each challenge. Through the process learners and teachers are able to engage more deeply with Māori knowledge, te reo and tikanga Māori.

References:

http://www.katoa.net.nz/kaupapa-maori

Culturally Responsive Practices for Māori Scale (Source: Asil, M. (2017). A School-Based Measure of Culturally Responsive Practices. Frontiers in Education 2(17), 1-7. doi:10.3389/feduc.2017.00017)

Milne, A: Colouring in the white spaces: Reclaiming cultural identity in whitestream schools (CORE Education's ULearn17 conference in Hamilton)

Smith, Graham: The Dialectic Relation of Theory and Practice in the Development of Kaupapa Maori Praxis

Smith, L. T.: Decolonising Methodologies Research and Indigenous People Zed Books 1999

Some really interesting stuff on Kaupapa Māori principles. Here is a precis. I have also included my bibliography if you feel so inclined to delve further into this!

The term ‘kaupapa’ can be associated with almost any organisation with reference to its policy and practices. Kaupapa Maori refers to the foundation, planning, philosophies and educational strategies adopted by educationalists. What makes it unique is that it ascribes to a Māori view of education. It relates to Māori philosophies of the world, to Māori understandings on which beliefs and values are based, together with Māori worldviews and ways of operating.

Kaupapa Māori theory is founded from knowledge that has been built from prior learning, experiences, worldviews, and values and beliefs that have been handed down through the generations. Despite dilution through colonisation, these ideals have survived and continue to inform practice today. Contemporary Kaupapa Māori theory is developed from a foundation of Kaupapa Māori together with mātauranga (wisdom), and papatūānuku (the land).

The idea of Kaupapa Māori is not a recent phenomenon. Samuel Marsden (1765-1838) talks about there being a difference between Māori knowledge and European knowledge; in attempting to inform the listener about Māori knowledge he talks about ‘feeding you with the food contained within the baskets.’ [this is a metaphor for knowledge]. The theoretical assertions of Kaupapa Māori are, however, relatively new. Graham Hingangaroa Smith initially identified the six elements of Kaupapa Māori within the context of educational intervention in 1990. Since then, other theorists such as Linda Smith, Leonie Pihama and Taina Pohatu have expanded on those original elements. Other theorists are now contributing to the growing awareness of the value of adopting Kaupapa Māori methodology in teaching practice. These practitioners include Russell Bishop, Kuni Jenkins, Cheryl Smith and others.

Linda Smith argues that Western research has been instrumental in the marginalisation of indigenous peoples’ knowledge and as such has contributed in key ways to the maintenance and perpetuation of colonisation. In her hard-hitting book, Smith states that the word ‘research’ is ‘probably one of the dirtiest words in the indigenous world’s vocabulary.’ The past and and present may be spaces of marginalisation, but it is from these spaces that indigenous researchers are starting to address the wider issues of decolonisation. By taking this viewpoint; to think and act in terms of Kaupapa Māori while experiencing colonisation is to resist domination. Kaupapa Māori, therefore, is transformative.

What is also important is the recognition that Kaupapa Māori theory is not set in concrete; in fact it is very much a fluid and evolving theoretical framework (Smith). It is argued that dominant cultures tend to regard minorities as set in their ways and therefore unchanging; this is, in fact, incorrect. By developing and refining Kaupapa Māori theory, this becomes part of an evolutionary process that is long-term and requires intense reflection in order to grow to face each challenge. Through the process learners and teachers are able to engage more deeply with Māori knowledge, te reo and tikanga Māori.

In 2010, Te Aho Matua was written by the pioneers of Kura Kaupapa Māori as a foundation document for their kura. Kura Kaupapa Māori are Māori-language immersion schools where the philosophy and practice reflect Māori cultural values with the aim of revitalising Māori language, knowledge and culture. This document provides a philosophical base for the teaching and learning of children. For us, it provides a valuable insight into Maori principles and values. The document is presented in six parts, each part having a special focus on what, from a Māori point of view, is crucial in the education of children for the future. Central to this document is the taha wairua (Spiritual Health) of the ākonga. According to Kaupapa Māori principles, this aspect of the whole being is equal in importance to physical health. Rather than relegating spiritual matters to that of the church and organised religion, taha wairua is a crucial aspect of the culture of the kura.

Bibliography:

http://www.katoa.net.nz/kaupapa-maori

Marsden, Rev Samuel: The Woven Universe. (Edited by Te Ahukaramu and Charles Royal) Te Wananga- o- Raukawa 2003

Pihama, L: Kaupapa Māori Theory: Transforming Theory in Aotearoa

Smith, Graham: The Dialectic Relation of Theory and Practice in the Development of Kaupapa Maori Praxis

Smith, L. T.: Decolonising Methodologies Research and Indigenous People Zed Books 1999

Tākao, N: Te Aho Matua (English translation)

http://whatworks.org.nz/kaupapa-maori/

http://www.rangahau.co.nz/ethics/166/

I found a logic model template which might be of use for you all:

https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/0B648pULHsslcfi1aS3pFckJrTlF1YlAza0lkdU1feThpTGRRNnU1Zk8wNndaVlc2YzdDaUE

English Interpretation of Te Aho Matua o Ngā Kura Kaupapa Māori

Author(s): Nuki Tākao

Date Published: September 2010

Presented in the Māori language, Te Aho Matua has been written by the pioneers of Kura Kaupapa Māori as a foundation document for their kura.

(Kura Kaupapa Māori are Māori-language immersion schools where the philosophy and practice reflect Māori cultural values with the aim of revitalising Māori language, knowledge and culture.)

As such, the document lays down the principles by which Kura Kaupapa Māori identify themselves as a unified group committed to a unique schooling system which they regard as being vital to the education of their children.

Te Aho Matua, therefore, provides a philosophical base for the teaching and learning of children and provides policy guidelines for parents, teachers and Boards of Trustees in their respective roles and responsibilities.

Te Aho Matua is intended for inclusion in the charters of Kura Kaupapa Māori as the means by which their special nature can be clearly identified from mainstream kura.

Te Aho Matua also provides a basis from which curriculum planning and design can evolve, allowing for diversity while maintaining an integral unity.

Te Aho Matua has been written in a typically elliptical Māori style which implies meaning and requires interpretation rather than translation.

Te Aho Matua is presented in six parts, each part having a special focus on what, from a Māori point of view, is crucial in the education of children for the future.

Part 1 – Te Ira Tangata

This part of the document focuses on the nature of humankind, and more particularly on the nature of the child. The Māori, perception of the child is encapsulated in two well-known whakatauaki, or proverbs.

The first, which says, Ahakoa he iti, he mapihi pounamu refers to the singular beauty and immense value of even the tiniest piece of fine greenstone.

There are two related interpretations of the second proverb which says, He kakano i ruia mai i Rangiatea. E kore ia e ngaro. The first interpretation refers to the child as the seed which was dispersed from Rangiātea, the island in the Society Group from which the ancestors of the Māori migrated. The second interpretation refers to the child as the seed which was dispersed from the marae, also named Rangiatea, of the supreme deity, lo‑matua.

The last line in this proverb affirms that the seed will never be lost. This statement implies a strong physical orientation for life, like that of the ancestors who faced the unknown on the high seas in search of a new home. It also implies the certainty of spiritual life since humankind emanated from the marae of Io.

When both proverbs are applied to the child, the nurture and education of that child takes on a significance which is fundamental to Kura Kaupapa Māori philosophy.

The statement which follows the proverbs suggests that the teaching fraternity ought to have full knowledge of the makeup of humankind before an effective system of teaching and learning for children can be devised.

What follows is a statement which presents a Māori perspective as to the origin and nature of the human spirit. It was felt that herein lay one of the answers for recovery from the malaise induced by loss of land, power and sovereignty which has been, and still is for many, the experience of Māori people.

The statement says that the spirits of human beings derive from the Rangi Tuhaha, the twelve dimensions of enlightenment in which spirit entities dwell until physical life is desired and to which spirit entity return after physical death. The inference is that at the moment of conception the physical and spiritual potential of the human being becomes an individual entity endowed with the spirit qualities of mauri, tapu, wehi, mana, and ihi; the spirit receptor–transmitters of whatumanawa, hinengaro, auaha, ngakau and pumanawa and the iho matua, which is the umbilical cord of spirit energy which links that single entity through his ancestral lines to the primal energy source which is Io.

The spirit qualities referred to here can best be described as emanations of energy, the strength or weakness of which is determined by the condition of the receptor–transmitters where feelings, emotions, intelligence, consciousness, conscience and all other non-physical characteristics of human personality dwell.

Most often referred to as taha wairua these aspects of the human spirit are considered as important as physical attributes, not to be dismissed as the domain and responsibility of church or religion, but regarded as an integral part of human personality and, therefore, is responsive to and affected by teaching and learning.

In summary, then, Te Ira Tangata focuses on the physical and spiritual endowment of children and the importance of nurturing both in their education. Kura Kaupapa Māori therefore:

· challenge parents, teachers and trustees to work together in establishing a harmonious, child‑centred learning environment in which care, consideration and co‑operation are acknowledged as necessary elements for the successful operation of the kura for the greatest benefit of its children.

· propose that the role of the kura is all round development of its children rather than career orientation.

· assert that the nurturing of body and soul in a caring environment is the greatest guarantee that children will pursue positive roles in life.

· affirm that affectionate nurturing breeds happy hearts and lithesome spirits and thereby, warm and casing people.

· honour all people regardless of age, creed, colour, gender or persuasion and will not therefore, belittle, resent, hurt or show prejudice toward anyone else.

· honour gender differences and attributes in full understanding that it is in the combined and co‑operative efforts of men and women that the well‑being of children and community is assured.

· respect the physical body and encourage children to pursue habits which guarantee personal health and well‑being.

· respect the physical and spiritual uniqueness of the individual and are therefore mindful of not perpetrating physical or psychological harm against oneself or others.

· affirm that the needs of the spirit are well served through the creative arts of music and song, dance and drama, drawing and painting, prose and poetry and all the activities which give full sway to colour and imagining.

Part 2 – Te Reo

Having established the nature of the child this part of the document focuses on language policy and how Kura Kaupapa Māori can best advance the language learning of their children.

As a natural and logical progression for graduates of Kohanga Reo, a primary focus of Kura Kaupapa Māori is the continuing development of the Māori language of their children. At the same time there exists a particular concern among some parents that the English language skills of their children should also be addressed. The primary language issue for Kura Kaupapa Māori became one of determining how the optimum result could be achieved in the development of both languages.

Indeed, the issue called for considerable research including a review of the literature which described the experiences of other language communities, especially those whose language, like that of the Māori, was experiencing serious decline. The language policies and teaching practices of other nation states, where bilingualism was a valued attribute for citizenship and the learning of a second language in educational institutions was encouraged, provided a rich panorama of experience from which the first Kura Kaupapa Māori could base its language policy.

The principle of total immersion featured in much of the literature, and the published research experiments of Lambert and his associates in the French & English Quebec experience legitimised total immersion as being particularly effective in advancing the French language competence of English speaking children.

So did the research studies of Dr Lily Wong‑Fillmore, Professor of Education, University of California, Berkley, USA, in which a range of second language learning methodologies, being used to teach elementary school children English were compared. Of these, total immersion proved to be significantly more effective.

The Ataarangi and Kohanga Reo initiatives which had preceded Kura Kaupapa Māori by 5 years had already established the effectiveness of total immersion. This then became firm policy for Kura Kaupapa Māori.

In summary, then, Te Reo focuses on bilingual competence and sets principles by which this competence will be achieved. Kura Kaupapa Māori therefore:

· respect all languages.

· expect full competency in Māori and English for the children of their kura.

· insist that legislation for the Māori language is worthless without a total commitment to everyday usage of Māori.

· affirm that total immersion most rapidly develops language competence and assert that the language of kura be, for the most part, exclusively Māori.

· accept that there is an appropriate time for the introduction of English at which time there shall be a separate English language teacher and a separate language learning facility.

· agree that the appropriate time for the introduction of English is a matter for the kura whānau to decide as a general rule, when children are reading and writing competently in Māori, and children indicate an interest in English.

· assert that along with total immersion, bilingual competence is rapidly advanced through discretely separating the two languages and therefore reject the mixing or code switching of the two languages.

· insist that competence in Māori language and culture along with a commitment to the Aho Matua be the hallmark of Kura Kaupapa Māori teachers and parents but that there be accommodation for those who are still in the learning phase.

· believe that where there is a commitment to the language mastery will follow.

Part 3 – Ngā Iwi

Having established the nature of children with respect to their physical, mental, emotional and spiritual needs, and determining the most effective approach to language learning, this part of the document focuses on the social agencies which influence the development of children, in short, all those people with whom they interact as they make sense of their world and find their rightful place within it.

In traditional society whānau was the socialising agency of children and the fragmentation of this fundamental social structure in the urban drift of Māori away from their tribal centres is one of the variables which has contributed to the 'lost generations' of Māoridom.

It seemed immensely desirable that the whānau, which in this context, are all those people associated with the kura and its children, should be established as a fully functioning socialising agency, where each member of the whānau contribute to the education of all of the children. This communal responsibility for all children has to be one of the most positive moves of accommodating single-parent and dysfunctional families whose children are most at risk, while at the same time providing a haven where such families and their children can recover both stability and dignity in their lives.

All people derive from a unique culture which shapes their perception of self as belonging to, participating in, and contributing to the continuum of life. The uniqueness of Māori social structures must therefore be reflected in the entirety of the kura, allowing the children to consolidate their place amongst their own people as the safe ground from which they can begin, with expanding consciousness, to explore the life ways of other people.

Given that these two important factors contribute to the special nature of Kura Kaupapa Māori and are particularly relevant to curriculum, to the functioning of Boards of Trustees, and to the interaction of the kura with its whānau, it follows that teacher training should also be a major consideration for kura.

It cannot be assumed that the graduates of main‑stream teacher training will meet the requirements of kura. In fact kura may need to target potential teachers from within the kura whānau, and to seek a suitable training package which allows such people to qualify as teachers for their kura.

As a further consideration, experience has shown that school size is a significant factor. A small school allows greater whānau participation with all the children. This same participation tends to dissipate as kura get larger. Kura may need, therefore, to set the parameters as to what their ideal population should be in order to fulfil the promise of success for all their children.

In summary then, Ngā Iwi focuses on the principles which are important in the socialisation of children. Kura Kaupapa Māori therefore:

· emphasise the importance of genealogy in establishing links within whānau, hapu, and iwi including iwi Pakeha.

· emphasise the importance for children to know their own ancestral links and to explore their links with other iwi.

· emphasise that children be secure in their knowledge about their own people but learn about and acknowledge other people and their societies.

· emphasise that children study the historical, cultural, political, social, religious and economic events and issues which are an integral part of their Māori heritage.

· emphasise that whānau ties are fundamental in the socialisation of children and is established and reinforced in a caring, supportive environment where aroha is evident.

· assert that such learning is caught rather than taught and is the primary reason for the kura whānau to be close to and involved in the activities of the children.

· emphasise that the association and interaction of the whānau with the children, where whānau approval or disapproval is felt by the children, is also where their sense of appropriate and acceptable behaviour begins.

· value the participation of whānau as administrators, ancillary staff and teacher support as a means of reinforcing the cohesion of whānau and kura.

· affirm that the kura belongs to the whānau and is available for the learning activities of all the whānau members.

· assert that teacher training is a legitimate function of the kura and that aspiring teachers have extended experience in the kura before and during formal training.

· submit that the size of the kura is a factor in facilitating or mitigating against the participation of whānau.

Part 4 – Te Ao

Having established the nature of children, their language learning and the people who influence their socialisation, this part of the document focuses on the world which surround children and about which there are fundamental truths which effect their lives.

Young children are naturally fascinated by every aspect of the natural world which enter their expanding field of experience. The task for the kura whānau is maintaining this fascination and optimising those experiences which contribute to their understanding and appreciation of the natural environment and the interconnectedness of everything within it.

Further to this, children need also to understand that the activities of people, including themselves, can have a detrimental effect on the environment and its resources.

In summary then, Te Ao encompasses those aspects of the world itself which impact on the learning of children. Kura Kaupapa Māori therefore:

· recognise that the learning of children encompasses what enters their field of experience at home, in the Māori world, and in the world at large.

· legitimise Māori knowledge of nature and the universe as an important and integral part of learning.

· encourage children to marvel at and value all life forms, and the balance of nature which gives each of those life forms their right of existence.

· develop in children an understanding that they are caretakers of the environment and are true to the laws of conservation passed down by their Māori forebears, as well as those practices which are environmentally friendly.

· inspire children to explore the natural and cosmic laws of the universe through the sciences and whatever means enhances understanding.

Part 5 – Ahuatanga Ako

Taken altogether, the perception of children being central in an ever expanding world of experience which is accessed through the people with whom they associate and language, the implications for curriculum become evident. This model provides for every aspect of learning which the whānau feel is important for their children as well as the requirements of the national curriculum.

A further and final consideration is how best to achieve this in practice.

Ahuatanga Ako liststhe principles of teaching practice which are considered of vital importance in the education of children. Kura Kaupapa Māori, therefore:

· assert that teaching and learning be a happy and stimulating experience for children.

· practise karakia as a means of settling the spirit, clearing the mind, and releasing tension so that concentration on the task at hand is facilitated.

· value the presence of supportive adults as important participants in the teaching/ learning process.

· emphasise the particular value of concentrated listening as a skill to be thoroughly learned by children.

· encourage the use of body, mind and all the senses in learning; listening; thinking and quiet concentration; visualisation and observation; touching; feeling and handling; questioning and discussing; analysing and synthesising; testing hypotheses; creative exploration.

· adopt teaching practices and principles which accommodate different styles of learning and motivate optimal learning.

· honour kaumatua as the repositories of Māori knowledge and invite their participation as advisors and fellow teachers.

· expose children to the protocols of hospitality in the home, at school and on the marae, and require their participation at cultural functions in roles appropriate to their ages and levels of maturation.

· accept that healthy relationships between brothers and sisters. younger and older siblings. children, parents and elders are the joint responsibility of the kura whānau.

· encourage older children to care for the young ones and to occasionally assist in their learning activities, and younger children to accept the guidance of their older peers.

· emphasise the importance of creating a learning environment which is interesting, stimulating and reflects the Māori world.

· expand the learning environment to include marae, the wide‑open spaces of bush, sea and sky, libraries and museums, and all other places which contribute to learning.

· welcome innovative ways of stimulating the learning of children but encourage self motivation.

· provide for the special interests that individual children may have in the development of self‑directed learning.

· encourage shared and co-operative ways of learning.

Part 6 – Te Tino Uaratanga

Having encapsulated in the foregoing statements the major areas to be considered in the education of children in Kura Kaupapa Māori, a final consideration focuses on what the outcome might be for children who graduate from Kura Kaupapa Māori.

Kura Kaupapa Māori will have in place appropriate measures for assessing and evaluating the achievement of their children at all levels of the national curriculum as well as whatever else the kura decides are valuable areas of knowledge for their children.

This part of the document focuses, however, on the whole person in terms of a fully functioning human being whose personal attributes are recognised, nurtured and brought to fruition.

In summary then, Te Tino Uaratanga defines the characteristics which Kura Kaupapa Māori aim to develop in their children, that they:

· develop free, open and inquiring minds alert to every area of knowledge which they choose to pursue in their lives.

· become competent thinkers, listeners, speakers, readers and writers in both Māori and English.

· advance their individual talents to the highest levels of achievement.

· delight in using their creative talents in all feats of endeavour.

· are receptive to and have a great capacity for aroha, for joy and for laughter.

· are true and faithful to their own sense of personal integrity while being caring, considerate, and co‑operative with others.

· assimilate the fruits of learning into the deeper recesses of consciousness where knowing refreshes the spirit.

· manifest self esteem, self confidence, self discipline and well developed qualities of leadership.

· value their independence and self determination in setting personal goals and achieving them.

· radiate the joy of living.

· manifest physical and spiritual wellbeing through the harmonious alignment of body, mind and spirit.

· are secure in the knowledge of their ancestral links to the divine source of all humanity.

· are high achievers who exemplify the hopes and aspirations of their people.

According to the Katoa Ltd website the potential of Kaupapa Māori is based upon six intervention elements or principles:

1. Tino Rangatiratanga - The Principle of Self-determination

· Tino rangatiratanga is about having meaningful control over one’s own life and cultural well-being.

· This principle is embedded in the Treaty of Waitangi. In signing this Treaty in 1840 the sovereign chiefs of Aotearoa New Zealand sought to protect their taken-for-granted, sovereign rights into the future.

2. Taonga Tuku Iho - The Principle of Cultural Aspiration

· Kaupapa Māori theory asserts a position that to be Māori is normal and taken for granted.

· Te reo Māori (the Māori language), matauranga Māori (Maori knowledge), tikanga Māori (Māori custom) and ahuatanga Māori (Māori characteristics) are actively legitimated and validated.

· This principle acknowledges the strong emotional and spiritual factor in Kaupapa Māori.

· Kaupapa Māori knowledge has its origins in a metaphysical base that is distinctly Māori.

· As Nepe stated, this base influences the way Māori people think, understand, interact and interpret the world.

3. Ako - The Principle of Culturally Preferred Pedagogy

· This principle promotes teaching and learning practices that are unique to tikanga Māori (custom).

· There is also an acknowledgment of ‘borrowed’ pedagogies in that Māori are able to choose their own preferred pedagogies.

· Rangimarie Rose Pere writes in some depth on key elements in Māori pedagogy. In her publication Ako she provides expansive discussion regarding tïkanga Māori concepts and their application to Māori pedagogies.

4. Kia piki ake i ngā raruraru o te kāinga - The Principle of Socio-Economic Mediation

· This principle addresses the issue of Māori socio-economic disadvantage and the negative pressures this brings to bear on whānau (Maori families) and their children.

· This principle acknowledges that despite these difficulties, Kaupapa Māori mediation practices and values are able to intervene successfully for the well-being of the whānau.

· The collective responsibility of the Māori community and whānau comes to the foreground.

5. Whānau - The Principle of the Family Structure

· The whānau and the practice of whanaungatanga (family connectedness) is an integral part of Māori identity and culture.

· The cultural values, customs and practices that organise around the whānau and collective responsibility are a necessary part of Māori survival and achievement.

· There are many examples where the principle of whānau and whānaungatanga come to the foreground as a necessary ingredient for Māori education, Māori health, Māori justice and Māori prosperity.

6. Kaupapa - The Principle of Collective Philosophy

· Kaupapa Māori initiatives are held together by a collective vision and commitment.

· In Māori education, for example, ‘Te Aho Matua’ is a formal charter that has collectively been articulated by Māori working in Kaupapa Māori initiatives.

· This vision connects Māori aspirations to political, social, economic and cultural well-being.

· Likewise in Māori health, a healthy Māori would have be healthy politically, culturally, socially and economically.

I did some initial digging into the definition of 'collaboration' by going into the Core website. Some interesting information here that could be a catalyst for further investigation.

‘Collaboration means working smarter together, rather than harder alone’ (Educational Leaders website, NZ)

What’s it about?

As we move well into the 21st century, collaboration is widely embraced across all areas of our system, from what happens within classrooms between students, to what happens within schools among staff, to what happens between schools and other agencies.

Collaborative approaches are foundational to effective pedagogy in education, as well as in the way schools themselves function in an increasingly networked world. The ability to work effectively with others is a key element of employability and a key desirable outcome of a successful educational system. Those who can work in teams and who can use and promote a ‘collective intelligence’ are often sought-after employees, as well as effective leaders in education and business settings. This means there is a real urgency to learn how to work collaboratively as well as collaborative practice underpinning effective education.

Collaboration is different to cooperation. Collaboration requires working with specific intent, an agreement to a common purpose or goal, and to a common way of achieving that. Fullan (2013[WU1] ) describes the collaborative power of a group as social capital that along with the talent of individuals (human capital) and the wisdom and expertise to make sound judgments about learners that are cultivated over many years (decisional capital) are the anchor stone of professional capital — the capital that is found in countries that are more equal, higher-attaining, healthier in just about every way that counts. Teachers in these countries are nation builders, as they social cohesion, and social justice.

Collaboration is built on a foundation of mutual trust and respect. There is an underpinning expectation of vulnerability and exposing one's own practice to critique and feedback. The focus is generally on improvement, and often some form of critical reflection (formal or informal) supports the development of collective skill and expertise. Through working closely together and working towards a well-understood and aligned vision, members of a team can maximise their efforts. There are explicit and implicit ways of working that value ‘positive abrasion’¹ and encourage diversity of thought and new ideas.

When working collaboratively individuals and whole organisations can more effectively:

· Learn from each other and from different parts of the organisation

· Innovate, prototype, and embed change quickly

· Generalise effective practices and process quickly and effectively

· Avoid repeating errors and ineffective practice

What is driving this?

Our world is becoming more complex, requiring the collective intelligence of the many to address the ‘wicked problems’ we face on a day-to-day basis — most of which are beyond the capacity of any individual. We see this reflected in the way the modern workforce is organised — the work used to be the domain of an individual, now there are teams involved using their respective strengths and abilities, to achieve the common task.

Educational institutions are certainly not exempt. Embracing collaboration must be fundamental to the way these organisations work. It is not sustainable for individual teachers to assume responsibility for the wide range of tasks and roles expected of them in the past – ‘isolated’ in the way they operate with groups of students in individual classrooms. Individual schools cannot continue to operate in isolation, competing for resources, staff, and students. Education into the future must be fundamentally more collaborative at every level.

A second significant driver from an educational point of view is our understanding of collective teacher efficacy (CTE[WU4] ), which refers to a staff’s shared belief that through their collective action they can positively influence student outcomes. With an effect size of 1.57, CTE is ranked as the number one factor influencing student achievement (Hattie, 2016²). According to the Visible Learning Research (Table 1), CTE is beyond three times more powerful and predictive of student achievement than socio-economic status. It is more than double the effect of prior achievement and more than triple the effect of home environment and parental involvement. It is greater than three times more likely to influence student achievement than student motivation, concentration, persistence, and engagement.

What examples of this can I see?

Collaborative activity is growing in several areas of our education sector. Often, they are organisations that reaching into schools as they see that through working together on local, national, and global issues there will be better outcomes for all.

Student-student collaboration

· Passionfruit – a curriculum integration project at secondary school

· Language learning — a collaborative approach supported by technology

Teacher-teacher collaboration

· Strategic planning — describing how the senior leadership team operates at Pakuranga College

· Collaboration and PLD across the Katote Cluster

· Collaborative teaching in a year 5–6 innovative learning environment (video)

School-school collaboration

· Manaiakalani Project — a collaborative education programme achieving significant improvement in student achievement outcomes for 12 mostly decile 1A schools in the Auckland suburbs of Glen Innes, Pt England and Panmure.

School-wide community collaboration

· Grow Waitaha — collaboration between schools, Ministry of Education, local iwi, and professional learner providers that supports schools and learners through the process of change happening in Canterbury

· Communities of learning/Kāhui Ako Learning partnerships forging new collaborative arrangements[WU5] that extend the reach of individual schools to community organisations.

· Sticks and stones Sticks — a student led collaboration focused on taking positive action online to stop both Bullying online or in person.

¹ http://www.leankor.com/10-reasons-team-collaboration-2017-project-management-strategy/

¹ Hattie, J. (2016). Third Annual Visible Learning Conference (subtitled Mindframes and Maximizers), Washington, DC, July 11, 2016.

How might we respond?

The shift to a truly collaborative culture in schools presents significant challenges within a system that has been traditionally very hierarchical[WU6] .

Some questions to act as a stimulus with your colleagues include:

· What examples of student-student collaboration can you identify are happening regularly in your school? Are the skills and dispositions that students need to collaborate successfully identified and explicitly addressed through the school?

· How are staff currently engaged in collaborative approaches to designing and implementing learning programmes in your school? Are they supported to develop the[WU7] skills and dispositions to be successful in this, and to deal with the ‘creative abrasion’ that occurs? Is there a shared understanding of the goals being pursued, and of the protocols and processes for working collaboratively?

· If you are a part of a cluster, how are you working to ensure you are collaborating effectively? What frameworks or supports are you using?

· What opportunities for collaborating with parties outside of your school might be pursued (i.e. parents, businesses, support agencies etc.

http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/policyfunding/leadership/IdeasIntoActionBulletin3.pdf - this site had some great stuff on the development of the concept of collaboration in teaching...

The idea of collaborative learning cultures in teaching is not new[WU8] …

· They date back as far as Willard Waller’s The Sociology of Teaching, published in 1932. It was not until the late 60s, however, that the issue began to receive broad attention.

· The issue of teacher isolation and its effect on school improvement has been explored by Jackson (1968), Sarason (1971), Lortie (1975) and Newmann and Wehlage (1995).

· Rosenholtz (1989) and McLaughlin and Talbert (1993) studied the effect of workplace factors – particularly opportunities for collaborative inquiry – on teaching quality.

· Insights on the characteristics of effective Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) are offered by Little (1990) and by Kruse, Louis, and Bryk (1995).

· The connections between professional learning and student achievement have been studied by Louis, Marks and Kruse (1996), Louis and Gordon (2006) and Leithwood, Louis, Anderson, and Wahlstrom, 2004.

· DuFour, DuFour and Eaker (2004) continue to have a significant impact on putting PLCs into practice beginning with their release of Whatever It Takes: How Professional Learning Communities Respond When Kids Don’t Learn.

· An excellent adjunct to the U.S. literature is a Canadian study, by Coleman and LaRocque (1990), that explores the links between district climate and improvements in both teaching and student achievement.

[WU1]Some really powerful stuff in his writing. I will dig it out to share with you all.

WU4]We need to investigate this further.

[WU5]We could investigate the development of this in terms of collaboration across primary and secondary sectors.

[WU6]How has this shift to a more collaborative approach affected RHS at all levels?

[WU7]What support mechanisms are currently here in order for teachers to collaborate effectively without increasing workload?

[WU8]This provides a really interesting context for the development of the idea of collaboration in teaching.

Some of my research into collaboration has turned up some interesting viewpoints! Michael Fullan, in particular, strikes a note of caution by saying that the focus in collaborative cultures needs to be on the right things, otherwise things can go very wrong! The publication by the Ontario Education Ministry also strikes a note of caution about the concept of collaboration, warning that if we view collaborative learning cultures as just another innovation, we run the risk of losing sight of the intended outcome.

Collaboration

Source 1: “A Framework for Transforming learning in Schools: Innovation and the Spiral of Inquiry

Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper No. 234 2014

Timperley, H Kaser, L Halbert, J

In a truly transformative learning system, there is:

(a) Focus on high quality and high equity

(b) Learners will leave school more curious than when they arrived

(c) Schools will develop active and engaged citizens

HOW this will happen is inconclusive and often contradictory

e.g. disruptive innovation

e.g. focus on improving the quality of teaching

e.g. make systems more accountable (favoured by politicians)

Ideas Into Action: Promoting Collaborative Learning Cultures: Putting the Promise into Practice

Timperley et al propose that through a disciplined approach to collaborative inquiry resulting in new learning and new action, that educators,

learners, their families and involved community members will gain the confidence, the insights, and the mindsets required to design new and

powerful learning systems. This process will indeed transform their schools into more innovative learning environments.

“Even in very challenging situations, we have observed leadership teams transform their settings through engaging in evidence-informed

collaborative inquiry.” (p4)

Source 2: “Leading in a culture of change”

(e-book) Jossey-Bass, 2001

Goleman identifies six leadership styles; two are negative:

· Pacesetting

· Coercive

The remaining four, when utilised effectively by leaders, can be very powerful:

· Authoritative

· Affiliative

· Democratic

· Coaching

when used in the right context.

“Collaborative cultures…are indeed powerful, but unless they are focusing on the right things, they end up being powerfully wrong.”

“The most effective leaders…are those who combine intellectual brilliance with emotional intelligence.”

Source 3: “Promoting Collaborative Learning Cultures: Putting the Promise into Practice.”

Ontario Ministry of Education Winter 2013-14

The case for collaborative learning cultures has been made consistently, but what does it look like? Are we there yet? How can we build networks beyond our own individual walls to embrace – and benefit from – a system-wide collaborative learning culture? And how can we help ensure that the work of educators coming together results not only in more knowledge, but also significantly improved practice in classrooms?

In viewing collaborative learning cultures as a process or practice – or worse, as the latest educational “innovation” – we risk losing sight of the intended outcome: a dramatic improvement in the culture itself that builds teaching capacity and improves student achievement.

The rise of the concept of Professional Learning Communities (PLCs) as Michael Fullan (2006) argues, is a case in point. Fullan hesitates to apply the PLC label, preferring to speak more generally about building collaborative networks. He does this first, because transforming the culture of schools and systems is the key focus, and second, because educators run the risk of simply describing what they are currently doing as a PLC, without realizing that they are not going deep enough. He describes this as a “you-don’t-know-what-you-don’t-know” (Fullan, 2009) phenomenon.

Developing a collaborative learning culture is a process, rather than a destination, and one that requires knowledge, skills and persistence.

I was asked to present my 2018 Spiral of Inquiry to staff this week. Here are the slides that accompanied my spoken words: https://drive.google.com/drive/u/0/folders/1wFWMJOvYcijFXyHPE3pDmOj8iXi1em61