MAORI SCIENCE EDUCATION

Issues of knowledge, language and identity

Dr Elizabeth McKinley, Parehau Richards and Georgina Stewart

School of Education

University of Waikato

PB3105

Hamilton

Aotearoa[1] New Zealand

DRAFT ONLY: not to be copied or quoted without the permission of the author

Paper presented at the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, Vancouver, Canada, 1-3 April 2004.

In the last decade in Aotearoa New Zealand there has been considerable attention directed towards increasing the achievement, participation and involvement of the indigenous Mäori[2] peoples in science and science education. For example, in the past few years there have been curricula and science education resources written in te reo Mäori (the Mäori language), seminars and conferences on the topic have been initiated, science specific scholarships and professional science associations for Mäori have been formed, and support and mentoring programmes have been initiated in universities and high schools. This concern of under-representation of various indigenous groups in science and science education is not a new one nor is it just a local issue (see McKinley, Waiti & Bell, 1992; Pomeroy, 1994). However, despite the concerted efforts of a growing number of people in science and science education all over the world, the scientific community remains relatively unchanged. Current targeting has not resulted in a significant increase in numbers of Mäori students succeeding in science education so that they can pursue careers in science. However, not all Mäori groups are interested in producing scientists who just happen to be ‘Mäori’.

Mäori tribal groups, or iwi, who have resources, mainly returned to them through Treaty of Waitangi[3] claims, want to develop them in a way that will benefit the iwi economically, socially, spiritually and physically. For many tribal organizations, they wish to be able to deal with scientists who are aware of the cultural aspects pertaining to the tribe’s assets. Many science organizations have responded by employing Mäori liaison people, or ‘culture brokers’, who can interface between tribes and the organization. However, the culture brokers are often people who do not have a science background. In addition, there are few scientists who identify as Mäori - approximately 3.5% of all scientists in Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) (McKinley, 2003). Mäori participation and achievement in science education is essential for Mäori participation and full engagement in science generally. The national education authorities in Aotearoa New Zealand have employed a number of strategies that have not met with much success (for a fuller account see McKinley, 1997). I have argued elsewhere that science education needs to incorporate the aspirations of Maori for greater engagement and for Mäori futures generally (McKinley, 1996, 1997). However, the inclusion of cultural identity and knowledge is a complex issue and it has yet to be fully acknowledged and developed by science education curriculum initiatives and research. The issue of identity, language and knowledge are inextricably tied together.

This paper is based on a current exploratory research project being carried out in English and Mäori medium schools, investigating the experiences of Mäori students, their teachers, and whänau (family) or caregivers. It also explores the role and influence of an Iwi Education Partnership between an iwi (tribal grouping) and the Ministry of Education (MoE) on education initiatives being carried out in schools in their rohe (tribal boundaries). The paper will focus on the exploration of the teaching of science in te reo Mäori (Maori language) and an Iwi Education Partnership. Both initiatives are strategies that include Mäori knowledge and/or language as an integral part of their programmes. These can be seen as attempts to develop Mäori student’s participation and achievement in education through enabling them to keep their identity as an integral part of their learning and not as something that is added to it. Whilst in their early stages, it is argued that they have the potential to be more successful than previous strategies.

Mäori involvement in science and science education

The reasons for the interest in cultural diversity and science education as stated by scientists, science educators, government and industrial leaders in Aotearoa New Zealand are consistent with trends in the literature from overseas. Three arguments have been forwarded that relate specifically to science and science education in the current political climate (see for example, Ministry of Research, Science and Technology, 1994; Ministry of Research, Science and Technology and Ministry of Education, 1992; Ministry of Education, 1993, 1994). First, there is a growing disparity between the Mäori demographics of the population as a whole and these demographics within the scientific institutions at all levels. A number of writers have argued that there is a lack of policy makers, agenda setters and researchers worldwide who can adequately represent the increasingly diverse array of interests and needs in our society (Harding 1994; Kawagley, 1995; Krugly-Smolska, 1996). Secondly, there has been a general failure of the system to produce students who are scientifically literate. Some writers see scientific literacy as increasingly important in a world that is becoming more dependent on science and technology, especially as central elements in modern 'Western' culture's self-understanding and self-interpretation processes (Haraway, 1997). And lastly, there is the argument of every person's participation and contribution towards the development of the society in which they live. It is recognised by Mäori generally that science and science education is critical to Mäori development and as such these arguments are accepted.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, Mäori groups also have an interest in increasing the participation and involvement of Mäori in science and science education. However, the reasons for doing so differ in part from those generally accepted in the literature. The arguments proffered are often related to and centre on issues of justice, Mäori development and sovereignty. Equitable Mäori access to the science system is seen as being provided for under the Treaty of Waitangi. In meetings between government agencies and Mäori communities (Ministry of Research, Science and Technology, 1995, p20) the following key themes surfaced of what Mäori want from science:

  1. to develop our own economic assets, particularly forestry and fisheries;
  2. to maintain the quality of the environment as enshrined within the concept of kaitiakitanga (guardianship) and for Mäori to take an active role in the research process and have the value of traditional local knowledge for this purpose acknowledged;
  3. equitable access to the science system that includes Mäori input into, and influence on, the direction of research programmes which particularly affect the Mäori community;
  4. to help retain traditional knowledge, particularly with respect to flora and fauna and other natural resources, traditional living skills and the philosophical structures which support the knowledge paradigm;
  5. to address issues relating to the interface between science knowledge and mätauranga Mäori; and
  6. to increase representation of Mäori in public science.

Mäori involvement in science is related to and focused on constitutional issues relating to the Treaty of Waitangi, including of justice (e.g. Maori input and influence on the direction of research), Mäori development (e.g resources) and sovereignty (e.g. retaining traditional knowledge and te reo). The question that arises from here is whether the current initiatives surrounding science education and Mäori are enough to meet what Mäori communities require from themselves and from the science industry at large.

Whilst schools have attempted to increase the achievement of Mäori in science and mathematics over a number of years they have not been very successful. In an analysis of Mäori student information for senior school qualifications we found a number of disturbing trends. In student entry data obtained for odd years from 1993 to 2001 for the 11 senior secondary Maths and Science subjects[4] we found a significant decline in the total number of students (and in the number of Mäori students) entering 9 of these subjects, despite the growth in secondary student numbers (particularly Mäori students) during the decade. The exceptions were School Certificate (SC) Mathematics and University Entrance Bursary and Scholarship (UEBS) Physics, in which participation increased by 12% and 14% respectively. Data on participation, achievement and high achievement (see table below) for Mäori students compared against all students was analysed for each of these 11 subjects for the years 1997, 1999 and 2001, and the mean results are shown in Graph A.

Achievement

/ High Achievement

SC

/ 50% + / 80% +
SFC / Grade 1 – 4 / Grade 1 – 2
UEBS / 45% + / 66% +

The graph shows Mäori results as a percentage of overall results, so the participation (1st column) columns give the percentage of Mäori candidates entering each subject, while the achievement (2nd column) and high achievement (3rd column) indicate the gap or disparity between Mäori and overall performance. Of the total candidature, Mäori students account for approximately 12% in SC, 6% in SFC, and 4% in UEBS Mathematics and Science subjects. Mäori student populations for those years are approximately 17% of Year 11, 14% of Year 12 and 10% of Year 13. The participation gap clearly increases from SC to UEBS. The Mäori pass rate is approximately 60% that of the overall pass rate in SC and Sixth Form Certificate (SFC), improving to around 75% in UEBS. That is, the achievement gap narrows. Mäori students achieve highly at just 20% of the overall rate in SC Mathematics and Science. This improves to around 33% for SFC and UEBS, with the exception of SFC Biology in which only 2% of Mäori candidates achieve highly.

In 2002 New Zealand introduced a new national qualification called the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA).Participation and achievement is reported by individual achievement standard (9 standards for Mathematics, 7 for Science) but in only 4 achievement bands (Not achieved, Achieved, Merit, Excellence). We are closely monitoring outcomes for Mäori students to see if they are achieving any better. Currently it is too early to tell.

Furthermore, a number of curriculum ‘solutions’ have been tried over the last 20 years in order to meet the needs of culturally diverse learners (see for example, Pomeroy, 1994). These include various support systems such as scholarships and the use of role models; making school science relevant and in context; culturally appropriate teaching pedagogies such as co-operative learning and peer teaching; using texts that have included groups who have previously been excluded; utilising ‘real’ stories; targeting science as a form of language acquisition; and studying science within the culture of the excluded group. These have all been tried in Aotearoa New Zealand as well (see McKinley, 1997). New Zealand has two national science curricula – one in English (Science) and one in Mäori (Pütaiao). Essentially the learning outcomes in both documents are the same and whilst large parts of the documents are translated the documents are not exact translations (see McKinley, 1996).

The project on which this paper is based includes schools that use both documents. The English medium schools use the Science document and the Mäori medium schools use both Pütaiao and Science. This is the result of large amounts of new language associated with the Pütaiao document. The New Zealand Science Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1993), written in the early 1990s, gave an increased focus to Mäori culture, including the incorporation of Mäori contexts. The curriculum states:

Science education needs to make science more accessible to Mäori students. It must make use of teaching strategies which are effective with Mäori students and must be responsive to the diversity of their cultural and language backgrounds. Acknowledging tikanga Mäori, and valuing the use of Mäori language and the experiences of Mäori students, affirms their identity and creates a positive learning environment (Ministry of Education, 1993:12).

In the Aotearoa New Zealand context, the Kohanga Reo (preschool), Kura Kaupapa Mäori (primary/elementary) and Wharekura (secondary/high school) movement have picked up Mäori language as a medium of instruction. Mäori have ways of knowing, talking, interacting and valuing that are best expressed through te reo Mäori (Mäori language). The recent development of Pütaiao i roto i te Marautanga o Aotearoa (National Science Curriculum in Mäori) (Ministry of Education, 1996) is an example of the work done with te reo Mäori. When writing the Pütaiao curriculum in 1994, I became acutely aware of how subtly our teaching of taken-for-granted concepts in school science knowledge can violate student’s understandings of their world. For example, as in many curriculum documents the world over, the New Zealand science curriculum suggests five year-olds are taught to categorise the world into living and non-living (Ministry of Education, 1993, 1996). This idea is in conflict with Mäori world-views but is accepted ‘fact’ and very fundamental in school science in the sense that this ‘distinction’ is foundational to further classification and categorisation in sciences. This ‘teaching’ can be considered as ‘epistemic violence’ (Spivak, 1984) that can have serious consequences if not dealt with seriously. It can be confusing for children whose teachers do not fully appreciate or accept other world constructs. At the same time, not developing other worldviews precludes some understandings of our local environments. Do such practices contribute to Mäori student’s alienation from science and science education? Mäori knowledge as knowledge to be learned in science, and Mäori language as a means by which scientific understandings can be conveyed, still remain marginal to the main issue of teaching and learning (McKinley, 1995, 1996).

The project: Mäori knowledge, language and participation in Mathematics and Science Education

The wider project will investigate ways of developing a science and mathematics education that is more inclusive of Maori knowledge and students. The project will focus on establishing a research base to inform further projects and consists of two parallel strands. One strand examines current research regarding Maori (and other indigenous peoples) participation and achievement in science and mathematics at school through the literature and current information. The second strand seeks to gather qualitative data from students, teachers, caregivers or parents/whänau and iwi (tribal groups). The main objectives for the project include:

  • examining current practices of measuring Maori participation and achievement in science and mathematics through the literature and to identify those that support Maori in science and mathematics.
  • investigating Maori student experiences of science and mathematics at school in English medium and Maori medium schools.
  • investigating the views of whanau/parents/caregivers and teachers of Maori students regarding science and mathematics education in English medium and Maori medium schools.
  • collating and analysing information from the other objectives and identifying possible further research and professional development for Maori in science and mathematics education and recommend priorities.

The project operates according to Kaupapa Mäori research principles and practices which includes: ‘being Mäori’; connecting to Mäori philosophy and principles; taking for granted the legitimacy of Maori, the importance of Maori language and culture; and being concerned with the struggle for autonomy over our own cultural well being (Smith, 1992). This is appropriate for this research because like Smith we locate our research within a wider project of Mäori struggles for sovereignty and self-determination. Kaupapa Mäori research is a means to reclaim a ‘space’ in the research agenda for research for Mäori by Mäori (Smith, 1999). However, it is more than this. It provides a framing of ideas and practices around which new communities of researchers – those who have previously been ‘the researched’ - can coalesce and can engage in dialogue about setting new directions and priorities for research.

Iwi Education Partnership (IEP)

The IEP in our project is between Tuwharetoa[5] and the Crown or government but enacted through the Crown’s agent, the Ministry of Education. The governance group includes three members of the Tuwharetoa Trust Board and three members of the Ministry of Education (Secretary of Education, Group Manager Mäori, and one other MoE manager). It includes 23 schools in its rohe (tribal boundaries). The IEP has an operational arm, named Hei Ara Kokiri, which is primarily focused on education, not only for its tribal members but also for all who live within the tribal boundary. The iwi is involved in environmental management partnerships with local government and science organizations. It has a substantial scholarship programme aimed at assisting members of Tuwharetoa to access tertiary education and qualifications. They also host an annual Forum for educators who are working in the field of Maori education. Tuwharetoa is an iwi partner in one of nine Iwi Education Partnerships (IEPs) currently in existence in New Zealand. The partnership was signed in 1999 and has been in operation since 2001. Iwi Educational Partnerships are relationships between the Crown or government and an iwi, or iwi-based organisation, established to improve Mäori educational outcomes. The nine IEPs cover a wide range of capacity and socio-political circumstances and are very specific in their aims and objectives. With such heterogeneity, the outcomes of any one IEP are unlikely to be representative.

Hei Ara Kokiri has developed a strategic plan that included some recommendations of a survey of students, parents, schools and communities within its tribal boundary that was commissioned by Tuwharetoa and the Ministry of Education (see Mikaere & Loane, 2001). Mikaere & Loane identified 7 key issues: support for families; early childhood participation; te reo Mäori; student support; governance and management; tertiary education and careers; and inter-agency co-operation and co-ordination. The education manager of Hei Ara Kokiri states:

Tuwharetoa has always held a vision for their people in terms of education … With this partnership and the support from the Ministry, Tuwharetoa will be able to realise that vision. … [the]partnership with the Crown has produced constructive results … the partnership has given the people of Tuwharetoa the ability to engage in education either by supporting their children’s education or advancing their own learning opportunities (Ministry of Education, 2004, p. 8).

However, in contrast to this vision is an evaluation of a different IEP in the north of the New Zealand has recently been reported on by Auckland University showing that there was a lack of acceptance among the target population and limited effectiveness in its first years of being established (Hohepa & Jenkins, 2003). According to the Ministry of Education (MoE) (2004a), the IEPs central focus is strengthening the role of parents and whänau to help their children in education, through face-to-face support and advice; better information and knowledge about education; and more support for tikanga (cultural protocols) and te reo Mäori. The benefits accrued to the MoE is through obtaining better information on the education system’s particular clientele, and helping make Mäori communities more responsible for their own children’s educational outcomes. It is worthy to note that while the Ministry of Education reports on all IEPs together the objectives of each can differ widely.