melitta dorn hogarth...equality and the indigenous struggle for self-determination illustrate some...
TRANSCRIPT
ADDRESSING THE RIGHTS OF
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES IN EDUCATION: A
CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF INDIGENOUS
EDUCATION POLICY
Melitta Dorn Hogarth
M. Ed (Research), Grad Cert in Academic Practice, Grad Dip Ed, BCreativeArts
Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
Office of Education Research
Faculty of Education
Queensland University of Technology
2018
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy i
Keywords
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education
Critical discourse analysis
Education policy
Equality
Equity
Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis
Indigenous Standpoint theory
Indigenist Research Principles
Social justice
ii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy iii
Abstract
The disparity between the educational attainment of Indigenous and non-
Indigenous peoples’ is a global social ‘problem’. Issues of access, equity and
equality and the Indigenous struggle for self-determination illustrate some of the
tensions prevalent in Indigenous education. In the Australian context, Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students were excluded and marginalised in primary and
secondary education until the late 1960s. The influence of the historical, political,
cultural and social institutional and societal constructs that ensured that Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples were forcibly removed from Country and Place,
separated from family and kin, seen as a dying race and consistently told they were
inferior ensured that the dominant position of the coloniser was maintained. A shift
in the societal paradigm since the 1970s has seen governments seek to address the
disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous primary and secondary school
students by implementing Indigenous education policy. However, despite almost 40
years of concerted effort to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary education, evidence shows
that very little progress has been made and in some instances, have not improved.
This study critically analyses the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015, from here on referred to as the Strategy. The Strategy is
the current Australian government bipartisan Indigenous education policy. The study
uses the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in education, a policy
text produced in consultation with Indigenous peoples from around the world, as an
explanatory framework to guide and inform the analysis of the data. Indigenist
Research Principles, Indigenous Standpoint Theory and Critical Discourse Theory
iv
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
inform the ontological perspective that guides this study. An innovative
methodological framework, Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis, is proposed for
this study. Deriving from and building on the analytical framework of Critical
Discourse Analysis, Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis makes my standpoint
and position explicit while analysing how policy discourses influence, maintain
and/or challenge institutional and societal constructs.
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy v
Table of Contents
Keywords .................................................................................................................................. i
Abstract ................................................................................................................................... iii
Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................v
List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... xi
List of Tables ........................................................................................................................ xiii
Publications related to thesis ...................................................................................................xv
List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................ xix
List of abbreviated policies ................................................................................................... xxi
Statement of Original Authorship ....................................................................................... xxiii
Acknowledgements ...............................................................................................................xxv
Acknowledgement of Country ........................................................................................... xxvii
My story: Positioning of self ............................................................................................... xxxi A contemporary story of Aboriginal identity ........................................................... xxxi Deniability and identity .......................................................................................... xxxiii Self, the study and methodology ............................................................................ xxxvi
Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................ 1
The rationale for critical analysis of policy ..............................................................................6 My motivation ................................................................................................................7 The justification for the texts ..........................................................................................8 The reasoning for Indigenous education policy ..............................................................8
Representations in Indigenous education ................................................................................11 Representations of Indigenous Peoples in the social conditions of production
and interpretation ................................................................................................12
An introduction to the objects of analysis: The texts ..............................................................15 The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education .....................15 The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 .............19
An introduction to the Guiding Theoretical Frameworks .......................................................22 Indigenist Research Principles ......................................................................................23 Indigenous Standpoint Theory ......................................................................................24 Critical Discourse Theory .............................................................................................25
An introduction to the Guiding Methodology .........................................................................31 Critical Discourse Analysis ..........................................................................................32
The research questions ............................................................................................................35
Structure of the thesis ..............................................................................................................37
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings .............................. 41
Representations of the social conditions of production and interpretation in Indigenous
education prior to colonisation ................................................................................................44 Societal constructs and positioning within Indigenous communities ...........................45
Representations of the social conditions of production and interpretation in Indigenous
education after 1788 ................................................................................................................46
vi
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Colonialism: The historical, political, cultural and social context ............................... 47 The eras: Frontier contact to Reconciliation ................................................................ 47
An overview of policy ............................................................................................................ 68 Policy itself and how it informs institutional constructs .............................................. 68 Indigenous education policy ........................................................................................ 71 How the policy cycle ensures consistency and informs institutional constructs .......... 72
Indigenous education policy and Human Rights .................................................................... 81 Schools Commission 1975 ........................................................................................... 82 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy ................................ 85 The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ rights in Education .................... 88 National Indigenous Reform Agreement ..................................................................... 91 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians ......................... 94 United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ............................... 96 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 ................... 98 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 .................. 100
The gap in the literature........................................................................................................ 104
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................. 105
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens .. 107
Indigenous research .............................................................................................................. 109 Positioning approaches .............................................................................................. 110
Indigenist Research Principles ............................................................................................. 113 Resistance as an emancipatory imperative ................................................................. 114 Political Integrity ........................................................................................................ 117 Privileging Indigenous voice...................................................................................... 118 The influence of Indigenist Research Principles on this study .................................. 120
Indigenous Standpoint Theory ............................................................................................. 120 The cultural interface as a contested space ................................................................ 121 The continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency ....................................... 123 The continual tensions that inform and limit what can/cannot be said in the
everyday ........................................................................................................... 125
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................. 127
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad ........................ 129
Critical Discourse Theory .................................................................................................... 131
Discourse as a social practice ............................................................................................... 132 Elements of social practice......................................................................................... 135 Theoretical constructs and members’ resources: The establishment of societal
norms ............................................................................................................... 136
Orders of Discourse and Positioning .................................................................................... 138 Genres, styles and discourses ..................................................................................... 140 Ideologies and assumptions........................................................................................ 145 Access, equity and representations ............................................................................ 145 Consistency, knowledge and evidence ....................................................................... 146 Institutional and societal constructs ........................................................................... 147
Critical Discourse Analysis .................................................................................................. 147 Stages of Critical Discourse Analysis ........................................................................ 148
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................. 163
Chapter 5: The launch pad .................................................................................... 165
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy vii
The semiotic narrative ...........................................................................................................169 Semiotic representations at a macro-level ..................................................................171 Semiotic representations at a meso-level ....................................................................172 Semiotic representations at a micro-level ...................................................................174 Semiotic representations of the Indigenous theoretical frameworks ..........................175
Development of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis .....................................................176 Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory ........................................................................177 The methodological approach .....................................................................................184
Addressing bias in this study ................................................................................................189 Use an appropriate point of view – Establish standpoint and position .......................190 Use of language – Euphemistic expression ................................................................190 Consistency – Interconnections and linking of content and research .........................191
Data Collection Strategies .....................................................................................................192 Policy documents ........................................................................................................192 Archival documents ....................................................................................................192
Procedure and Timeline ........................................................................................................193 Stage 1 - Identification of the social problem .............................................................195 Stage 2 - Preliminary analysis of the literature ...........................................................195 Stage 3 - Identification of the textual features ............................................................196 Stage 4 - Application of thematic coding ...................................................................196 Stage 5 - Identification of the social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation ....................................................................................................196 Stage 6 - Utilisation of software .................................................................................196 Stage 7 - Reflection on the data ..................................................................................197
Ethics ....................................................................................................................................197 Credibility ..................................................................................................................198 Transferability ............................................................................................................199 Dependability ..............................................................................................................200 Confirmability ............................................................................................................200
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................................201
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view ................................................................................. 203
Organisation of the data chapters ..........................................................................................205 Developing the thematic coding .................................................................................206
The data themes ....................................................................................................................212 The notion of Indigenous self .....................................................................................212 Indigenous education ..................................................................................................214
The texts: Generic structure and language features ..............................................................217 The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Education ..................218 National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 ..................224
Chapter Summary .................................................................................................................237
Chapter 7: Indigenous self..................................................................................... 241
The evolving representations of Indigenous peoples’ rights .................................................244 Universal Declaration of Human Rights .....................................................................245 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights .................................................245 The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples ......................246
Representations of Indigenous peoples in the Strategy.........................................................247 Acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples .........................248
Peoples: Stakeholder representations in the discourses ........................................................254
viii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
The role of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education is negotiable .............. 255 The representations of Others in the Strategy ............................................................ 258 Over-representation of the coloniser in the Strategy .................................................. 261 The interconnectivity of governmental bodies ........................................................... 272
Culture: The representations of histories, cultures and languages in the discourses ............ 274 The dichotomy of Indigenous and Western knowledges ........................................... 274 Stories and languages, ceremonies and dance, values and structures: Defining
culture .............................................................................................................. 280 The representations of culture in the Coolangatta Statement ..................................... 281 The emerging notions of culture ................................................................................ 282 Representations of culture in the Strategy ................................................................. 286
Identity: Encompassing the notion of Indigenous self ......................................................... 294 The omitted: defining identity .................................................................................... 294 The problem of identity in education ......................................................................... 300
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................. 302
Chapter 8: Indigenous education .......................................................................... 305
Values ................................................................................................................................... 307 Values in the Coolangatta Statement ......................................................................... 308 Values in the Strategy ................................................................................................ 311 Implicit values ............................................................................................................ 314
Actions ................................................................................................................................. 324 The need for action .................................................................................................... 326 Incremental actions in the Strategy ............................................................................ 328 Collaborative actions or government control? ........................................................... 330
Pedagogy .............................................................................................................................. 337 Indigenous pedagogical approaches ........................................................................... 338
The priority areas and pedagogy .......................................................................................... 344 Initiatives and Outcomes ............................................................................................ 344
Chapter Summary ................................................................................................................. 362
Chapter 9: Land ahoy ............................................................................................ 365
Major findings ...................................................................................................................... 370 They don’t talk to each other: The lack of incremental and intertextual
properties ......................................................................................................... 371 The Australian way: The championing of colonial values, bias, assumptions and
stereotypes ....................................................................................................... 374 A sleight of hand and a positive to binaries: The power of language ........................ 375
The contribution and limitations of the methodological approach, ICDA ........................... 377
Primary Recommendation .................................................................................................... 381 Recommendations for Higher Degree Research students .......................................... 382
Future directions for study ................................................................................................... 383
Bibliography ........................................................................................................... 389
Appendices .............................................................................................................. 417
Appendix A: Timeline for study ........................................................................... 419
Appendix B: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis ....................................... 421
Appendix C: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis: Like terms .................. 423
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy ix
Appendix D: Exemplification of the semiotics analysis – The Strategy (2015) 425
Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta Statement
(2006 Version) ......................................................................................................... 427
Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015) ........ 431
x
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xi
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 The social conditions of production – the historical, political, cultural
and social contextual factors, which influence policy ................................... 13
Figure 1.2 The social conditions of interpretation – the members’ resources that
influence and validate my standpoint ............................................................ 14
Figure 1.3 Discourse as text, interaction and context. Taken from “Language and
Power”, by N. Fairclough, 2015, p. 58. ......................................................... 28
Figure 1.4 A visual representation of the three stages of Critical Discourse
Analysis. Adapted from “Language and Power”, by N. Fairclough,
2015. .............................................................................................................. 33
Figure 1.5 A visual representation of the textual features that focus the analysis of
the Strategy .................................................................................................... 35
Figure 2.1 The key events and eras that influence the education of Australia’s
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples up until 1970 ........................ 49
Figure 2.2 The relationship between policies, strategies and plans. Taken from
“UNESCO Handbook on Education Policy Analysis and
Programming”, by United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization, 2013. ......................................................................... 73
Figure 2.3 The Policy Cycle. Adapted from “The Policy Circle: a framework for
analysing the components of family planning reproductive health
maternal health and HIV/AIDS policies”, by K. Hardee, I. Feranil, J.
Boezwinkle & B. Clark, 2004. ...................................................................... 75
Figure 2.4 A sample of the policies, reviews and reports that have saturated
Australian policy making regarding Indigenous education policy
since 1980. ..................................................................................................... 79
Figure 2.5 The priority areas of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015. Taken from “The National Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015”, by Education
Council, 2015. ............................................................................................. 101
Figure.3.1 IRP and their interconnectivity ....................................................................... 115
Figure 3.2 The three stages of IST and their interconnectivity ........................................ 122
Figure 4.1 The theoretical constructs that inform my member’s resources and
therefore, the interpretation of policy .......................................................... 138
Figure 4.2 The Australian education ‘architecture’. Adapted from “A critical
analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Action Plan”, M. Hogarth, 2015. ................................................................. 139
Figure 4.3 The three elements of social practice and their interconnectivity ................... 141
Figure 4.4 The dimensions and stages of CDA ................................................................. 148
Figure 4.5 The interdependence and interaction of the social conditions and
processes of production and interpretation, and text. .................................. 162
Figure 5.1 A conceptual overview of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis ................ 167
xii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Figure 5.2 A focus on the macro level: social conditions of production and
interpretation ................................................................................................ 171
Figure 5.3 A focus on the meso-level: processes of production and interpretation .......... 173
Figure 5.4 A focus on the micro-level: Textual features .................................................. 174
Figure 5.5 A focus on the theoretical frameworks: Indigenist axiologies,
ontologies and methodologies ..................................................................... 175
Figure 5.6 The culmination of the principles of IRP, the stages of IST and the
elements of social practice in CDT to form the principles of
Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory ......................................................... 179
Figure 6.1 A word cloud listing the most frequent words in the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) ............................................................................................. 208
Figure 6.2 A revised word cloud of the most frequent words used in the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015). .......................................................................... 209
Figure 6.3 A visual representation of the themes that inform this study .......................... 216
Figure 6.4 The conceptual overview of the priority areas of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015). .......................................................................... 233
Figure 9.1 A visual representation of ICDA ..................................................................... 378
Figure 9.2 Simplified visual representation of ICDA ....................................................... 379
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xiii
List of Tables
Table 1.1 Elaboration of the principles of the Coolangatta Statement ............................... 17
Table 4.1 The social and discursive elements of CDA with a focus on social
practice. ....................................................................................................... 133
Table 4.2 The interrelationship between Fowler (1985) and Fairclough’s (2015)
categories of modality. ................................................................................ 153
Table 4.3 The key elements of interdiscursive analysis at the meso-level ........................ 157
Table 4.4 The reproduction of social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation in this study .......................................................................... 160
Table 5.1 The stages of data collection ............................................................................. 194
Table 6.1 A visual representation of the thematic coding for this study ........................... 211
Table 6.2 A snapshot of the generic structure and language features of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) .......................................................................... 239
Table 8.1 The textual components of the Strategy: Section titles, descriptions and
audience ...................................................................................................... 333
Table 8.2 The categorisation of the Strategy’s priority areas .......................................... 345
xiv
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xv
Publications related to thesis
Book chapters
Hogarth, M. (2017). Die, brain demons, die!: The internal monologue of an
Aboriginal researcher. In McMasters, C., Murphy, C., Mewburn, I., & Whitburn, B.
(Eds.) in Postgraduate study in Australia: Surviving and Succeeding. Peter Lang
Publishing Inc.: New York. (pp. 137-147).
Hogarth, M. (Under Review). Indigenous education in Australia post 1788: A
systemic review of the deficit and resistant discourses. In Dodson, M., Fforde, C.,
Fogarty, B., Gorringe, S. (Eds.) in Deficit Discourses.
Hogarth, M. (Under Review). “In 2017 we seek to be heard”: De-tangling the
contradictory discourses that silence Indigenous voices in education. In Netolicky,
D., Andrews, J., & Paterson, C. (Eds.) in Flip the System Australia: Subverting
education from Down Under.
Journal articles
Hogarth, M. (2017). Speaking back to the deficit discourses: a theoretical and
methodological approach. Australian Education Researcher, 44 (1), 21-34.
Hogarth, M. (2017). The power of words: Bias and assumptions in the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan. Australian Journal of
Indigenous Education, 46 (1), 44-53.
Hogarth, M. (Under Review). Talkin’ bout a revolution: The call for
transformation and reform in Indigenous education. Australian Education
Researcher.
xvi
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Hogarth, M. (Under Review). The role of an Indigenous teacher in rural
schools. Australian and International Journal of Rural Education.
Articles
Hogarth, M. (June 8, 2017). Is policy on Indigenous education deliberately
being stalled? The Conversation. Accessible at: https://theconversation.com/is-
policy-on-indigenous-education-deliberately-being-stalled-76855
Conference Presentations
Hogarth, M. (2016) Speaking back to the deficit discourses. Presented at the
2016 AARE Conference (December 1). Melbourne Cricket Ground, Melbourne.
Wilson, B. & Hogarth, M. (2017) Strengths-based policy making: A response
to deficit discourse. Presented at Re-imagining Education for Democracy (November
14). University of Southern Queensland, Springfield.
Hogarth, M., Walker-Gibbs, B., Gower, G., Lowe, K., Moodie, N., Singh, M.,
& Brown, L. (2017). Acts of de-tangling: The politics of Indigenous education.
Presented at 2017 AARE Conference (November 28). Hotel Realm, Canberra.
Hogarth, M. (2017). Talkin bout a revolution: The call for transformation and
reform in Indigenous education. Presented at 2017 AARE Conference (November
29). Hotel Realm, Canberra.
Invited Presentations
Bunda, T.; Hogarth, M.; O’Dowd, M.; Gower, G.; Anderson, P & Smith, J.
(2016) Transforming the space of Indigenous research: An open dialogue. Presented
at the 2016 AARE Conference (November 29). Melbourne Cricket Ground,
Melbourne.
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xvii
Hogarth, M. (2017) Indigenous research: Research Indigenous. Presented at
QUT Research and Publications (RAP) Week (June 26). Queensland University of
Technology, Brisbane.
Hogarth, M. (2017) The experiences of an Aboriginal PhD candidate and
academic in the institutional space. Presented at QUT-UC-BIU Doctoral Forum
(November 1). Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane.
Hogarth, M. (2017). Research as resistance: Designing and applying
innovative methodological approaches. Presented at AARE HDR/ECR Pre-
Conference Workshop (November 26) Hotel Realm, Canberra.
Guest Lectures
Hogarth, M. (2016). Introduction to Indigenous Education Policy. Lecture
presented in EDN673 – Culture Studies: Indigenous education. Brisbane,
Queensland: Queensland University of Technology.
Citations
Krakouer, J. (2016). Taking Indigenous culture into account: a critical analysis
of an early childhood education program for disadvantaged families (Masters
Coursework). University of Melbourne. Retrieved from
http://hdl.handle.net/11343/122193
Carden, C. (2017). ‘As parents congregated at parties’: Responsibility and
blame in media representations of violence and school closure in an Indigenous
community. Journal of Sociology, 53(3), 592-606. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1440783317722855
doi:10.1177/1440783317722855
xviii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Rennie J., White S., Anderson P., & Darling A. (2018). Preparing teachers to
work with and for remote Indigenous communities: Unsettling Institutional Practices.
In Heck D., & Ambrosetti A. (Eds.) in Teacher education in and for uncertain times.
Springer:Singapore. (pp. 113-127).
Hopkins, J. P. (2018). Indigenous education reform: A decolonizing approach.
In Petrovic, J., & Mitchell, R. (Eds.). in Indigenous philosophies of education around
the world. Routledge: New York. (pp. 129-147).
Professional Affiliations
Australian Association for Research in Education Executive Officer. (2015 –
present) Role: Indigenous Engagement and Research
Australian Association for Research in Education Conference Standing
Committee member. (2015 – present). Role: Indigenous Engagement
AARE Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Research Special
Interest Group. (2015 – present) Role: Chair
Awards
Indigenous Postgraduate Student Researcher, awarded by Australian
Association for Research in Education [AARE] at the AARE National Conference,
Hotel Realm, Canberra on 28th
November, 2017 for Talkin bout a revolution: The
call for transformation and reform in Indigenous education.
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xix
List of Abbreviations
ACARA Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority
AITSL Australian Institute for Teaching and School
Leadership
CDA Critical Discourse Analysis
CDT Critical Discourse Theory
COAG Council of Australian Governments
DEET Department of Education, Employment and Training
ECARD Early Career Academic Research and Development
ESA Education Services Australia
ICDA Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis
ICDT Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory
IRP Indigenist Research Principles
IST Indigenous Standpoint Theory
MCEECDYA Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood
Development and Youth Affairs
MCEETYA Ministerial Council on Education, Employment,
Training and Youth Affairs
MR members’ resources
NAEC National Aboriginal Education Committee
NPA National Partnerships Agreements
OECD Organisation for Economic and Co-Operation
Development
PISA Programme for International Student Assessment
QUT Queensland University of Technology
xx
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
SCRGSP Steering Committee for the Review of Government
Service Provision
SCSEEC Standing Council on School Education and Early
Childhood
TIMMS Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study
UN United Nations
UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural
Organization
UNPFII United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
WIPC:E World Indigenous Peoples’ Conference on Education
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxi
List of abbreviated policies
AEP National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Policy
Coolangatta Statement The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’
rights in Education
Melbourne Declaration Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for
Young Australians
NEA National Education Agreement
NIRA National Indigenous Reform Agreement
Strategy National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015
UNDRIP United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous
Peoples
xxii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxiii
Statement of Original Authorship
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet
requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the
best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously
published or written by another person except where due reference is made.
Signature: QUT Verified Signature
Date: May.2018
xxiv
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxv
Acknowledgements
It has now been almost four years of further study that my husband, family and
friends have had to suffer through the ups and downs of research. Thank you to my
ever supportive husband who at times felt abandoned and replaced by a laptop. Your
never-ending support and understanding has been appreciated.
Thank you to my family – all of you. Your constant messages of support via
social media, the listening ears when it all seemed too hard have given me the
strength to dust myself off and get back to it.
Thank you to my supervisors, Dr Bronwyn Ewing and Associate Professor
Grace Sarra. The advice and guidance, the shared stories on the struggles of research
provided insight into the highs and lows.
To Professor Tracey Bunda – Thank you for the critical discussions to assist
me in seeing the end goal post.
To those who have passed who encouraged me to ‘just do it’, I thank you. I
will continue to try and make you proud as I work towards my dream and our goals.
To my past students from Woorabinda who told me to go further, that I could
do this. Thank you for the kick in the pants that I needed. I am forever grateful for
the belief you had in me.
xxvi
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxvii
Acknowledgement of Country
I must acknowledge my people, the Kamilaroi peoples from South-Western
Queensland. In doing so, I pay my respects to the many Elders and family who
guided my research directions and purpose. I also acknowledge the Elders both past
and present who have worked within the education sector providing the path for me
to follow. Your fight for equity, your yearning for social justice has allowed me to
enter academia and guides me to join the many other colleagues, who today in
modern Australia, still fight for the rights to be Indigenous; for recognition. I would
also like to acknowledge the traditional owners of the land in which this research was
undertaken. Finally, I acknowledge the Elders of the future - the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students in the classrooms today.
xxviii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxix
xxx
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxxi
My story: Positioning of self
Where does one start when reflecting on self? How does one articulate how
the world as they know it, formed by the lived experiences, is the result of politics
and policy? This is an introduction to me as a person and how it has influenced me
as a researcher. It provides the reader with an insight to my life.
The story is a metaphor; it is my introduction to the world. An experience that
helped form the person I am today.
A contemporary story of Aboriginal identity
Come closer if you will. I will tell you a story...a story of love, a story of
acceptance, and a story of life. The story is two-fold with the lives of two
very separate young couples whose lives become entangled. Lives that in
the future become shared through the birth of an emu chick.
Imagine if you will; a young couple of birds whose romance was in its early
days. The love shared had resulted in a pregnancy that was being kept
secret. The grandfather was to be kept in the dark, he must not know. The
mother, an emu and the father, a magpie; together they struggled on what
to do. They left the country and moved to the city. Soon a young chick
would arrive. The relationship was still new, the uncertainty of the strength
of the love caused anxiety and so they decided to place their chick with
another.
In another area, a young couple of magpies had married and had two young
chicks of their own. Unfortunately, both chicks had passed on and moved
to the next realm. Their hearts were broken, their lives incomplete. The
mother magpie was told she could not have any more chicks or risk losing
more babies. If only they could have the chance to be parents.
xxxii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
The day had arrived for the mother emu to have her baby chick. The
decision had already been made; the chick was to be gifted to another. It
was a hard decision at the time and in the future, it would prove to be the
right decision.
The magpie couple received a call. A chick has been born that is in need of
a new nest. Now magpies are known to raise the young of many a different
bird and so, without hesitation, they flew to the nursery where the chick
was waiting. Finally, the hole in their hearts would be filled. They would be
parents.
Upon receiving their gift, the magpie couple were told the chick was a
storm bird. At the time of the adoption, there was a belief that not all
magpies would be happy to have an emu and so the lie was told. The emu
chick grew up dreaming of a time when she could go to the land of the
storm bird to learn more about her country. At the nursery, they were told
that they could not sing about their chick. No birth song could be sung.
The magpie couple did not care…they were to be parents. They had a chick
to call their own.
However, as the chick grew, she displayed some of the characteristics of an
emu. This went unnoticed by all around her for they were told she was a
storm bird and they had no reason not to believe this was so. She would go
walkabout to look at the country. So much so, that one day a bandicoot
brought her home. The young emu chick was told of the dangers.
Thankfully, this was at a time when the danger of chicks going walkabout
like today was not evident. The magpie parents attempted to keep the
chick in the nest but her will to go walkabout was strong and she always
found a way to escape.
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policyxxxiii
The emu grew within the magpie family; although the distinction of the
difference was never recognised or acknowledged. The emu could never
remember being told she was not a magpie but she always knew she was
special. Her story was one of being chosen by the magpie family. As a
result, she always felt a love and support within the magpie family, a sense
of acceptance and belonging. The fact she was not a magpie was not
relevant.
This story is but one part of my life.
I am the storm bird.
I am the emu.
Deniability and identity
A key theme within my story is deniability. My identity as an Aboriginal
‘bird’ was denied given the historio-political and policy governing and controlling
Aboriginal Affairs, our situatedness, into which I was born. I live within the push-
pull nexus of Aboriginal identity. The binaries, the simplistic signages, used in
determining Aboriginal identity fail to comprehend the complexity inherent.
The secrecy behind my adoption was a practice maintained due to policy and
was possible due to the position of power and authority held by government. It was a
closed adoption. The term closed adoption “is where an adopted child’s original
birth certificate is sealed forever and an amended birth certificate issued that
establishes the child’s new identity and relationship with their adoptive family”
(Higgins, 2012, p. 2). As a result, my own identity as an Aboriginal person was
denied by others.
xxxiv
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Upon the ‘discovery’ of my biological family and my cultural heritage, I was
angry at those who had been deceitful and lied. I could not understand why it was
kept secret. It did not make any sense and I wanted answers as to why. Hence, the
research that I am drawn to is about policy - about how policy is developed and
implemented and how it positions Indigenous peoples. I want to understand the
position of those who made and make the decisions that influence Indigenous
peoples’ lives. I want to understand how Indigenous peoples are and were positioned
within Australian society. I want to understand how language is and was used to
control and oppress and on the other hand, resist and challenge institutional and
societal constructs. Within this thesis, I seek to further develop my understanding
and to work towards finding answers to my questions of ‘Why?’
Much like the experiences shared by Gilbert (2007), my transformation from
an adopted child with little ‘identifying’ information provided at the time of adoption
to a Kamilaroi woman began when I reconnected with family. Both families
welcomed the other into their fold and those connections have been maintained
throughout the years. Thus, my question of why is further exacerbated when I see
both of my families together, spending time together as family, laughing and sharing
stories.
To build on the learnings of family history, I gained a position at a school
within a Queensland mission. I immersed myself within Aboriginal ways of
knowing, being and doing. The community was not on Country but there was family
links as my ‘Grandparents’ (Murri way – that is, my ‘Grandfather’ was the brother of
my Grandmother) had been moved to the then newly-established Mission in the
1920s. I am forever grateful for the teachings and learnings I gained in this
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy xxxv
experience, for the connections made with Elders and family and for the acceptance
into the community.
The issues regarding my Aboriginality did not come from family or the
community in which I taught for almost 10 years but from non-Indigenous peoples
who made such claims as ‘So, you are a half-caste!?’ or ‘But you look White!!’ or ‘I
am darker than you! Are you sure??’ Nowadays, I recognise that such insensitive
and culturally unaware statements only further demonstrate how colonial discourses
are maintained within Australian society. However, at the time, those words cut like
a knife. I finally had a sense of self, a sense of identity and I was suddenly having
that questioned because I ‘didn’t look like an Aboriginal’. The ideologies based on
these statements are founded within notions of power and signal issues of race and
stereotypes.
Therefore, in this thesis, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories,
representations and the policies that have influenced and/or affected our ways of
knowing, being and doing are investigated to further develop my position and
standpoint as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher. Questioning the notions
of power and finding strength and agency in my identity as a female Aboriginal
educator and researcher are key outcomes that I endeavour to gain by completing this
study. Focusing on Indigenous education policy allows me to draw on my discipline
and enables me to investigate the power of language by speaking back to the
discourses from a position of knowing.
In relation to my story, if I were to fly, my launch pad – the position on which I
stand, is a place from which I am gathering the knowledge ‘winds’ under my ‘wings’
knowing that my best ‘flight path’ is one where I read, analyse and theorise the
multitude of ‘landscape’ discourses that are set before me. This is my story. In
xxxvi
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
telling it, I contribute to the troubling discourses of Aboriginal identity but perhaps, I
am also contributing epistemological depth. Either way, it is my story. I will not
allow it to be denied anymore.
Self, the study and methodology
The inclusion of Figure A here has several purposes. They are:
1. Extending the metaphor of self as an image;
2. Presenting the research design as an image; and,
3. Introducing the innovative methodological approach, Indigenous Critical
Discourse Analysis prior to its deconstruction and reconstruction
throughout this study.
Firstly, the figure is a representation of self. The outer circle is my physical being –
it is my skin, my appearance, the outer me that people see. As shared in my story, I
am judged by, and assumptions are made from, my outer appearance. Judgments
made through interaction, through no interaction, through others own standpoints’
and societal positioning.
The middle circle is where I interpret and produce my own position informed
by my own interpretations of the world as I see it. In other words, it is where my
socio-cognitive ideologies, values, beliefs, attitudes and so forth are formed.
The inner circle is me – the product of the social conditions, my interpretations
and interactions with the world. The person I am is both the product and process. It
is not static and constantly transforms, reforms and reconceptualises dependent on
those I interact with and our relationality. It is informed by the outer and middle
circles. It is the ‘real me’ hidden behind the mask of the outer circle.
Figure A is also the research design. It presents the theoretical frameworks that
inform Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis - Indigenist Research Principles
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policyxxxvii
(Rigney, 1999), Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Nakata, 2007b) and Critical
Discourse Theory (Fairclough, 2015). It informs Chapter 2. The public sphere; the
historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors, is explored. The values,
beliefs and attitudes held in society and the representations of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples in education and society as a whole are considered.
Extrapolation of the policy cycle and the policies that inform the production of the
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 (Education
Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in
education (Morgan et al., 1999, 2006) occurs. The process of collating the
knowledge and literature leads into the methodology.
Figure A: Self, the study and methodology
xxxviii
Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis of Indigenous Education Policy
Finally, Figure A provides a visual representation of the innovative
methodological approach, Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis. It depicts the
processes in which the analysis will be conducted. Explication of the methodology is
provided in Chapter 5. However, the framework is deconstructed into distinct
elements throughout this study; such as: the social conditions of production, the
social conditions of interpretation and so forth, to further introduce and foreground
the finite details of the conceptual framework.
The role of Figure A within this study is multifaceted. It helps in telling the
story, in developing the knowledge, in answering the research questions and in
guiding the study. It is the summation of the thought process and yet, the foundation
of the study. Now at the end of My story, positioning of self within the study and
providing a visual representation of self – what better place to begin the study.
Chapter 1: Introduction 1
Chapter 1: Introduction
It has been 4 years since I took on the ocean of higher degree research. I
have ridden the waves of hope, despair, anger, guilt, self-doubt and
achievement. My motivations for taking on this quest has remained
constant – to encourage change, to open peoples’ eyes to see what I have
seen, to question the world as it is and dream of a world where those
children who sat in my classroom saw a world that embraces them as they
are, of an education system that is led by Indigenous peoples, parents and
community that acknowledges the skills and knowledge that they bring to
the school and their expectations.
I was encouraged by my students to leave my safety nest. They saw in me
opportunity to “make ‘em lissen, Miss”. It is a responsibility that drives me.
It is necessary to be an agent of change, to encourage and question the
status quo, to provide the alternative lens in the realities of Indigenous
education.
Policy is the fundamental strategic driver of any school. Failure to address it
means no money. Indigenous education policy is not mandated and
therefore, is subject to the values of predominantly White education
administrators. I hope that this study disrupts their day, questions their
priorities and encourages transformation and action.
2 Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 1: Introduction 3
The power of education to improve the potential futures of Indigenous peoples
has been extensively documented. This is evident in publications from global
organisations such as the United Nations and their report, State of the World’s
Indigenous Peoples (United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
[UNPFII], 2009) as well as reports from the Organisation for Economic and Co-
operation Development (OECD) inclusive of Overcoming School Failure: Policies
that work (Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development (OECD),
2010), Equity and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and
Schools (Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development (OECD), 2012),
and No more failure: Ten steps to equity in education (Field, Kuczera, & Pont,
2007). More specifically, in an Australian context, reports such as Our children, Our
future: Achieving improved Primary and Secondary education outcomes for
Indigenous students (Doyle & Hill, 2008) and Indigenous education and the ladder
to prosperity (Langton & Rhea, 2009) highlight the need to address the educational
attainment of Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in primary and
secondary schooling. One of the tensions that is consistent throughout these
documents is the need for government to address the educational disparities between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. This concern is central to this study.
This study proposes to critically analyse the current Australian National
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 (Education Council,
2015), from here on referred to as the Strategy, to determine how the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders is being addressed and
represented within policy discourses. The Strategy builds “on the actions underway
in pursuing COAG’s Closing the Gap targets and the evaluation of the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014” (Education Council,
4 Chapter 1: Introduction
2015, p. 1). Here, the Education Council indicates how Indigenous education policy
is incremental and intertextual. More specifically, “intertextuality as Kristeva
(1986) puts it: [is] the idea that any text is explicitly or implicitly ‘in dialogue with’
other texts […]. Any text is a link in a chain of texts, reacting to, drawing in, and
transforming other texts” (Fairclough, 2001c, p. 233 [original emphasis]). That is,
the Strategy builds on and is informed by and informs other broader educational
policies.
However, policy production is also built on political agendas. Altman, Biddle,
and Hunter (2009) state that, the closing of the gap and therefore, addressing the
educational attainment of Indigenous primary and secondary students through policy
production and implementation is rather the desire for statistical equality.
Furthermore, they assert that, “there appears no substantive difference between
‘closing the gap’ and ‘statistical equality’; both concepts seek to eliminate
socioeconomic disparities” (Altman, et al., 2009, p. 226) and in turn, validating the
need for big data.
This study seeks to privilege Indigenous voice by making use of The
Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Education (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006), from here on referred to as the Coolangatta Statement, as an
explanatory framework to analyse the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). That is,
the Coolangatta Statement acts as a lens to thematically deconstruct the Strategy as
well as guiding the investigation of policy discourses and the representations of
Indigenous peoples. Further elaboration of how the Coolangatta Statement is used as
an explanatory framework is provided in Chapter 3.
In order to maintain and ensure consistency of terms and furthermore to avoid
confusion, the term Indigenous peoples is used in this study to recognise and
Chapter 1: Introduction 5
acknowledge the difference between the various groups of Indigenous people in the
world, “each of which is a “people” with distinct characteristics and legal character”
(United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, n.d., footnote 1).
Pursuing this further, the use of the term Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander refers
specifically to the Indigenous peoples of Australia. The terms of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander, First Nations peoples and Indigenous are used
interchangeably throughout this thesis. In addition, the term coloniser is used
extensively to refer to the dominant Other - the British Empire, the colonial settlers
who took possession of and occupied Australia and who still continue to maintain a
position of dominance. This has been used in preference to the term invader or
occupier due to the contentious nature of such terminology and the wish for this
study to be proactive rather than viewed as reactive.
In this study, the term, the Indigenous researcher has been used when referring
to the assertions made by other academics when providing guidance to neophyte
Indigenous researchers. When referring to self, first person, being I, me, and my, is
used. Within the preamble, I provided insight to my sense of self and identity. As a
result, reference is also made to self as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher
when establishing my standpoint, my social position and/or my position within the
research. I do not intend to genderise the argument but moreover, to establish the
intersectionality prevalent within the study.
The structure of this thesis acts to disrupt the template; to speak back to the
institutional constructs and locate myself within the thesis genre. As a result, each
chapter of the thesis is introduced with an extension of the Preface, My story:
Positioning of self. The metaphor, research is an ocean, is introduced with the emu, a
symbol of self, sailing the ocean. The struggles and barriers faced as I traverse the
6 Chapter 1: Introduction
seas and my thoughts and understandings reflecting on the process offer insight to
my positioning and standpoint throughout the study.
Within the data chapters, descriptions of the deep critical and reflective
thinking that informed and formed the application of methodological approach are
shared. My intention for giving these finite details is to act as a guide for fellow
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander higher degree researchers, using reflective
voice to ensure that they are not alone in the struggles (Hogarth, 2017a). Another
purpose is to articulate some of the barriers and challenges as well as the solutions
found when proposing a methodological approach as a neophyte researcher. In turn,
the reflections are a component of the strategies enacted to address ethics as
discussed in Chapter 5.
In this Chapter, the rationale for conducting the study and the context is
provided. The following section provides an overview of the social conditions that
influence policy production and interpretation. The texts that inform this study are
outlined in the next section. An introduction of the guiding theoretical frameworks
and methodological approach follows. Articulation of the research questions occurs.
The rationale for critical analysis of policy
Indigenous education policy is a relatively new phenomenon in the Australian
education paradigm. The first definitive Indigenous education policy in Australia,
the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy [AEP] (DEET,
1989), was not produced until 1989. The focus in this study is on the most current
policy, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), which complements the AEP.
Within this section, provision of my reasons for undertaking the study occurs.
The next section provides the reader with insight into why I chose the Strategy
Chapter 1: Introduction 7
(Education Council, 2015) as the focus of the study and the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as the explanatory framework. The final section
provides an explanation for the critical analysis of Indigenous education policy.
My motivation
In 2010, I took on the role of Head of Curriculum at an Independent high
school within an Indigenous community. The position had been created to address
the introduction of the Australian Curriculum throughout Australian schools (Gable
& Lingard, 2013). I must admit my own knowledge of education policy and in
particular, Indigenous education policy at that time was limited.
As the only Aboriginal classroom teacher in this school, I quickly found myself
in a very contentious position. The community saw my position as a means to ensure
that Indigenous perspectives, histories, cultures and values be embedded within the
school. The school saw my position as a means to develop a whole school
curriculum based on the incoming Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2015b). The
experience of a kind of tug of war between the Indigenous community and the
Westernised school’s expectations caused continual internal tensions.
As a means to further develop my understanding of Indigenous education
policy, I entered further study in 2013. My Masters of Education (Research)
critically analysed the then current Indigenous education policy, the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 (Hogarth, 2015). The
study provided a basis in which to gain insight into the incremental and intertextual
properties of education policy (Henry, Lingard, Rizvi, & Taylor, 2013) but
moreover, the study spiked an interest in the production and interpretation of policy.
Elaboration on the incremental and intertextual properties of Australian Indigenous
8 Chapter 1: Introduction
education policy is provided in Chapter 2. These experiences prompted the desire
for further investigation.
The justification for the texts
There are two primary reasons for the study of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) and the use of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006). Firstly, the study enables there to be a distinction between the general aspects
of the Strategy and the specific aspects that are relevant from an Indigenous
perspective. In doing so, “it presents one set of actions alongside another set, thus
enabling one to ascertain similarities and differences between” the texts (Armitage,
2014, p. 7). The distinct similarities and differences between the Strategy and the
Coolangatta Statement can then be categorised to identify gaps between the texts.
Secondly, the critical analysis by a female Aboriginal educator and researcher
provides a new lens and perspective to Indigenous education policy; speaking into
what Nakata (2007a) refers to as the “contested space” (p. 9). Nakata (1998) asserts
that to do so, Indigenous peoples are “to understand our own position better, and to
ultimately act to improve it [, that] we must immerse ourselves in and understand the
very systems of thought, ideas and knowledges that have been instrumental in
producing our position” (p. 4). Here, Nakata makes a point that the Indigenous
researcher needs to gain an understanding of the representations of Indigenous
peoples within the literature; a position of knowing. In Chapter 2, the representations
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education are explored.
The reasoning for Indigenous education policy
There is a need for people to become engaged with and in policy (Ozga, 2000).
Ozga articulates how it is important for policy analysis to counter the evaluations and
validations to policy development by government. That is, “to act as a commentary
Chapter 1: Introduction 9
or critique of ‘official’ research outputs, and assist those who implement or mediate
policy to orient themselves in relation to official research claims” (Ozga, 2000, p. 2).
By conducting policy analysis, Ball (1990) asserts that reform in policy is possible.
That is, it can encourage an ideological shift of the underlying bias, taken for granted
assumptions and beliefs maintained in wider society. This study looks to bring a new
perspective to Indigenous education policy by explicating the similarities and
differences between the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The intention of this study, therefore, is not
to solve the inequitable educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students and their non-Indigenous counterparts; rather it is to promote
critical dialogue and explicate how policy discourses maintain a deficit. To do this, I
must understand how Indigenous education policy is produced, how Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples are positioned within the policy discourses of the
Strategy and the Coolangatta Statement and challenge the bias and taken for granted
assumptions evident. In turn, I acknowledge that my understandings and position
inform the analysis of the data articulating my standpoint as a female Aboriginal
educator and researcher.
The analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the use of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework is
an innovative decision. Two aspects that highlight the novel contribution of this
study are that the study will:
Challenge the corpus of Indigenous education policy that is dominated by
non-Indigenous male voices by providing a female Aboriginal educator
and researcher standpoint (Moreton-Robinson, 1998; Nakata, 2007b); and,
Privilege Indigenous voice in education by making use of the Coolangatta
Statement as a guiding lens to the analysis.
10 Chapter 1: Introduction
Critical analysis of Indigenous education policy provides opportunity to develop my
knowledge and understanding of policy discourses allowing me to speak back into
the cultural interface
in a way that will speak to those knowledges, that will speak within the
discourse, but will extend the discourse to include what has been hitherto
submerged, our understanding of them and how they give expression to
relations of power (Nakata, 1998, p. 4).
As a result, my awareness of the social conditions of production and interpretation is
further enhanced and therefore, provides a means to “defend from the position of
knowledge about knowledge” (Nakata, 1998, p. 4).
Challenging the deficit discourses, questioning the continuous notions of
‘failure’ within data sets and resisting the ongoing forms of oppression requires a
position of knowing; of defiance to the dominant ways; of understanding the
hegemonic positioning of the coloniser, the power of language and the silencing of
marginalised peoples. Through this lens, throughout this study, I have elected to use
the term speak back rather than such terms as challenge or resist as I am countering
the hegemonic position of the coloniser by explicating the silences and hidden
discourses within policy and therefore, positioning myself as a knower. Hence, I am
refusing to be silent and responding to, essentially speaking back to, the coloniser’s
representations of Indigenous peoples in primary and secondary schooling from a
position of understanding and knowing; challenging and resisting the dominant
societal norms. In the following section and in Chapter 2, explication is provided of
the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that influence the social
conditions of production and interpretation of policy and the representations of
Chapter 1: Introduction 11
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in primary and secondary education
occurs.
Representations in Indigenous education
A common thread within international and national Indigenous education
reports is the stark disparities of the world’s Indigenous peoples in comparison to the
rest of the world’s population. The disparities are summarised within the historical,
political, cultural and social contextual factors. Exemplification of the disparities
that influence the production and interpretation of policy include the effects of past
policy and an identified deficit ‘view’ of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students’ educational attainment held within society.
The social conditions of production are found at the macro-level of Critical
Discourse Analysis (Fairclough, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015) and are adopted within the
methodological approach – Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis (see Chapter 5),
from here on referred to as ICDA. The social conditions of production provide
explanation of the relationship between social context and social interaction. It is
here that language is used to assert common understandings and reaffirm shared
ideologies, values and beliefs by informing the social positioning and relationships of
the participants or their relationality.
Alternatively, the social conditions of interpretation are informed and formed
by our members’ resources, or MR for short (Fairclough, 2015). In this study,
members’ resources, from here on referred to as MR, are understood to be the socio-
cognitive understandings of the world which inform social actors’ ways of acting and
interpreting in social activities and practices (Fairclough, 2015). MR are therefore
more individualistic and reliant on the social actor’s interpretations rather than shared
12 Chapter 1: Introduction
common understandings. Explication of the social conditions of production and
interpretation that inform this study follows.
Representations of Indigenous Peoples in the social conditions of
production and interpretation
The social conditions of production are located at the macro-level of the
Critical Discourse Theory framework (Fairclough, 2015, see also Figure 1.4).
Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) highlight that “the object of study in social
science is social life, and a major issue, particularly in critical social science, is the
relationship between spheres of social life and activity, the economic, the political
and the cultural” (p. 20). The contextual factors that influence Indigenous education
policy production, which Chouliaraki and Fairclough refer to as the public sphere,
are:
1. Politics - identification of the policies developed by policymakers;
investigation of the historical and political contexts that influence the
production of policies and in turn, the reasons for policy development;
2. Society - examination of the dominant racist and oppressive ideologies and
the normalisation of the bias and taken for granted assumptions within
wider Australian society about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students’ educational attainment;
3. Culture - examination of the deficit discourses used to control Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the examples of resistance by
Indigenous peoples to challenge the oppressive ideologies maintained in
the wider Australian society; and,
4. Economy – recognition that policy implementation is dependent on the
funding resources made available by policymakers and aligns to the policy
cycle.
Chapter 1: Introduction 13
Figure 1.1 provides a visual representation of the social conditions of policy
production relevant to this study. The key elements and/or points are represented
visually rather than in a table or SmartArt graphic, such as a matrix, as each element
is drawn from the conceptual framework of the methodological approach, ICDA (see
Figure A). The purpose is to introduce each of the elements throughout the study
prior to the explication of the methodological approach and the presentation of the
methodological conceptual overview in Chapter 5.
Figure 1.1 The social conditions of production – the historical, political, cultural and social contextual
factors, which influence policy
A synopsis of the representations of Indigenous peoples in education
demonstrating the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that
influence Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ engagement in primary and
secondary schooling follows. Figure 1.2 provides a visual representation of the
social conditions that inform my interpretation of the literature and policy within this
study.
14 Chapter 1: Introduction
Figure 1.2 The social conditions of interpretation – the members’ resources that influence and
validate my standpoint
The social conditions of interpretation are also located at the macro-level.
Contested space, Political agenda, Marginalisation of voice, Deficit discourses and
Social justice have been purposefully selected as they inform my interpretation of
policy. The contested space is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges
about the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
meet. The political agenda looks at embedded colonial ideologies maintained in
society such as the assumed superiority of the coloniser and the representation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as “oppressed victims in need of
charity” (Foley, 2003, p. 48). The marginalisation of voice further explicates the
position of authority that the coloniser assumes and seeks to identify how, or if,
Indigenous voice is privileged within the literature and/or policy production. Deficit
discourses are used by the coloniser to maintain a position of authority and control
over Indigenous peoples. Social justice provides a means in which to investigate
Chapter 1: Introduction 15
how access, equity and institutional constructs act as barriers limiting the
engagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in primary and
secondary schooling.
An introduction to the objects of analysis: The texts
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) argues that the effects
of colonisation and the exclusionary practices found within historical accounts of
colonialism have been ignored by governments, policymakers, and the colonisers.
Therefore, the Coolangatta Statement makes assertions for “access [to] education that
acknowledges, respects and promotes the right of Indigenous peoples to be
indigenous – a right that embraces Indigenous peoples’ language, culture, traditions,
and spirituality” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229). In this study, the Coolangatta
Statement acts as a lens in which the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is analysed.
The Strategy emphasises the need for Indigenous students to be supported to achieve
their full potential in a schooling environment where their cultural identities, values
and knowledges are acknowledged and, parental and community engagement in the
child’s education is encouraged. An overview of the Coolangatta Statement and its
principles follows.
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999; 2006, p. 229) is “a living
document” providing the collective voice on Indigenous peoples’ rights in education
globally. It was issued at the World Indigenous Peoples’ Conference on Education
[WIPC:E] in Hawaii in 1999. A Task Force of nine Indigenous educators from
Australia, Aotearoa, America and Canada were commissioned by the WIPC:E
National Organizing Committee to address the continuing processes of colonisation
and to redefine Indigenous systems of education.
16 Chapter 1: Introduction
Within this study, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is
privileged and provides a framework through which to analyse the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) assisting in categorising the data into themes. Bruce-
Ferguson (2005) proposes that the Coolangatta Statement is positioned “as a
benchmark for how educational work with [I]ndigenous peoples should proceed” (p.
37 [emphasis added]). Here, Bruce-Ferguson asserts how the Coolangatta Statement
can and should be used when developing education policy with Indigenous peoples.
Furthermore, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is an
emancipatory document providing a means to speak into the contested space of
Indigenous education. That is, the Coolangatta Statement has as its purpose to
develop understanding and knowledge about the nature of educational inequality and
inequity in order to develop strategies for change. The value of the Coolangatta
Statement to this study therefore lies within its principles in addressing the rights of
Indigenous peoples in education and its application of Rigney’s Indigenist research
Principles (1999) – Resistance as an emancipatory imperative, Political Integrity and
Privileging Indigenous voice. Elaborations of these principles are provided in
Chapter 3. An overview of the Coolangatta Statement’s principles follows.
The principles of the Coolangatta Statement
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) provides five
overarching principles that address Indigenous peoples’ rights in education. They
are:
1. The right to be Indigenous;
2. The right to self-determination;
3. The right to practice and maintain language and culture;
Chapter 1: Introduction 17
4. The right to an education whereby the teaching and learning provision is
culturally appropriate and uses pedagogical principles that address the
skills and needs of the student holistically; and,
5. The right of Indigenous peoples to be actively engaged in the education of
the student including decision-making.
Iterations of the Coolangatta Statement were presented at the triennial WIPC:E
conferences starting with the 1993 conference held in Wollongong, Australia.
Extrapolation of the Coolangatta Statement principles is presented in Table 1.1.
The principles within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
are primarily focused on the tensions and constraints within Indigenous education.
Further to this, it places a focus on the notion of resistance providing an Indigenous
lens to the control and issues of power evident within Indigenous education policy.
An overview of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and its guiding principles
follows.
Table 1.1 Elaboration of the principles of the Coolangatta Statement
Principles Elaboration of the Principle
The right to be Indigenous Based within the then draft of the United Nations
Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples [UNDRIP]
(United Nations General Assembly, 2008); and,
Articulates the connection and interdependence of being
Indigenous and having the notion to control Indigenous
affairs, lives and futures.
The right to self-
determination
The right to practice and
maintain language and
Describes the connection of Indigenous peoples with
Country;
18 Chapter 1: Introduction
culture Highlights the importance of language and culture;
Acknowledges the detrimental effects of past policies; and,
Advocates for the revitalisation of languages as a means to
maintain and preserve Indigenous knowledges.
The right to an education
that is holistic and value-
based
More education specific -
“Indigenous pedagogical principles are holistic, connected,
valid, cultural, valuebased, thematic and experiential.
They promote and reward cooperative learning and the
unified co-operation of learner and teacher in a single
educational enterprise. They describe who teaches, as well
as, how and when teaching occurs” (Morgan, et al., 2006,
p. 235).
The right to control
Indigenous education
Indigenous education should be controlled by Indigenous
peoples at a local level;
Advocates for Indigenous education to be centred on
Indigenous values, cultures and beliefs -
“Non-Indigenous peoples should not involve themselves in
the processes of Indigenous decision-making” (Morgan, et
al., 2006, p. 236).
NOTE: Adapted from “The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in education”, by
Morgan, et.al, 2006.
Chapter 1: Introduction 19
The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy
2015
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is the most recent Australian
Commonwealth government policy to work towards addressing the ‘gap’ between
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and their non-Indigenous counterparts.
Its’ production works towards achieving the targets of the National Indigenous
Reform Agreement (Council of Australian Governments, 2008). It also builds on the
commitments made in other education policy including the Melbourne Declaration
on Educational Goals for Young Australians (MCEETYA, 2008).
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) acts “as a framework to guide
jurisdictions in developing and implementing localised policies and actions to
improve outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people” (p. 2). In other
words, schools and systems are to produce and recontextualise policy to address
issues and needs at a systemic and/or local level. Therefore, primary and secondary
schooling is the focus within this study.
The principles of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) has eight principles. They are: 1)
Achieve potential; 2) Accountability; 3) Equity; 4) Cultural recognition; 5)
Partnerships; 6) Relationships; 7) Local approaches; and 8) Quality. The Strategy’s
principles articulate the parameters needed to address the Vision Statement. In
addition, the principles establish the values that underpin the policy (Ball, 1990).
Each of the principles is now introduced and discussed.
Achieve potential, Accountability and Equity
In order for the principles Achieve potential, Accountability and Equity to be
addressed there is a need for a shared ideology where high expectations are held for
20 Chapter 1: Introduction
and by Indigenous young people in an educational institution (Education Council,
2015). Further to this, there is an expectation that Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students have access to an education equivalent to their non-Indigenous
counterparts. In doing so, there is a need to challenge institutional and societal
constructs that hinder Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ access and
participation in primary and secondary education.
Cultural recognition
Cultural recognition is another principle that policymakers are to embed within
their enactment of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). In this study, the term
cultural recognition is understood to be where the teaching and learning
acknowledge and respect Indigenous peoples’ histories, values, languages and
cultures. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006) argues that Indigenous
pedagogical principles must be embedded into the teaching and learning ensuring
that it is “holistic, connected, valid, cultural, valuebased, thematic and experiential”
(p. 235). In an Australian context, this is endorsed within the Australian Curriculum
with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures being one of three
Cross-Curriculum priorities (ACARA, 2015a).
Partnerships
Partnerships are contexts where Indigenous peoples are engaged in “decision
making, planning, delivery and evaluation” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). The
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006) reiterates the need for a strong local
involvement in Indigenous education where there is a need for parents and
community to “determine how and to what degree non-Indigenous peoples are
involved in Indigenous education” (p. 235). Particular attention within the Strategy
is placed at the local level; that is, primary and secondary schools, parents, extended
family and community (Education Council, 2015).
Chapter 1: Introduction 21
Relationships and Local approaches
Several principles of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) namely
Relationships; Partnerships; and, Local approaches, acknowledge the need for
increased engagement between stakeholders and community. Furthermore, the focus
of these principles expresses the need for Indigenous peoples to be encouraged in the
decision-making process in all levels of policymaking. In this study, the term all
levels of policymaking refers to the varying levels where policy is produced,
interpreted and enacted at a Federal, State/systemic and School level.
Quality
The final principle Quality is closely aligned with the principles of
Accountability, Partnerships and Local Approaches (Education Council, 2015). The
Strategy states that “policies, practices, programs and partnerships are inclusive of
the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, young people and their
families, and are informed by knowledge, evidence and research” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 3). Carapetis and Silburn (2011) discuss how evidence and
research has heavily influenced education in contemporary policy production. The
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) also draws on international
Human Rights Charters to validate its position including the United Nations
Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations General Assembly, 1948) as well as
the Kari-Oca Indigenous Earth Charter (Kari-Oca Declaration the Indigenous
Peoples’ Earth Charter, 1992).
Extensive discussion of the principles and the factors that inform the
production and interpretation of policy is provided in Chapter 2. This section
provided an introduction to the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The following section presents the
theoretical frameworks that inform the methodological approach.
22 Chapter 1: Introduction
An introduction to the Guiding Theoretical Frameworks
In this section, the three theoretical frameworks that inform the methodological
approach are articulated to illustrate how policy positions, represents and addresses
Indigenous young peoples’ educational attainment. The theoretical frameworks are
Indigenist Research Principles (Rigney, 1999), from here on referred to as IRP;
Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b), from here on referred to as
IST; and, Critical Discourse Theory (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough,
2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015), from here on referred to as CDT.
Kovach (2009) states, “so much of Indigenous ways of knowing is internal,
personal and experiential, [that] creating one standardized, externalized framework
for Indigenous research is nearly impossible” (p. 43). Weiss and Wodak (2003)
propose that researchers develop conceptual tools that are adopted from various
theoretical frameworks. Through these interpretations, both Indigenous and non-
Indigenous academics advocate for an eclectic methodological approach. Within this
study, establishing the shared ideologies that inform the accepted societal ‘norm’
when producing and interpreting Indigenous education policy, from a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher standpoint, is important in order to provide an
alternative lens on how policy positions, represents and addresses Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students’ educational attainment in primary and secondary
schooling.
While I have explicitly stated that I do not wish to genderise this argument, it is
important to note that ‘the alternative lens’ is from a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher standpoint as my lens and standpoint will differ to that of other Aboriginal
and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples. As Moreton-Robinson (2013) states, “the
gender of Indigenous bodies as with all racialized bodies does matter. Intersecting
Chapter 1: Introduction 23
oppressions marked by race, class, colonisation, culture, abledness and sexuality
shape the production of knowledge and ways in which we are known and come to
know and experience the world” (p. 339). The intersectionality of these binaries;
race, class, culture and so forth, informs and forms my standpoint and therefore,
brings forward an alternative lens privileging my social position as a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher; but also, challenging the patriarchal dominant
voices found in academia (Moreton-Robinson, 2013).
Indigenist Research Principles
The purpose of IRP, according to Rigney (1999), is to provide a means for
Indigenous researchers “to […] shift to a more empowering and self-determining
outcome” (p. 110). He emphasises that IRP are not to be considered as a definitive
set of strategies but rather as a foundation on which Indigenous researchers can
build. In doing so, he encourages Indigenous research reform whereby emerging
Indigenous researchers approach Indigenous research through an Indigenous lens
(Henry, Dunbar, Arnott, Scrimgeour, & Murakami-Gold, 2004).
Rigney (1999) asserts that
Indigenous Peoples must now be involved in defining, controlling, and
owning epistemologies and ontologies that value and legitimate the
Indigenous experience. Indigenous perspectives must infiltrate the structures
and methods of the entire research academy (p. 114).
This perspective is useful to conceptualize the ways in which the articulation of
Indigenous and non-Indigenous theories in this study constructs new knowledge and
understandings of Indigenous education policy and how such knowledges have the
potential to contribute to the struggle for self-determination. Rigney prescribes three
principles: 1) Resistance as the emancipatory imperative, 2) Political Integrity, and,
24 Chapter 1: Introduction
3) Privileging Indigenous voice. Elaboration of each of the principles is elaborated
on in Chapter 3.
Indigenous Standpoint Theory
IST provides a means to speak back into the contested space. According to
Nakata (2007b, p. 214), “it is a distinct form of analysis, and is itself both a
discursive construction and an intellectual device to persuade others and elevate what
might not have been a focus of attention by others”. Here, Nakata makes a point that
IST involves three actions. Firstly, I must draw on my socio-cognitive
understandings of the world in which I live. Furthermore, I need to extract the bias,
beliefs and taken for granted assumptions textured in the policies and known to be
held within wider society to establish my position. Thirdly, my knowledge and
understanding of the phenomenon is then based within reason and I can argue my
position with an intention to provide an alternative lens.
To enable researchers to do this, Nakata (2007a, 2007b) provides a conceptual
framework of three principles, or as I see them – stages, to develop, inform and enact
their standpoint. They are as follows:
1) Recognition of the cultural interface as a contested knowledge space;
2) Recognition of the continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency;
and,
3) Recognition of the continual tension that informs and limits what can and
cannot be said in the everyday.
Full investigation of these stages occurs in Chapter 3.
In this study, emphasis is placed on drawing from Indigenous research to
ensure that Indigenous voices are privileged. In doing so, my voice will be
constituted within the collective. The Indigenous theoretical frameworks used in this
Chapter 1: Introduction 25
study assist in establishing my ontological and axiological perspective on the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young peoples in
primary and secondary schooling. Such intentions are articulated here as a means of
making myself accountable to contributing to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander struggle for self-determination but also, to differentiate this study from
Western approaches and therefore, ensuring that it is not “western research done by
[an] Indigenous [person]” (Martin & Mirraboopa, 2003, p. 207). An overview of
CDT follows.
Critical Discourse Theory
Discourses play a critical role in this study, in particular, the means in which
discourses are drawn on to position and represent Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students’ educational attainment. In this section, focus is placed on CDT as
a means to foreground the methodological approach. CDT is a useful lens through
which to view the power of language in the policies (Chouliaraki & Fairclough,
2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015). Fairclough (2015) states that in
using Critical Discourse Analysis, from here on referred to as CDA,
one is committing oneself not just to analysing texts, nor just analysing
processes of production and interpretation, but to analysing the relationships
between texts, processes and their social conditions, both the immediate
conditions of the situational context and the remote conditions of
institutional and social structures (p. 58).
This understanding of the properties of CDT provided by Fairclough aligns with the
stages of IST where Nakata (2007a) affirms the need of the Indigenous researcher to
establish position.
26 Chapter 1: Introduction
An overview of each of the aspects of CDT follows. A definition of discourse,
as deployed in this study, is given. Discussion of discourse as a social practice and
as a social process is provided. The influence of the orders of discourse is also
considered.
Defining discourse
There is a paradoxical dilemma when defining discourse. Discourse is not
simply text but is a series of layers and complex relations between discursive and
interdiscursive elements (Fairclough, 2010). Furthermore, definition of discourse
requires a ”dialectical view of the social process in which discourse is one of six
elements (or ‘moments’): discourse (language); power; social relations; material
practices; institutions (and rituals); beliefs (values, desires)” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 7;
Harvey, 1996). Therefore, in this study, discourse is understood to be the dialectical
relationship between language and society whereby language is a fundamental
component of society that shapes and is shaped by society (Fairclough, 2015).
To further explicate the definition of discourse in this study, an iterative
process where discourse is treated as text, as a social practice and as constituting
knowledge occurs (Fairclough, 2010, 2015; Hodge, 2017); interchanging and
traversing between the layers of discursive and interdiscursive elements. For
example; while the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as policy texts are analysed, the power
relations of the Strategy’s author (government) and the intended audience
(educational stakeholders) as well as the positioning of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples are considered. Exploration of how the position of the coloniser as
the ‘knower’ and their influence on the values, beliefs, attitudes and stereotypes
Chapter 1: Introduction 27
maintained about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the educational
attainment of Indigenous students occurs.
The social conditions inform the production and interpretation of the text and
vice versa; ensuring that “discourse is not simply an entity we can define
independently [but] the complex relations which constitute social life: meaning, and
making meaning” (Fairclough, 2010, p. 3). Therefore, while discourse includes
“representations of how things are and have been, [discourse also provides]
imaginaries, representations of how things might or could or should be” (Fairclough,
2001b, p. 3). The possibilities and probabilities of “how things might or could or
should be” are referred to as discourses of imaginaries in this study.
Fairclough (2015) provides a conceptual framework of three dimensions of
discourse to illustrate the relationship between language and societal practices and
processes. Figure 1.3 depicts discourse as Text, Interaction and Context representing
the product, the processes of production and interpretation as well as the social
conditions of production and interpretation. It also denotes the stages of CDA which
are discussed in the section titled: Critical Discourse Analysis later in this chapter
and expanded in Chapter 3.
Discourse as a social practice and process
CDT provides a means to analyse the multiple discourses in policy by
investigating the positioning of the coloniser and Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. Luke (2002) advocates that CDA provides
an understanding of the centrality of language, text, and discourse in the
constitution of not just human subjectivity and social relations, but also
social control and surveillance, the governance of polity and nation-state,
and attendant modes of domination and marginalization (p. 99).
28 Chapter 1: Introduction
Figure 1.3 Discourse as text, interaction and context. Taken from “Language and Power”, by N.
Fairclough, 2015, p. 58.
Here, Luke makes a point that discourse is a social practice that is used to maintain
notions of power that can, in turn, marginalise voice. Van Dijk (1993) states that a
researcher who uses CDA selects a critical social issue to analyse to better
understand the context.
Central to Figure 1.3 is Text. Within this study, the primary texts of concern
are the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan,
et al., 1999, 2006). Here, the texts are the “product of the process of text production”
(Fairclough, 2015, p. 57). That is, they are both product and process. Both these
texts have been purposefully selected because of their opposing ontologies; one
which emphasises a Western lens and the other, an Indigenous lens, in regards to
addressing Indigenous education.
The middle box in Figure 1.3 represents the processes of production and
interpretation with the outer box referring to the social conditions of production and
interpretation. The processes of interpretation and production involve the
Chapter 1: Introduction 29
recognition of textual features and the “interplay between properties of texts and a
considerable range of […] ‘members’ resources’ (MR) which people have in their
heads and draw upon when they produce or interpret texts” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 57
[original emphasis]). That is, the socio-cognitive resources, or MR, that people draw
on are shaped by and shape broader social conditions which is the third (outer)
dimension of Fairclough’s framework.
Fairclough (2015) suggests these social conditions are determined by “three
different ‘levels’ of social organization” (p. 57), which I see as the positions of social
actors, who operate within: 1) Societal, 2) Institutional, and 3) Situational contexts.
In relation to this study, the social conditions of production and interpretation involve
identifying and later, analysing:
1) Societal contexts- The position of policy as a means to control and govern
the efforts and approaches when addressing the disparity of the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in comparison
to their non-Indigenous counterparts; which in turn relates to
2) Institutional contexts - The position of social actors, being the coloniser as
well as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples including students,
parents and community, within education; which in turn, is informed by
3) Situational contexts- The position, shared values, beliefs and assumptions
held by society of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ abilities,
skills and knowledge in regards to education that inform the social
identities of the social actors.
The varying positions illustrated here make explicit the orders of discourse. These
three levels of social organisation can be broken into three elements of social practice
that inform the orders of discourse, being: genres, discourses and styles. Explanation
of genres, discourses and styles is provided in Chapter 4.
30 Chapter 1: Introduction
Orders of Discourse
A term originally used by Foucault, Fairclough (2012) reconceptualises orders
of discourse in regards to its application in CDA. He states that orders of discourse
“is really a social order looked at from a specifically discoursal perspective – in
terms of those types of practice into which a social space is structured which happen
to be discourse types” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 61). Here, Fairclough makes a point to
define orders of discourse as a social order. Furthermore, he indicates that orders of
discourse are informed by genres, discourses, and styles. Therefore, providing
examples of how discourse is shaped and constrained by the interrelated and
networking clusters of social conventions and the dialectical relationship between
discourse and society make orders of discourse evident.
Embodied within the orders of discourse in the various social institutions are
dominant ideologies that have the potential to maintain or change the power relations
upheld in society. Fairclough (2015) indicates the importance of this by stating,
institutional practices which people draw upon without thinking often
embody assumptions which directly or indirectly legitimise existing power
relations. Practices which appear to be universal and commonsensical can
often be shown to originate in the dominant class […] and to have become
naturalized (p. 64 [original emphasis]).
The relations of power here are based on consent; not coercion. In other words,
Fairclough is referring to the notion of hegemony.
Hegemony places a focus on the interdependencies and synergies of power,
politics, ideology and class (Fairclough, 2010). As Ives (2004) asserts,
politics, [according to Gramsci], cannot be conceived exclusively in narrow
terms of the state and government but must encompass the wide range of
Chapter 1: Introduction 31
human activity often seen as non-political, such as our everyday beliefs and
behaviour, from the books we read and the films we enjoy to our religious
feelings and perceptions of the world” ( p. 3-4).
Here, the view of language as power; where ideologies are established to gain
consent through commonsensical and/or taken for granted assumptions, beliefs or
values occurs. Discourse enables communication and the sharing and understanding
of ideas and therefore, is the primary vehicle utilized to maintain or resist dominant
ideologies through the notion of control by consent or the notion of struggle by
resistance, respectively. Elaboration of the power in and behind discourse is
provided in Chapter 4.
In this section, the theoretical frameworks that inform the methodological
approach were provided. Rigney’s IRP (1999) and Nakata’s IST (2007b) were
introduced. CDT was examined. The three dimensions of discourse were provided.
In the following section, CDA that informs the methodological approach in this
study is considered. The textual features that inform the Descriptive analysis of the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) at a micro-level are given.
An introduction to the Guiding Methodology
In this study, CDA (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b,
2001c; Fairclough, 2015) informs and guides the development of a methodological
approach, ICDA. In this section, focus is placed on the textual features that inform
the analysis of the data. CDA, and in turn – ICDA, enables an extensive examination
of how texts position, represent and address the educational attainment of Indigenous
students. A definition of CDA, the three stages of CDA and the textual features that
inform this study are discussed. The influence of IRP (Rigney, 1999) and IST
32 Chapter 1: Introduction
(Nakata, 2007a, 2007b) on CDA is alluded to, where appropriate. Articulation of the
theoretical frameworks and the methodology occurs in Chapters 3 and 4,
respectively. Exposition of ICDA is provided in Chapter 5.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Definition of the methodological approach of CDA is diverse. Wodak and
Meyers (2009) assert that, “CDA is […] not interested in investigating a linguistic
unit per se but in studying social phenomena which are necessarily complex and thus
require a multi-disciplinary and multi-methodical approach” (p. 2). Van Dijk (1993)
affirms the multidisciplinary properties of CDA. He writes that CDA involves
defining and acknowledging the relationships between “text, talk, social cognition,
power, society and culture” (Van Dijk, 1993, p. 253). In later writings by van Dijk
(2009), he contends that critical discourse analysts seek to demonstrate how
discourse “(re)produces social domination, that is, the power abuse of one group
over others, and how dominated groups may discursively resist such abuse” (p. 63
[original emphasis]). CDA in this study is understood to be the analysis of the
dialectical relationship between discourse and society (Fairclough, 2001b).
Fairclough (2015) provides a conceptual framework of the three stages of CDA
that aligns with the three dimensions of discourse as illustrated previously in Figure
1.3. In his textually-based approach, the three stages of CDA include Description,
Interpretation and Explanation. A visual representation of these stages is provided
in Figure 1.4. Explanation of the Description, Interpretation and Explanation stages
occurs in Chapter 4. A brief overview of the Description stage follows to foreground
the introduction to the textual features that inform this study.
Chapter 1: Introduction 33
Figure 1.4 A visual representation of the three stages of Critical Discourse Analysis. Adapted from
“Language and Power”, by N. Fairclough, 2015.
Description
Within this study, the primary focus for analyses is the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) as a text through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006). In other words, the two texts are the object of description
(Fairclough, 2015). The Coolangatta Statement is also a tool of interpretation of the
Strategy. Elaboration of the Coolangatta Statement as an explanatory framework
occurs in Chapter 3.
Fairclough (2015) states that “analysis at the description stage differs from
analysis at the interpretation and explanation stages” (p. 59). Here, Fairclough
makes explicit the distinct difference between Description and the other stages of
analysis – Interpretation and Explanation. That is, the Description stage identifies
textual features to determine the mobilisation of discourses at the micro- level.
Definition of the micro-, meso- and macro- levels of analysis is provided in Chapter
34 Chapter 1: Introduction
4. Introduction of the textual features that inform this study are provided in the
following section.
Textual features
For the purpose of this study, the textual features that inform the analysis are:
1. Binary constructs;
2. Euphemistic expressions;
3. Relational modality;
4. Expressive modality;
5. Metaphor; and,
6. Declarative statements.
More specifically, the textual features focus the descriptive analysis of the study and
provide a means for the linguistic features and discourses of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), at a
micro- level, to be investigated. Description analysis therefore provides a means to
understand the elements of language that make the text. That is, the structural,
grammatical, linguistic, and semiotic features of the text (Fairclough, 1992, 2001b,
2008, 2012; Fairclough, 2015). Figure 1.5 provides a visual representation of the
textual features that inform this study. Explication of the textual features is provided
in Chapter 4.
Explication of CDA, that informs the methodological approach in this study,
was provided in this section. A definition of discourse was given. An illustration of
the conceptual framework of the three stages of CDA was presented and its various
stages were then explained. The Description stage and the textual features that
inform this study were introduced. The research questions that guide this study are
now considered.
Chapter 1: Introduction 35
Figure 1.5 A visual representation of the textual features that focus the analysis of the Strategy
The research questions
The focus in this study is to establish how the current Australian Indigenous
education policy, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), positions, represents and
addresses the educational attainment of Indigenous primary and secondary students
and in turn, attends to the rights of Indigenous peoples in education as advocated for
in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The primary overarching
question is:
1) What are the key elements of the current Australian Indigenous education
policy, the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Strategy 2015 that address the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander young peoples, as reported in the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education, in primary and secondary
schooling?
Further investigation is required to respond to this question. The sub-questions that
have emerged are:
36 Chapter 1: Introduction
1) How are the principles of the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous
peoples’ rights in Education signified, represented and enacted in the
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015?
2) What discourses are identifiable in the National Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 and the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education and how do they influence,
maintain and/or challenge social structures and social practices?
3) How do the discourses within the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Strategy 2015 and the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education illustrate relations of power and
tensions at the cultural interface?
The overarching question focuses on identifying the similarities and
differences between the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) when addressing the education of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students. The second question investigates the positioning
and representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people within
policy and explores how Indigenous educational attainment is portrayed within the
literature. Focus will be on how social actors control and/or resist representations of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ educational attainment in primary and
secondary schooling. Understanding of the context that foregrounds and positions
Indigenous peoples provide the base for answering the third question to identify
whose voices are privileged and/or silenced when addressing the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and therefore, whose values are
represented. The final question engages in the social conditions that inform the
possibilities of the production and interpretation of the texts. It looks to determine
the tensions at the cultural interface and how, or if, education in Australia supports a
Chapter 1: Introduction 37
holistic education approach when addressing the educational attainment of
Indigenous young peoples.
Structure of the thesis
Chapter 1 has provided the background and context of this study. It has
provided an overview of the research problem, the theoretical frameworks and
methodology that informs this study. It also puts forward the research questions.
Chapter 2 provides a synopsis of Indigenous education policies in Australia. A
historical timeline of the intertextual and incremental properties of policy is
examined. Particular attention is paid to how policy discourses have previously
addressed Indigenous disadvantage as well as the educational attainment of
Indigenous young peoples. The influence of historical, social, political and cultural
contextual factors foregrounds the current context of Indigenous educational
outcomes. Focus is placed on how Indigenous potential, cultural recognition and
productive partnerships are represented and addressed within the corpus.
The Indigenous theoretical frameworks that inform this study are presented in
Chapter 3. This chapter provides an elaboration of the principles of IRP and IST.
Demonstration of how the principles and stages inform the analysis of Indigenous
education policy is considered.
Chapter 4 discusses how CDT (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough,
2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015) informs policy discourse analysis. CDA
(Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015) as a
methodological approach is also discussed. The chapter investigates policy
discourses and the sociocultural practices that inform the production and
38 Chapter 1: Introduction
interpretation of policy. Identification and analysis of each of the stages in CDA are
detailed.
Extrapolation of the ICDA framework occurs in Chapter 5. The semiotic
properties of the conceptual framework are provided. An overview of how bias is
addressed in the study and ethical considerations necessary to establish
trustworthiness are discussed.
The corpus analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) through the lens
of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is provided in Chapter 6.
The generic structure of genres of governance including the font style and layout is
explored. Analysis of the semiotics prevalent in the Strategy occurs.
In Chapter 7, investigation of how the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
addresses Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students access to education that
“embraces Indigenous peoples’ language, culture, traditions and spirituality”
(Morgan, et al., 1999; 2006, p. 229) occurs. In turn, Chapter 7 provides a means to
identify how the Coolangatta Statement’s principles (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are
signified, represented and enacted in the Strategy, how the discourses influence,
maintain and/or challenge societal structures and social practices as well as illustrate
relations of power and the tensions at the cultural interface.
Deriving and building on the basic human rights for Indigenous peoples to
education is the theme of culture and identity. The interrelationships and synergies
between culture and identity are explored. Strategies that encourage and respect the
languages, histories, values and spirituality of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students; that acknowledge the Indigenous relationship with the land, air and sea and
their right to be Indigenous are considered.
Chapter 1: Introduction 39
In Chapter 8, the link to education and pedagogy becomes explicit. The
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006) states that “education must be scholarly
and empowering whilst at the same time the processes of education must be
embedded in Indigenous culture and wisdom” (p. 233). An educational approach
that advocates for the inclusion of Indigenous histories and cultures is subject to the
commitments and values held by educationalists, institutions and policymakers. The
actions and values signified, represented and enacted in policy discourses illustrate
relations of power and the tensions at the cultural interface.
In Chapter 9, the major findings of the study are presented. The contributions
of the theoretical and methodological approach, Indigenous Critical Discourse
Analysis are discussed. Recommendations for future study are provided.
40 Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 41
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
I am the emu. It was not until beginning to navigate the oceans of higher
degree research that I truly became aware of the rips in the tide; of how
influential the colonial past is and how it shapes and is shaped by dominant
ideologies and hegemonic positioning. Prior to this, I just put it down to a
racist society that had lost the sense of compassion, the sense of humanity.
As I read the journal articles, media discourses, policy discourses – I began
to see and my world view changed. It was not because these values were
lost but rather were annihilated by a sense of strength in the dominant
voice of the coloniser. So often in social media discourses I read the
majority rejecting the actions of the past; ‘I didn’t do it!’; ‘It happened 200
years ago – just get over it!’ but it wasn’t 200 years ago. Marginalisation
and exclusion were political measures utilised to control Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples until up to the 1970s, a mere 40+ years ago;
and still do today. I struggled as I entered the cultural interface.
42 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 43
This chapter draws on the literature foregrounding the social conditions that
shape and are shaped by the processes of policy production and interpretation. The
chapter has been broken into four parts:
a historical recount of the representations of Indigenous education pre-
1788 – foregrounding of the educational practices prior to colonisation;
a historical recount of the representations of Indigenous education post-
1788 - making explicit the tensions and complexities faced by Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples as they struggled to engage in
Westernised education;
an overview of policy - that is, explication of the policy cycle as well as
identifying the key stakeholders and processes necessary in policy
production; and,
an overview of the key policies that inform the production of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006).
Analysis of the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that
influence the social conditions of production and interpretation and in particular, the
historical recounts that develop my understanding of the social conditions and how
they inform the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in
education occurs (Nakata, 2007a). Therefore, unlike a conventional Literature
Review where critical analysis of the literature is undertaken, this chapter is used to
contextualise how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling were initially excluded and marginalised from education and
how change and transformation did not occur until the mid-twentieth century. As I
shared in My story: Positioning of self, I am gathering the knowledge ‘winds’ under
my ‘wings’ to select the best flight path, padding my ‘nest’ prior to launch.
Definition of the various types of policy and explication of the policy cycle
44 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
foregrounds the overview of the policies that have informed the production of the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006). In turn, this chapter enables me to position myself as a knower when
critically analysing the Strategy through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement in
Chapters 6, 7 and 8.
It is important to note that the historical account of Indigenous Australia prior
to colonisation is rife with contestation. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples have an oral tradition and as a result, the dominant literature within the
corpus has been provided by the colonisers after 1788 (Smith, 1999). Effort has been
made to draw on the work of Indigenous academics to counter the patriarchal
dominance of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history from the colonisers’
perspective. As Smith (1999) states “representations of ‘native life’ (sic) as being
devoid of work habits, and of native people (sic) being lazy, indolent, with low
attention spans, is part of a colonial discourse that continues to this day” (pp. 53-54).
Through this interpretation, the colonial representations of Indigenous peoples are
through a deficit lens and are still prevalent within the dominant ideologies, bias and
taken for granted assumptions in contemporary Australia. In the following section,
the representations of the social conditions of production and interpretation in
Indigenous education prior to colonisation are explored.
Representations of the social conditions of production and interpretation in
Indigenous education prior to colonisation
Prior to colonisation, education was founded within Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander culture. Spirituality and connection to Country were foundational
basics within Indigenous education. Welch (1988) contends that “black education
(sic) was the living culture of Aboriginals itself, and functioned without such
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 45
artefacts as school buildings and school texts” (p. 207). Through this lens,
Indigenous education encompassed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures
and as a result, was not an education that prepared Indigenous youth for life but was
life itself. Dudgeon, Wright, Paradies, Garvey, and Walker (2010) report how
“reciprocity and sharing were and still are important characteristics in Aboriginal
society” (p. 27). Krakouer (2016) notes how the teaching and learnings of
Indigenous peoples provided a means for survival as well as the care and use of
Mother Earth. The ideologies shared by Dudgeon, et al., Krakouer and Welch
exemplifies the positions established in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) whereby the interrelationship of Indigenous peoples and Country
informed the teaching and learnings of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander youth.
Societal constructs and positioning within Indigenous communities
The practice of guiding children into specific roles by teaching them the
necessary skills was practiced within both Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander customs and traditions (Price, 2012a). The raising of the child was shared.
Both Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and tradition saw the
community as the ‘teacher’.
The oral traditions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples ensured
that cultural practices were maintained and shared. As Price (2012b) states
“Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s education was staged so that
information was given to a child when the child was ready to receive it” (p. 4). As a
result, much of the learning was disseminated orally and largely informal in nature.
Education was through participation and imitation. The practical and pedagogical
application of learning through practice ensured the understandings of the skills
46 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
necessary for such things as hunting and gathering were passed on through the
generations.
Language played a prominent part in the teaching and learning of Aboriginal
youth. Partington (1998a) states that, “it was common [for Indigenous peoples] to be
fluent in a number of languages and dialects to enable communication with
surrounding groups” (p. 28). Here, Partington makes a point that Indigenous peoples
were multilingual. The coloniser did not appreciate the intelligence required by
Indigenous peoples to produce and interpret the multiple languages, stories and
knowledges. Instead, as there were no written texts, “there was little respect among
the Europeans in 1788” (Partington, 1998a, p. 28). That is, the complex societal and
cultural practices within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities were
considered uncivilised because of the lack of a writing system. Further insight into
the representations of Indigenous education after the colonisation of Australia in
1788 follows.
Representations of the social conditions of production and interpretation in
Indigenous education after 1788
Investigation of the historical accounts and representations of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples in education provides opportunity for me to explore
how Indigenous peoples and history “is told from the perspective of the colonizers”
(Smith, 1999, p. 29). Gaining an understanding of the knowledge held about
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within the corpus is a key stage of
Nakata’s Indigenous Standpoint Theory [IST] (2007a, 2007b). Smith (1999) states
“transforming our colonized views of our own history (as written by the West),
however, requires us to revisit, site by site, our history under Western eyes” (p. 34).
That is, by investigating the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 47
peoples from the colonisers’ perspective, I can establish my standpoint and challenge
the dominant positions held by non-Indigenous ‘knowers’. Therefore, the
investigation begins with a synopsis of the historical, political, cultural and social
context.
Colonialism: The historical, political, cultural and social context
Australia was colonised by the British Empire in the late eighteenth century.
Soon, the growing White population of colonised Australia outnumbered the
Indigenous peoples. In turn, the settlement colonies became reflections of British
society (Brockliss & Sheldon, 2012). The initial phase of education for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students was indeed segregated and founded within the
historical, political, social and cultural contextual factors. In some states, it was
nearing two centuries before Indigenous students were allowed into the state
education system (see for example: Beresford, 2012; Cadzow, 2007; Hickling‐
Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003; Zubrick & Silburn, 2006).
Education, therefore, was a means in which the coloniser was able to further
position themselves as superior to Indigenous peoples. Smith (1999) asserts that,
“colonial education came in two basic forms: missionary or religious schooling
(which was often residential) followed later by public and secular schooling” (p. 64).
Here, Smith highlights the chronological provisions of education to Indigenous
peoples.
The eras: Frontier contact to Reconciliation
In this study, the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors have
been divided into three key eras; being: 1) Frontier contact; 2) Protected status and
Assimilation; and, 3) Integration. Figure 2.1 provides a timeline of key events
illustrating the social conditions of production including the historical, political,
48 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
cultural and social contextual factors that influenced the provision of primary and
secondary schooling education to and for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples.
Frontier contact focuses on native and missionary schooling provided from
1788 to the 1920’s. Here, the forced removal of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples from Country into missions and the role of the missionary as the
educator are explored. As a result, discussion of the racist and oppressive ideologies
that validated the notion of superiority held by the coloniser occurs.
The Protected status and Assimilation era ranges over a century from the late
1850s to the 1970’s. Responding to the House of Commons law in 1837, Australian
colonial states saw education as a means to assimilate Indigenous children who were
“considered open to change, education and salvation” (Armitage, 2014, p. 4). A
synopsis of the introduction of State secular education and the socio-political
ideologies that further marginalised Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
occurs.
The era of Integration (mid-1960s-current) looks at the representations of
Indigenous education after the 1967 Referendum including the initiatives embedded
into education systems to address the disparity between Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander and non-Indigenous students. The perceived shift in Australian attitudes and
values guide the current policies in regards to Indigenous education. In doing so,
policies challenge the historically embedded deficit discourses maintained by
dominant White Australian society. This era is inclusive of the more recent
Reconciliation movement. An analysis of the Frontier contact era follows.
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 49
Figure 2.1 The key events and eras that influence the education of Australia’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples up until 1970
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 51
Frontier Contact
The perceived inferiority of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples by
the coloniser ensured that they were only considered needing the fundamentals of
literacy and numeracy as well as other skills to assist and benefit the coloniser.
Haebich (1988) reports that if Indigenous students were accommodated; it was a
basic education. Price (2012a) states that “it was seen by many that our children
[Indigenous children,] were only fit to learn to sew, launder, cook, clean, garden,
build fences, tend livestock and generally participate in more menial tasks” (p. 4).
Secondary schooling was not introduced until the early 20th
century and therefore,
focus on the provision of primary schooling for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students by the coloniser follows (Burke & Spaull, 2007).
Positioning of Indigenous peoples within colonial Australia
The perceived inferiority of Indigenous peoples was based within the ideals of
social Darwinism (Attwood & Markus, 1999, 2007; Reynolds, 1989, 1996, 2006).
The term, social Darwinism, has been used extensively in Australia by prominent
Australian historians. Reynolds, Attwood and Markus, to name a few, refer to social
Darwinism as the notion of superiority held by the coloniser and the assumption of
the demise of the Indigenous Australian population. In other words, social
Darwinism was based on the belief that Indigenous peoples would die out. As a
result, the education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders was not considered
important and it took more than 20 years after the establishment of the colonies
before any Eurocentric schooling was provided.
Institutional constructs: Native schooling
Provision of primary schooling for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young
people by the coloniser was slow demonstrating the indifference of the coloniser
towards Indigenous peoples. Figure 2.1 shows that in 1814, Governor Lachlan
52 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Macquarie established the first school for Aboriginal students in collaboration with
William Shelley (Beresford, 2012; Cadzow, 2007). Known as the Parramatta Native
Institution, the school “was the first of repeated attempts to ‘civilise’ the Aboriginal
population away from Indigenous customs and Country by inculcating Christian
habits and the values of the coloniser. Macquarie’s unsuccessful attempt was
followed nonetheless by Christian missionaries” (Beresford, 2012, p. 85). Beresford
emphasizes the position of superiority assumed by the coloniser and their wish to
enlighten the Indigenous peoples of a ‘civilised world’ with the coloniser’s way of
being, knowing and doing.
The report, Bringing Them Home: National Inquiry into the Separation of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families (Commonwealth
of Australia, 1997), highlights that the innovation of the Parramatta Native Institution
was initially welcomed by the local Aboriginal families. However, “within a few
years it evoked a hostile response when it became apparent that its purpose was to
distance the children from their families and communities” (Commonwealth of
Australia, 1997, p. 22). Through this interpretation, the intentions of assimilating
Indigenous children to the coloniser’s way of life were rejected by Aboriginal
parents. The early attempt by government to provide an education failed and the role
of the missionary in assimilating the Indigenous peoples was signalled and enforced
(Burridge, Whalan, & Vaughan, 2013).
Institutional constructs: Missionary schooling
By the 1830s and 1840s, as a result of the removal of Indigenous peoples from
Country, missions and reserves were established (Beresford, Partington, & Gower,
2012). Not only was the removal an indication of the power of the coloniser but
also that its “intention [was to convert] the Aborigines (sic) to Christianity”
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 53
(Reynolds, 2009, p. 85). That is, under the auspices of Christianity, Aboriginal
people were to be provided some kind of education by the missionaries. The 1837
House of Commons Law provided further control over Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples through legislation. That is, missionaries’ ‘christianising’ of the
Indigenous peoples of Australia was considered an essential contribution to
producing citizens of Australia (Parbury, 2011). Explication of the House of
Commons law follows to further articulate the dominance of the coloniser over the
Indigenous peoples.
House of Commons Law and the validation of institutional constructs
In 1837, the House of Commons formed a committee. The role of the
Committee was to produce policy and law regarding control of the Indigenous
peoples of the nations commandeered by the British Empire (Armitage, 2014). As
Armitage (2014, p. 4) states, the law enabled control over those “that operated
outside the accepted economic structure and which was, or could become, a source of
disorder”. The law had eight principles, being:
1) the assertion of control, that is to say, the assumption that an orderly,
managed world was needed and that Britain was to provide it – both at
home and overseas
2) an assumption that the purpose of policy was to bring ‘outsider’ whether
the poor or [A]boriginals, within the established institutions of British
society […]
3) a commitment to a legal and regulatory process anchored in a separate
law for those outside the mainstream of society, pending their full
citizenship
4) appointment of ‘protectors’ (who could provide [A]boriginal peoples
with a restricted status under the law and subject them to summary
discipline) […]
5) special recognition of the situation of children, who were considered
open to change, education, and salvation
6) special recognition for the elderly, for whom change seemed unlikely
54 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
7) a recognized place for organised Christianity as an essential element in
the process of producing citizens
8) an obligation to provide orderly reports on the progress of the
administration and the welfare of [A]boriginal peoples[…] (Armitage,
2014, p. 4).
These principles can be identified within early Australian policy and reform. That is,
the Aboriginal Protection Acts and the policy of assimilation emulate these principles
(see, for example:Hasluck, 1961; Parliament of Victoria, 1869). However, the
principles are also evident in the earlier colonial dispositions as demonstrated within
the marginalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education
(Burridge & Chodkiewicz, 2013).
The influence of the House of Commons law on societal constructs and Indigenous
education
The forcible removal of children to missions increased the power and
responsibilities of missionaries to provide an education for Aboriginal children.
Particular focus was placed on the children of Aboriginal mothers and White fathers,
labelled as “half-caste” who were deemed easier to convert and assimilate (Francis,
1996; Welch, 1988, p. 208). The taken for granted assumption, based on the fifth
principle of the House of Commons law, was that Indigenous children were willing
to reject their cultural heritage and take on the beliefs, values and knowledges of the
coloniser.
The lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples were controlled by
the coloniser. The assertion of control was based within the first and second
principles of the House of Commons law whereby Britain’s stronghold as a civilised
society was assumed. Renes (2011) states that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander populations were further pathologised within Australian society by the
actions of the coloniser. He writes that the control assumed by the coloniser “denied
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 55
the Indigenes (sic) the necessary means and control over their own lives to improve
their living conditions, [in turn,] it simultaneously blamed them for the ills provoked
by white society” (Renes, 2011, p. 34). Renes asserts that the effects of
dispossession were detrimental to Australian Aboriginals further marginalising and
alienating them within their own lands. The missionaries also controlled Aboriginal
peoples and embedded the ways of the coloniser into teachings and learnings
(Nakata, 2007b).
The education of Torres Strait Islander children was also subject to the
influence of missionaries. Nakata (2007b) writes that, “the goals of the mission was
to bring the gospel to the people, to rescue the lost souls, and guide them back
towards the ideal state” (p. 23). Here, Nakata’s interpretation reflects the ideologies
shared in the first, second and seventh principles of the House of Commons law.
Nakata’s statement refers to Reverend MacFarlane and his work in New Guinea and
the Torres Strait Islands to ‘civilise’ the Indigenous peoples.
In relation to the education of Aboriginal peoples, the dominant view of
‘civilising’ the Indigenous peoples was that all teaching and learning was to be
provided in English. Aboriginal children were discouraged to use their multi-literacy
skills and the numerous Aboriginal languages and dialects they held (Partington,
1998a). In contrast, within the Torres Strait Islands, dialects were still able to be
used at times and Kriol encouraged (Welch, 1988; Williamson, 1997). Here, a
paradox is evident where Aboriginal languages were excluded and Torres Strait
Islander languages were privileged. The attempts to teach Indigenous peoples the
3R’s; reading, writing and arithmetic (Jackson-Barrett, 2011) or the 4R’s; “reading,
writing, reckoning and religion” (Welch, 1988, p. 208) was not well received by
wider Australian society. As Price (2012b) reported the general belief held by the
56 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
coloniser was that Indigenous peoples lacked the skills necessary and the coloniser
questioned “useless attempts to teach a half-dozen children to spell or scratch
unintelligible hieroglyphics on slates” (K. Hassell, 1966, p. 115 as cited in Welch,
1988, p. 208). The attitudes and beliefs held by the coloniser that Indigenous peoples
were considered uneducable and inferior normalised societal values and maintained
dominant ideologies. Embedded within the dominant ideologies is institutionalised
racism that makes explicit the political agenda of colonial Australia.
Institutionalised racism and the political agenda of colonial Australia
The establishment of the binary construct of ‘us’ and ‘them’, ‘Indigenous’ and
non-Indigenous’ by the coloniser validates the dominant ideology of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander as inferior. De Leeuw and Greenwood (2014) assert that, “it
was thus imperative for colonial educators to hold fast to ideologies that Indigenous
Others were always, despite being ‘educated’ or even ‘civilized,’ innately (e.g.,
biologically and culturally) inferior” (p. xix). That is, the ‘station’ of Indigenous
peoples whether educated or not was at the lowest rung of society and subject to the
notion of control and power by the coloniser. As Lattas (1996) suggests, the political
agenda of civilising Indigenous peoples and the assumption of the colonisers’
superiority was embedded in colonial Australia.
The forced introduction of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders within
missionary schooling ensured that the coloniser’s ways were legitimised within the
dominant notion of superiority. The education provided was rudimentary and
embedded the Christian values though “in neither case were the colonised consulted
as to the content of this curriculum, or whether they wanted schooling at all” (Welch,
1988, p. 207). Here, Welch highlights that the sovereign rights of Aboriginal and
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 57
Torres Strait Islander peoples were not considered but moreover, they would want to
adopt the coloniser’s ways.
The role of education in the colonial states was a means to maintain a notion of
power and dominance. The position of the coloniser and their desire to acculturate
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples into the coloniser’s ways of knowing,
doing and being was made possible through the provision of education and the
demonstrable actions undertaken to demonise and diminish the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being and doing. As De Leeuw and
Greenwood (2014) state, “education is never neutral or benign. Education always
fosters and maintains systems of social power” (p. xvi). Through this lens, education
was a means to control and impose colonial law on and over Indigenous peoples.
The contested space and resistance to early colonial education
The provision of education for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young
people in the colonial states was indeed a contested space. When Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students were provided education, they were expected to
assimilate and take on the colonisers’ ways and abandon their cultural identities,
traditions and cultures (Dodson, 1996). Nonetheless, early examples of resistance
against the civilising of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in colonial
education are evident.
As Moran (2002) writes, “the [I]ndigenous, though decimated, continued to
fight and to speak back. They refused to simply disappear from history, but
continued to point an accusatory finger at the societies that sought to ignore them”
(p. 1016). What Moran argues is that despite the efforts of the coloniser to silence
and marginalise Indigenous peoples and voice, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples would not be silenced. For example: Aboriginal parents elected to withdraw
58 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
their children from the Parramatta Native Institution once the hidden agenda became
apparent (Commonwealth of Australia, 1997). Parents reacted by disengaging from
the school. In doing so, the Aboriginal parents reinforced their parental rights and
challenged the superiority of the coloniser. There is clear alignment here to Rigney’s
(1999) principle of Resistance as an emancipatory imperative.
The dismissal of the cognitive skills held by Indigenous youth further validated
the dominance of the coloniser. There were examples whereby Indigenous students
challenged the ideologies held by colonial Australian society. Welch (1988) states
that the numerous examples reported of Indigenous students excelling failed to
change the racist tenets held. The notion of superiority of the coloniser minimised
these successes.
Examples challenging the dominant ideologies that maintained a deficit view
are found within the literature. Brooks and Kohen (1991; as cited in Cadzow, 2007)
cite an article from the Sydney Gazette in 1819 where “a reporter noted : ‘…a black
girl of fourteen years of age between three or four years in the school, bore away the
chief prize, much to the satisfaction of the worthy judges and auditors” (p. 251).
Price (2012b) drew on Bonwick’s work who cited the achievements of an Aboriginal
man known as Bungaree who was able to speak Latin and gained numerous prizes
from Sydney College. The accomplishments of such individuals were devalued by
the coloniser. With the introduction of the Aboriginal Protection Acts, the power and
control of the coloniser over the Indigenous peoples of Australia further influenced
the education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary schooling students.
Protected Status and Assimilation
By the mid-nineteenth century, the relationship between the State and the
various churches was changing (Sherington & Campbell, 2007). With the
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 59
introduction of the colonial Education Acts from 1872 onwards, the tensions between
the State and the Church becomes apparent (Lawry, 1972). Lawry (1972) argues
that, “the triumph of the State was evident when it assumed responsibility for
education from the Church” (p. 212). Since the establishment of the colonies, almost
a century beforehand, the Church of England had been allocated around 600 acres in
and around towns to establish a church and a school (Bourke & Lucadou-Wells,
2011). The states had now taken control of education under the guise of creating
opportunities for all (Sherington & Campbell, 2007).
From 1872-1893, all the Australian colonies established primary schooling
systems under colonial Education Acts (Meadmore, 2001). Burridge and
Chodkiewicz (2013) asserts that, “the Act resulted in a rapid expansion in the
number of children attending school overall, including an increase in the number of
Aboriginal children enrolled in local public primary schools” (p. 14). However, the
enrolment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students into State schooling
system was highly contested resulting in the further marginalisation of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander representation in State schools.
The position of Indigenous peoples in free, compulsory and secular education
Exclusionary policies were embedded into schooling practices to minimise the
integration of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students into the State schooling
system. In schools founded within the privileged position held by the coloniser,
Zubrick and Silburn (2006) highlight, “for Aboriginal children who managed to stay
with their families, health and hygiene provided the key mechanisms for expelling or
excluding Aboriginal children from state schools” (p. xxv). Here, Zubrick and
Silburn give insight to such exclusionary and racist policies as the Clean, Clad and
Courteous policy.
60 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Furthermore, the position of the coloniser as superior was enforced whereby
White parents could deny admission of Aboriginal children into schools. The
practice of exclusion was maintained. Zubrick and Silburn (2006) list the many
strategies employed by government and wider society to discourage Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander student engagement in State primary schooling (and secondary
schooling when it was introduced in the twentieth century) such as being “subject to
the prejudices, goodwill and whims of local parents in relation to their children’s
education” (p. xxv). The geolocation of schools being some distance from missions
to discourage enrolment and the objections and power of non-Indigenous parents
about Indigenous student’s health and morality were also influential. They did,
however, note that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ enrolment would
be allowed when schools were being established or threatened with closure.
The position of superiority held by the coloniser exemplifies White Privilege
by illustrating the notion of indifference and how the coloniser used Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students to the colonisers’ advantage (Welch, 1988).
Furthermore, White Privilege provides insight into the bias and taken for granted
assumptions that set societal norms and establish the dominant ideologies.
Explanation of White Privilege and illustration of the contested space by
investigating the hegemonic position of the coloniser at the cultural interface follows.
The contested space and White Privilege
Research is saturated with the colonisers’ observations, perspectives and
interpretations on the livelihoods and experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. Welch (1988) asserts, “White views on the educability of
Australian Aboriginals meshed neatly with more general racist views” (p. 210).
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 61
Here, Welch makes a point that the hegemonic position of the coloniser was based
within the ideals of implicit and explicit racism.
Gillborn (2005) highlights how White Privilege is not explicit racism but
moreover, taken for granted societal norms and therefore, implicit racism. Moreton-
Robertson (2004) further expounds White Privilege as the “invisible regime of power
that secures hegemony through discourse, and has material effects in everyday life”
(p. 75). She highlights how White Privilege illustrates the epistemological ways of
knowing that affirm the superiority of the coloniser. Leonardo (2002) explains that
White Privilege is built upon racial discourses that serve to establish the coloniser in
a position of authority and power. In regards to this study, White Privilege
demonstrates the assumed hegemonic position of the coloniser and illustrates a
component of the contested space where non-Indigenous and Indigenous knowledges
about Indigenous issues meet (Nakata, 2007a).
An understanding of White Privilege is important to this study as the
positioning of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people within Australian society
is influenced by and shaped by institutional and societal constructs. Nakata (2007a)
encourages Indigenous peoples to gain insight into how “our experience is
constituted in and constitutive of the corpus” (p. 12). In other words, I am to gain an
understanding of how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are represented
through racialized discourses and therefore, recognise how Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander educational attainment in regards to primary and secondary schooling
are represented in policy discourses.
The validation of institutional constructs: The policy of assimilation
The power of the coloniser over the Indigenous populations of Australia was
further legislated through the implementation of the policy of assimilation from 1940
62 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
through to 1970. Hasluck, the Minister of Territories in Australia in 1963 (Hasluck,
1961), stated that the term assimilation
means that all Aborigines [sic] and part-Aborigines [sic] will attain the same
manner of living as other Australians and live as members of a single
Australian community enjoying the same rights and privileges, accepting the
same responsibilities, observing the same customs and influenced by the
same beliefs, as other Australians (as cited in Dodson, 1996, pp. 3-4).
Taffe (1995) asserts that Hasluck’s definition of assimilation was based on social
justice principles and that “the ‘Aboriginal problem’ was a social problem, rather
than a racial problem” (p. 155). Dodson (1996) counters this argument by stating
that there was an assumption that Indigenous peoples’ cultural heritage, ways of life
and languages were inferior to the well-established institutions of the coloniser. That
is, the policy of assimilation was indeed a response to a perceived racial problem.
The struggle for social justice: Resistance to free, compulsory and secular
education
Resistance by Aboriginal peoples regarding their positioning in Australian
society became organised with the formation of the Australian Aboriginal
Progressive Association led by Fred Maynard (Maynard, 2003). The following
decade saw the formation of the Aboriginal Progressive Association (APA) led by
Jack Patten (Maynard, 2003). Maynard highlights how the APA positioned itself as
an organised Aboriginal-led resistance body against the legislation and policy that
controlled Indigenous peoples. In turn, the APA provided an opportunity for
Indigenous voice to be heard rather than silenced.
The lack of or poor education provided to Indigenous students were a focus of
the APA. In a speech made by Patten in 1938 at the Day of Mourning and Protest,
he identified that
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 63
Our children on the Government Stations are badly fed and poorly educated.
The result is that when they go out into life, they feel inferior to white
people. This is not a matter of race; it is a matter of education and
opportunity. That is why we ask for a better education and better
opportunity for our people. We say that it is a disgrace to Australia’s name
that our people should be handicapped by undernourishment and poor
education, and then be blamed for being backward […] incompetent teachers
are provided on the Aboriginal stations. That is the greatest handicap put on
us […] We appeal to the Australian nation of today to make new laws for the
education and care of Aborigines [sic] (as cited in Thompson, 2010, pp. 240-
241).
Patten’s impassioned speech drew attention to the positioning of Indigenous peoples,
the rudimentary education provided to Aboriginal peoples and the desire of
Indigenous peoples to gain an education that addresses their needs. That is, the
practice of providing poor education and incompetent teachers hampered the means
of success for Indigenous peoples. Further to this, the lack of educational attainment
for Indigenous peoples was then used to further validate the superiority of the
coloniser.
Smith (1999) asserts, “for [I]ndigenous communities the issue is not just that
they are blamed for their own failures but that it is also communicated to them,
explicitly or implicitly, that they themselves have no solutions to their own
problems” (p. 92). Here, Smith makes the point that Indigenous peoples are
consistently being told by media and politicians as well as wider society about the
dire hopelessness of their potential futures. In Australia, issues of social justice –
equity and access to education, the disparities between Indigenous and non-
Indigenous students’ educational attainment, were challenged due to the fact that
64 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Indigenous students were not readily accepted within the State education system.
Change was not afforded until the late 1960s with the integration of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students into the State primary and secondary schooling system
(Beresford, et al., 2012; Cadzow, 2007; Hickling‐Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003).
Integration
With the successful Referendum in 1967 to supposedly provide Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples with equal citizenship with their non-Indigenous
counterparts came the repeal of discriminatory policies such as the policy of
assimilation. Rigney (2002) affirms that “the 1967 Referendum saw a shift from the
colonial education by missionaries that was to ‘Christianise and civilise’, to
substantial changes in content and policy ushered in by Federal government during
the assimilation era from 1940s-1970s” (p. 75). Through this interpretation, the
passing of the Referendum was seen to bring about change. However, as Attwood
and Markus (2007) states, “repeal of section 127 provided for Aboriginal people to
be counted in the next national census but this did not confer citizenship rights such
as the vote” (p. vi). In other words, the Referendum and the resulting amendments to
the Constitution did not specifically articulate Commonwealth jurisdiction rather
than State over the Indigenous peoples of Australia. That is, while education
remained with the States, the control of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
was assumed by Federal Government hence highlighting future tensions prevalent in
Indigenous education.
Access and equity becomes an issue
With the introduction of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students into the
Eurocentric classroom, the mediocracy in the provision of Indigenous education and
the appalling disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students became
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 65
apparent. To address the disparities, government began establishing policy and
initiatives beginning with the Commonwealth Aboriginal Secondary School Grants
Scheme in 1969 (Burridge & Chodkiewicz, 2013). The Scheme provided Federal
funding for Aboriginal students to attend and to ensure their retention in completing
primary school (Partington, 1998b). A shift in the education of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students was becoming evident. To enable the shift,
transformation of institutional and societal constructs was necessary.
Societal constructs that position Indigenous peoples in education
The influence of historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors on
forming the dominant ideologies about Indigenous education became apparent from
the 1970s onwards. As Eckermann (1998) states, “any analysis of Aboriginal
education clearly shows that it was marred by neglect until the 1970s” (p. para. 12).
With the introduction of the policy of self-determination by the then Prime Minister
Whitlam, dramatic policy shifts in addressing the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students were developed, reviewed, evaluated
and recontextualised (Beresford, 2012; Eckermann, 1998).
The election of the Whitlam-led Labor government in 1972 saw further
developments in the education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
(O’Donoghue, 1994). Malin and Maidment (2003) assert that despite the shift from
the policies of assimilation after Whitlam’s election “the legacy of the past left huge
inequities and damage” (p. 86). Through this interpretation, the education of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples was influenced by the dominant
ideologies of colonial Australia.
66 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
The Schools Commission, positioning and privileging Indigenous voice
Within his term, the then Prime Minister Whitlam established the Schools
Commission, an advisory body, who “provided a new focus on educational
disadvantage, including that suffered by Indigenous people” (Beresford, 2012, p.
112). Education, in particular, was a primary focus under the policy of self-
determination as success for the policy was believed to be dependent on the success
of Indigenous education (Partington, 1998b). An Aboriginal Consultative Group was
established to assist in the Schools Commission’s “examination of the whole
program of Indigenous education” (Partington, 1998a, p. 48). The Schools
Commission privileged Indigenous voice; a dramatic shift in the institutional and
societal constructs of the past. The formation of the Aboriginal Consultative Group
to support the Schools Commission also has clear links to IRP (Rigney, 1999); to
privilege Indigenous voice.
The members of the Aboriginal Consultative Group were nominated by the
newly formed National Aboriginal Consultative Committee (Aboriginal Consultative
Group, 1975b). “The Group was appointed and first met on 16 December 1974”
(Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a, p. 61). One of the long-standing
recommendations to come from the collaborative work of the Schools Commission
and the Aboriginal Consultative Group was the formation and funding of State
consultative groups (Partington, 1998b) which provided and privileged Indigenous
voice on education until 2014. In December 2014, the State consultative groups
were defunded with the implementation of the Indigenous Advancement Strategy
under the Coalition Government led by the then Prime Minister, Tony Abbott
(Reconciliation Australia, 2016).
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 67
Addressing access and equity
While the government sought to gain understanding through the establishment
of the Schools Commission, “academics held conferences and published research
examining the complex range of issues surrounding the failure of schools to engage
most Aboriginal students” (Beresford, 2012, p. 105). There was a dramatic increase
of research in Indigenous education that was supported by the Australian Council for
Education Research (ACER) Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Committee. In 2004, the ACER Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Advisory Committee called for an escalation of focused longitudinal
research to ensure policy is evidenced-based and addresses the bias and taken for
granted assumptions held by wider Australian society (Mellor & Corrigan, 2004).
Numerous reports and reviews document the failures of schools to engage with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities based within the
notions of colonialism (see, for example: Welch, 1988); the disengagement of
Indigenous students from the Eurocentric classroom due to the effects of
intergenerational trauma (see, for example: Atkinson, 2013); the need to establish
school-community partnerships “to involve communities more heavily in direction
setting and delivery by schools” (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. 19); and, the
expectations and value of education to Indigenous peoples (MCEETYA Taskforce
on Indigenous Education, 2001), to name a few. The plethora of government policy
that has been developed since the initial report submitted by the Schools Commission
in collaboration with the Aboriginal Consultative Group in 1975 (see Aboriginal
Consultative Group, 1975a; Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b; Schools
Commission, 1975), as well as the academic research literature articulate the
‘problems’ in Indigenous education.
68 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
An overview of policy
In this section, focus is placed on policy. Definitions of policy and Indigenous
education policy are presented. The incremental and intertextual properties of policy
are considered. Finally, the difference between equality and equity are then provided
including the five dimensions of equality of condition to gain an understanding of
processes of policy production. Discussion of the policy cycle follows.
Policy itself and how it informs institutional constructs
Haddad and Demsky (1995) purport that policy is “an explicit or implicit single
decision or group of decisions which may set out directives for guiding future
decisions, initiate or retard action, or guide implementation of previous decisions” (p.
18). This understanding of policy is broad in terms and ambiguous in nature.
Further explanation is provided in the UNESCO Handbook on Education Analysis
and Programming (UNESCO, 2013) whereby policy is seen to be a means for
government to “explore solutions to an issue” (p. 7). Through this interpretation,
policy addresses significant public affairs including education. Further to this, the
formation of policy is deemed necessary through the identification of a ‘problem’
needing clarification and resolution. More specifically, policy becomes “the
operational statements of value” (Ball, 1990, p. 3).
The UNESCO Handbook on Education Policy Analysis (UNESCO, 2013)
defines education policy as “the main goals and priorities pursued by the government
in matters of education – at the sector and subsector levels – with regard to specific
aspects such as access, quality and teachers, or to a given issue or need” (p. 6).
Through these interpretations, the common themes within the explanation of
education policy include a means to provide an education to all school aged students
and addressing the numerous issues prevalent within the research.
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 69
While a definition of education policy itself is contentious (see Ozga, 2000),
Rizvi and Lingard (2010) assert that one of the purposes of education policy is to
ensure that there is equality and equity in education; to increase participation, and
therefore reduce social inequalities. Policy involves a consultative process. Ball
states that, “policy is both text and action, words and deeds, it is what is enacted as
well as what is intended” (1994, p. 10; as cited in Rizvi & Lingard, 2010, p. 5). That
is, policy involves not only the text itself but also concerns the processes of
production and interpretation. However, as Rizvi and Lingard (2010) assert, the
ambiguity of policy discourse allows for a contrasting reality when put in practice.
The purpose of policy is to bring about change; to target issues that political actors,
as a collective, make decisions on critical social matters (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010).
Therefore, within this study, policy is understood to be both product and process that
addresses a social problem. An overview of the key elements said to constitute
quality education and needs to be addressed in education policy follows.
The key elements in education policy
There is no unequivocal definition of what is quality education. However,
UNESCO (2013) states that the impetus to improve the educational attainment of
students “has increasingly been approached from the lens of learning outcomes,
including literacy, numeracy, critical thinking skills, occupational skills, responsible
citizenship, etc. These can be grouped broadly into cognitive and non-cognitive
skills (including social outcomes)” (p. 30). They suggest that this understanding of
quality in education demonstrates the need for policy to address three key elements:
1) curriculum, 2) learning outcomes and in turn, 3) the quality of teachers.
Elaboration of each of these elements follows.
70 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Curriculum
Richardson and Anders (1998) provide one theory whereby curriculum is said
to be the knowledge and skills students are expected to learn. UNESCO (2013)
further explicates the definition of curriculum stating that a “curriculum translates
expected learning outcomes into courses of studies and teaching-learning processes.
It […] guides the teachers to impart learning in an organized manner, so as to help
learners to achieve the desired learning outcomes” (p. 31). In an Australian context,
the development and implementation of a national curriculum produced by ACARA
has sought to address this ‘issue’ in recent years (see ACARA, 2015b).
Learning Outcomes
Learning outcomes are the product of assessment and are illustrated by the data
sets compiled as a result of assessment. In other words, assessment and its
consequential data are used as a means to measure the achievements in learning by
students. More recently with the globalisation of education, countries have been
drawing on the data collated by the OECD and their various assessment surveys
including the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) and Trends in
International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMMS) to enable cross-comparisons
of a country’s educational performance (UNESCO, 2013). In Australia, the learning
outcomes of students from Year 3 onwards, have been collated through the use of the
National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN). The data
collated is disaggregated into categories such as gender, geolocation and Indigenous
status (see ACARA, 2013).
Quality of teachers
The quality of the classroom teacher and the leadership of schools are critical
to the success of the implementation of educational policy. UNESCO (2013) asserts
that, “teachers play a key role in improving the quality of education” (p. 31).
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 71
Australia has in recent times sought to address the position of the classroom teacher
and school leadership through the development of the Australian Professional
Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2014b) and the Australian Professional Standard
for Principals (AITSL, 2014a). Further to this, the training of pre-service teachers
and the accreditation of University Initial Teacher Education courses have also been
addressed of late (see AITSL, 2013).
Indigenous education policy
The development of Indigenous education policy highlights that Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students’ educational attainment and the disparity between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous students are critical matters that the government
have deemed needing a ‘solution’. Dorey (2005) states that
some ‘problems’ are socially constructed, meaning that they reflect social or
ideological values about what is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable,
desirable or undesirable. Issues which are ignored or not even recognized in
one era can become defined as problems in a subsequent era (p. 8).
Here, Dorey highlights how the colonial notions of superiority maintained in colonial
Australia were not considered detrimental to the educational prospects of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander young people until the election of Whitlam to government
in 1972.
Access and equity in policy
In regards to Indigenous education policy, Rizvi and Lingard (2010) recognise
that access to education is just one part of addressing the social injustices
experienced by Indigenous students. They recognise how today’s policies maintain
the ideologies of colonialism albeit ‘hidden’ within policy discourses. That is, as
Lingard (2003) states, “there is perhaps no greater challenge facing educators today
72 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
than providing opportunities that transform the life experiences of young people” (p.
2). Therefore, the role of Indigenous education policy is to provide opportunity for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to transition into the workforce, to
develop lifelong learning skills to apply in their futures, and to contribute to wider
Australian society (MCEETYA, 2008).
Indigenous education policy presents the values of Federal and State
government in addressing matters pertaining to the educational attainment of
students (Rizvi & Lingard, 2010). In particular, Indigenous education policy
articulates governments’ desire to reform educational systems and/or approaches to
improve the education of Indigenous young people (see Education Council, 2015;
SCSEEC, 2013). Within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), governmental
viewpoints and their discourses of imaginaries for Indigenous young peoples’
educational experiences and attainment are given in the Vision Statement. However,
before focusing on specific Australian Indigenous education policy, I provide insight
into the policy cycle and the institutional constructs to further develop my
understanding of policy as product and process.
How the policy cycle ensures consistency and informs institutional
constructs
There are three types of education policies as articulated by the UNESCO
Handbook on Education Policy Analysis and Programming (UNESCO, 2013): 1)
Policy; 2) Strategy; and, 3) Plan. While descriptive in nature, the three types of
education policy are also normative as UNESCO is a global organisation and not
specific to a given country. Focus in this study is on the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) that is informed by the AEP (DEET, 1989). A strategy is defined as
“how the policy goals are to be achieved” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 6). Figure 2.2
provides a visual overview of the relationship between policies, strategies and plans
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 73
•Is a broad statement that sets the main goals and priorities that demonstrate the government's commitments to addressing specific issues
Policy
•Sets the directions necessary to achieve the goals and priorities set within the policy that in turn, illustrates the roles and responsibilities of the stakeholders
Strategy •Articulates the actions required to be implemented to achieve the goals and priorities set within the policy within identified time lines
•Sets specific targets and outputs as well as resources necessary in achieving those goals
Plan
as illustrated by UNESCO. Here, the interconnection of policies, strategies and plans
are provided.
Figure 2.2 The relationship between policies, strategies and plans. Taken from “UNESCO Handbook
on Education Policy Analysis and Programming”, by United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization, 2013.
The policy cycle has six distinct steps in which the policy, strategy and/or plan
follows as it is developed. The six steps are:
1. Problem - identification of the ‘problem’ including an analysis of the
evidence and literature to gain an understanding of the context as well as
recognition of “the issues that influence the various dimensions of
education” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 6);
2. People and place - recognition of the key stakeholders and the institutions
central to providing educational services;
3. Process - formation of policy including the setting of goals and priorities;
4. Price tag - confirmation of “the financial, physical, and human resources
that are needed to implement policies, plans, and programs” (Hardee,
Feranil, Boezwinkle, & Clark, 2004, p. 18);
74 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
5. Paper - recognition of and analysis of the policy documents that already
seek to address the ‘problem’; and finally,
6. Performance - analysis of the various strategies implemented to address
the policies and is inclusive of a monitoring and evaluation system
(Hardee, et al., 2004).
The illustration of the policy cycle in Figure 2.3 provides a visual representation of
the stages of policy. It presents the steps regarding formulation of policy, but also
the incremental and intertextual properties that inform approach and development
(Henry, et al., 2013). Hardee, et al. (2004) indicates that the historical, political,
cultural and social contextual factors influence the policy cycle and the development
of policy. Explanation of each of the stages of the policy cycle in relation to
Indigenous education follows.
The Problem: Knowledge and evidence
The initial perception of a problem triggers the need for a ‘solution’. That is,
“before the start of a policy cycle, a strategic intent, often called a “vision”, is
formed” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 8). An analysis and review of the educational sector is
conducted to reflect “the constitution and legislations, national development policies,
strategies and plans; and the country’s commitments to international development
goals” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 23). In doing so, the initial step demonstrates the
incremental and intertextual properties of policy (Henry, et al., 2013).
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 75
Figure 2.3 The Policy Cycle. Adapted from “The Policy Circle: a framework for
analysing the components of family planning reproductive health maternal health and
HIV/AIDS policies”, by K. Hardee, I. Feranil, J. Boezwinkle & B. Clark, 2004.
By identifying the ‘problem’ and conducting a critical review of the issue,
several aspects of policy and education are considered including ensuring evidence-
based policymaking; consistency across policies, strategies and plans as well as
addressing access and equity; and, quality of education provision (UNESCO, 2013).
That is, “policymaking should be preceded by research, evidence-collection and
debates on the identified issue or need, as well as on the proposed vision, options and
means to address such issues or needs” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 7). To do this, there is a
need to identify the key stakeholders and institutions involved in policymaking.
The People and Places: Positioning
The individuals (People) and the institutions (Places) involved in
policymaking are necessary to be identified within the policy cycle. As Hardee, et al.
(2004) states “individual stakeholders [,the people involved in policymaking,] and
76 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
the institutions [,the places,] they represent are central to policymaking” (p. 8). In
regards to Australian education policymaking, Ministers of Education form the
Education Council (Education Council, 2015). Other stakeholders include
“government bureaucrats and technocrats from various sectors (e.g. health,
education, finance, local government” (Hardee, et al., 2004, p. 8) such as the
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL), the Australian
Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) and Education Services
Australia (ESA) who all contribute to education policymaking in Australia.
Knowledge of the people and places at a macro-level of policymaking is just
one part of policy production. Mingat, Tan, and Sosale (2003) highlights that
in the education sector, developing a shared understanding of the problems
and strategy to address them is critical for achieving results on the ground
because such consensus is a key ingredient for encouraging cooperative and
synergistic action by the many parties who typically play a part in
implementing policies in education (p. 2).
Through this interpretation, shared ideologies between people and institutions are
also important in the policy cycle.
The Process: Institutional constructs
Process looks to the production of policy itself. Hardee, et al. (2004) states
that, “policy formulation is the part of the process by which proposed actions are
articulated, debated and drafted into language for a law or policy” (p. 14). Here,
there is recognition of policy discourses, that is, that policy has its own specific
language that sets its goals, objectives and expected outcomes. Hardee, et al. (2004)
contends that discourse may be broad; nonetheless, it should “articulate the relevant
activities and indicators by which they will be achieved and measured” (p. 15). As a
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 77
result, key theoretical constructs such as access and equity, participation and quality
form the principles within policy.
Education is broad in nature. For example: UNESCO (2013) states that,
“education is a major public service, and the government’s obligation to enable its
citizens to access education is enshrined in the constitutions of most countries” (p.
26). Here, access and equity is demonstrated as a crucial component of education
provision. To measure access, enrolment and attendance of students is monitored
and evaluated within the Performance step. Participation is also related to access.
Participation “is about to what extent the population fully takes part in and makes use
of available education services” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 27) and is measured through the
completion and dropout rates of students from education. The data collated is then
disaggregated into such categories as gender and race.
The Price Tag: Economy
Price Tag looks to address the funding provided to implement policy as well as
the other resources necessary for its ‘success’ such as human resources. As Hardee,
et al. (2004) contends, “it is crucial when developing or analysing a policy to
consider the level of resources necessary for proper implementation and whether
those resources are already available (and allocated) or need to be added for more
effective policy implementation” (p. 18). The educational attainment of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students was not specifically funded but more generalised
funding through the then National Partnership Agreements (NPA). The current
funding model is a needs-based model under the National Education Reform
Agreement (COAG, 2013).
78 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
The Paper: Text
Paper looks for consistency between policies and laws. That is, ensuring that
there are no inconsistencies as well as “check[s as to] whether there are any
duplications […] and whether there are competing demands for resources and
implementation capacities” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 24). In regards to this study, the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is informed by the AEP (DEET, 1989) but also,
the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians
(MCEETYA, 2008), from here on referred to as the Melbourne Declaration, the
NIRA (Council of Australian Governments, 2008), the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 (MCEECDYA, 2011b) and its subsequent
reviews (see, for example: Acil Allen Consulting, 2014). The Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), on the other hand, draws on international human rights
charters such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations General
Assembly, 1948) and the United Nations Declaration on the rights of Indigenous
Peoples (United Nations General Assembly, 2008).
The Programs and Performance: Consistency
The Programs and Performance step is two-fold. While being the final step in
policy production, it is also the beginning of the implementation process of the
policy in which the next cycle begins. That is, the policy is reviewed, monitored and
evaluated. “The process of policy implementation is often delegated to technocrats,
who are charged with devising solutions, mobilizing and allocating resources, and
ensuring maximum gains” (Hardee, et al., 2004, p. 24). A component of the
implementation is also the monitoring of the performance of the programs developed
to address the issue, in this instance, the educational attainment of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students.
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 79
Figure 2.4 A sample of the policies, reviews and reports that have saturated Australian policy making regarding Indigenous education policy since 1980.
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 81
The monitoring and evaluation process can be formative, summative or
“conducted a certain time after the completion of a programme in order to evaluate
the impact and sustainability of the programme” (UNESCO, 2013, p. 38).
Furthermore, review and evaluation may be internal or external and allows for policy
actors to learn from the experiences of implementing policy and therefore, encourage
improvements in future endeavours in addressing the issue of access.
Indigenous education policy and Human Rights
The policies outlined in this section have been specifically selected in relation
to their significance in Indigenous education and, in particular, their relevance to the
development of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) or the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). An overview of the Schools Commission Report for the
Triennium 1976-1978 (Schools Commission, 1975) and the Aboriginal Consultative
Group’s reports to the Schools Commission (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a,
1975b) are provided as these reports were the inaugural studies supported by
government to address the issues and challenges within Indigenous education.
The AEP (DEET, 1989) as well as the NIRA (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008) and the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008) are also
summarized to provide foregrounding to the production of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015). A synopsis of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly, 2008) is provided to feature
the Articles that inform the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
Figure 2.4 provides a visual representation of a sample of the policy and review
regarding Indigenous education that has saturated Australian policy making since the
late 1980s.
82 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Schools Commission 1975
On the advice of the Schools in Australia: Report of the Interim Committee for
the Australian Schools Commission, from here on referred to as the Karmel Report,
(Karmel, 1973), the then Prime Minister Whitlam authorised the Schools
Commission to investigate the education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students. “In order to obtain an Aboriginal opinion on this area, the Commission
formed an Aboriginal Consultative Group to advise on the present needs and future
provisions for the education of Aboriginal people in Australia” (Aboriginal
Consultative Group, 1975a, p. 61). The Aboriginal Consultative Group’s role was to
1) advise the Schools Commission on the current provision of education; 2) identify
the funding arrangements; and, 3) provide insight into other extenuating factors that
apply to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students (Aboriginal Consultative
Group, 1975b).
The Schools Commission in partnership with the Aboriginal Consultative
Group reported back to government two years after the Karmel Report (Karmel,
1973). “The report was a landmark in Indigenous education. For the first time,
Indigenous people were consulted in regard to the education of their children”
(Partington, 1998a, p. 48). Beresford, et al. (2012) asserts consultation with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on the actions and policies was not
previously practiced. The findings and recommendations made within the
Aboriginal Consultative Group report to the Schools Commission were categorised
into four key areas: 1) Administrators and Decision Makers, 2) Professionals, 3)
Children and, 4) the Excluded (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a, 1975b).
The first area looked to increase the “involvement, appointment and training of
Aborigines [sic] to high level administrative and decision-making positions which
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 83
affect the education of Aboriginal children” (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b).
The Aboriginal Consultative Group voiced their concerns over the lack of
representation of Indigenous peoples at decision making levels; in particular, “in
programs being undertaken on their behalf” (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b,
p. 3). Here, the Aboriginal Consultative Group makes a point that Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people are positioned to articulate the lived experiences.
The second area of concern, Professionals, involved increasing the number of
trained Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teachers. That is, the Aboriginal
Consultative Group looked to introduce “strategies to meet some of the needs at the
professional and trade levels” (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b, p. 10). The
area of professionals not only addressed the training of Indigenous teachers but also,
the introduction of Liaison Officers to address Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students’ needs as well as increase the number of Indigenous teacher aides within the
classroom setting (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a, 1975b).
The third and fourth areas of Children and the Excluded, respectively, sought
to address the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students from preschool
to secondary including those who have disengaged from education (Aboriginal
Consultative Group, 1975a, 1975b). The Aboriginal Consultative Group
acknowledged the low educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students but highlighted the dire influence of colonisation on student self-
esteem and wellbeing. That is, that the underachievement “create stereotypes
detrimental to Aboriginal psychological well-being. They also have a self-fulfilling
prophecy effect on school performance” (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b, p.
17).
84 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
To address the deficit labels placed on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students, the Aboriginal Consultative Group encouraged Indigenous cultures and
histories within textbooks, cultural activities including art exhibitions and dance, as
well as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages within the curriculum
(Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a, 1975b). To re-engage students “who [did]
not have the opportunity to take advantage of education, or who have withdrawn
because of deficiencies in some education systems” (Aboriginal Consultative Group,
1975b, p. 23), the Aboriginal Consultative Group encouraged public forums “to
educate and to acquaint the participants with current innovations and trends in
education” (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975b, p. 24). The Aboriginal
Consultative Group supported the introduction of flexible learning as well as
providing external training of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in
vocational courses on community.
The recommendations made by the Aboriginal Consultative Group were
presented by the Schools Commission in their report for the Triennium 1976-1978
(1975). The report provided a snapshot of the demographics, socioeconomic and
educational trends evident in regards to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
population. In the report’s final recommendations, it encouraged further
investigation into the health and socioeconomic positioning of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples.
The Aboriginal Consultative Group was replaced by the National Aboriginal
Education Committee (NAEC) in 1977 (Price, 2012b). The NAEC became a key
advisory group in policy up until 1989 (Mellor & Corrigan, 2004). Mellor and
Corrigan (2004) list the various policy recommendations by the NAEC made
including the training of 1000 Aboriginal teachers by 1990 to ensure Aboriginal and
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 85
Torres Strait Islander representation within schools at a decision making level (see,
also: Hughes & Willmot, 1982). As a result of the work being conducted by the
NAEC, Zubrick and Silburn (2006, p. 40) state that
there began to be a greater recognition that progress in educational outcomes
were hampered by a raft of issues outside of the traditional sphere of
education, including physical health issues such as eye and ear disease. The
notion of a holistic approach to the problems facing Aboriginal education
was gaining acceptance by policy makers.
Here, Zubrick and Silburn highlight a shift in the approach to Indigenous education.
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy
The next most significant event in Indigenous education began in 1988. As
Beresford (2012, p. 114) affirms
the Commonwealth re-visited Aboriginal education again in 1988 […] In the
following year, the States and the Commonwealth agreed to establish the
first National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy out of
which came the first National Aboriginal Education Policy the following
year.
The decision to develop the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Policy (AEP) was based on a three-month inquiry conducted by the
Aboriginal Education Policy Task Force, from here on referred to as the Task Force,
which recommended “a coordinated national policy” (Beresford, 2012, p. 114). That
is, a policy that was endorsed by Federal and State government. A synopsis of the
findings and recommendations of the Report of the Aboriginal Education Policy Task
Force (Aboriginal Education Policy Task Force, 1988), from here on referred to as
the Hughes Report, are provided to foreground the AEP (DEET, 1989).
86 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
The Hughes Report (Aboriginal Education Policy Task Force, 1988) drew on
the available evidence including various governmental reports from government
agencies including the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Aboriginal
Education. In the 1988 report, the Task Force (1988, p. 1) found that
in the compulsory school years, 1 in 8 Aboriginal children aged 5 to 9 years
do not go to school or pre-school, and for those aged 10 to 15 years an
appalling 1 in 6 do not have access to appropriate schooling. [The Task
Force states that] It is an anathema, as we approach the final decade of the
twentieth century, that a developed country like Australia has not managed
to extend human rights that are as fundamental as the provision of a basic
education to all children and young people in the nation.
The attributes of human rights to education and the vehement statement on the
atrocious state of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in education systems
express the principles articulated in the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights
(United Nations General Assembly, 1948) and the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly, 2008). The
Hughes Report provided foregrounding for the AEP including its objectives
addressing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students from pre-school to tertiary
education.
The AEP provided 21 long-term goals to address the diverse needs of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students (DEET, 1989). Broken into four
overarching sections, the AEP sought to:
1) Increase the involvement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
in educational decision making;
2) Provide Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with equality of
access to educational services;
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 87
3) Increase participation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in
education; and,
4) Provide education that enables equitable and appropriate educational
outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young
people (DEET, 1989).
In doing so, the AEP “emphasised the importance of the policy as a way of ensuring
that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples achieve a greater degree of control
over education services” (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy,
1997, p. para. 3). The AEP was later reviewed in 1995 (Parbury, 2011). However,
as Zubrick (2006) highlights few of the goals had been put in action.
The AEP further endorsed the areas of concern clarified in the Schools
Commission report (1975) and the Aboriginal Consultative Group’s reports to the
Schools Commission (Aboriginal Consultative Group, 1975a, 1975b). Emphasis was
placed on increasing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representation at a
decision making level in education. The AEP called for the increase in
the number of Aboriginal people employed as educational administrators,
teachers, curriculum advisers, teacher assistants, home-school liaison
officers and other education workers, including community people engaged
in teaching of Aboriginal culture, history and contemporary society, and
Aboriginal languages (DEET, 1989, p. 1).
It is important to note here that the Aboriginal Consultative Group in their initial
report to the Schools Commission acknowledged that the Aboriginal populations of
Australia are inclusive of both Aboriginals and Torres Strait Islanders. As such, the
terminology used, being Aboriginal, encompasses both Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples.
88 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ rights in Education
Ten years after the release of the AEP and five years after its review and
endorsement, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) was
disseminated at WIPC:E. The development of the Coolangatta Statement was the
result of several years of consultation with Indigenous communities. As a result, the
Coolangatta Statement “represents a collective voice of Indigenous peoples from
around the world who support fundamental principles considered vital to achieving
reform and transformation of education for Indigenous peoples” (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 229). What Morgan, et al., is arguing here is that the Coolangatta Statement
documents the desire of Indigenous peoples to determine the practices within
education that cater for and address the needs of Indigenous children and young
people (Munro, 2005).
In an Australian context, Zubrick and Silburn (2006) state that the change in
position and policy by government after the Referendum saw Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander people held in higher esteem. However, examples of prior recognition
of the value by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents are provided within the
literature. McGrath (1995) cites the letter of John Kickett, a Nyungar Aboriginal
man from Western Australia, who in 1916 implored the then Minister of Education
to allow his children to attend State schooling. In the letter, Kickett writes
my children wants to learn something I have been to School…this is my own
handwriting…Probbley this is the only letter you ever got from an Half-
Cast…I want to Bring My Children up the Best away…Sir do what you can
for me (as cited in McGrath, 1995, pp. 253-254).
Kickett’s request was denied however, the enthusiasm to access education prior to
the 1970s is evident.
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 89
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) addresses the
historical, political, cultural and social injustices that acted against the Indigenous
peoples of the world. Morgan, et al. (2006, p. 229), argue that
over the last 30 years, Indigenous peoples throughout the world have argued
that they have been denied equity in non-Indigenous education systems
which has failed to provide educational services that nurture the whole
Indigenous person inclusive of scholarship, culture and spirituality.
This understanding of Indigenous education differs to the rhetoric of the literature in
previous sections.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) exemplifies
Indigenous resistance; seeking to challenge the effects and ramifications of
colonisation. Tiwari (2004) affirms the positioning of the Coolangatta Statement
stating it “situates [I]ndigenous rights to education in its historical context of social
exclusion and marginalisation” (p. 116). In doing so, the Coolangatta Statement
gives voice to those who struggle for the “rights of Indigenous peoples to be
[I]ndigenous” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229). Drawing on international human rights
charters, the Coolangatta Statement positions itself within the discourses of human
rights, Indigenous rights and those addressing discrimination based on race within an
educational context (United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues
[UNPFII], 2009).
Concerns about the deficit discourses and the need for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples’ participation within decision making was a common theme
emerging within policies. Within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006),
self-determination was defined as “the right of Indigenous people:
To control/govern Indigenous education systems;
90 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
To establish schools and other learning facilities that recognize, respect
and promote [I]ndigenous values, philosophies and ideologies;
To develop and implement culturally inclusive curricula;
To utilize the essential wisdom of Indigenous elders in the education
process;
To establish the criterion for educational evaluation and assessment;
To define and identify standards for the gifted and talented;
To promote the use of Indigenous languages in education;
To establish the parameters and ethics within which Indigenous research
should be conducted;
To design and deliver culturally appropriate and sensitive teacher training
programs;
To participate in teacher certification and selection;
To develop criterion for the registration and operation of schools and other
learning facilities; and,
To choose the nature and scope of education without prejudice (pp. 234-
235).
Such human rights, to govern and control, to determine and participate in the
foundations of education decision making was based on the then draft Declaration on
the Rights of Indigenous Peoples that also asserted the right of Indigenous peoples to
“freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development” (United Nations
General Assembly, 2008, p. 4).
McConville (2002) highlights that the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) and the ideologies it advocates for seeks to be an agent of change to
transform Indigenous education. In doing so, he asserts that the Coolangatta
Statement does not promote a separate educational system but moreover, “it is about
ensuring that mainstream institutions, be they schools, TAFE colleges or universities,
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 91
incorporate in all areas of their activity Indigenous terms of reference and values as
articulated by Indigenous peoples” (McConville, 2002, p. 17). Here, McConville
makes a point that the Coolangatta Statement resists Indigenous education being
determined by and controlled by government. It challenges the embedded
Indigenous educational disadvantage, as exemplified within the deficit discourses of
policy. That is, there is a need for “institutions […] to accept and uphold the rights
of Indigenous peoples” (McConville, 2002, p. 17). Further investigation of the rights
of Indigenous peoples occurs when looking at the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly, 2008; see Section
titled United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples).
National Indigenous Reform Agreement
In early 2008, the Close the Gap: Indigenous Health Equity Summit -
Statement of Intent (Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, 2008) was
signed whereby the health and life expectancies of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples were to be addressed (Holland & Close the Gap Campaign Steering
Committee, 2015). By November 2008, the commitments agreed upon within the
Close the Gap Statement of Intent were summarized and articulated within the
National Indigenous Reform Agreement [NIRA] (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008). The targets set within the NIRA bound governments “to a
number of targets for reducing the disparity in life expectancy, health, education and
employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians”
(Productivity Commission, 2015, p. 19). An overview of the targets follows.
The NIRA sought to address seven key ‘building blocks’ including early
childhood, schooling, health, economic participation, healthy homes, safe
92 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
communities, and governance and leadership (Council of Australian Governments,
2008). To attend to these areas, six targets were agreed upon including:
1. Closing the life expectancy gap within a generation;
2. Halving the gap in mortality rates for Indigenous children under five
within a decade;
3. Ensuring all Indigenous four year olds in remote communities have access
to early childhood education within five years;
4. Halving the gap for Indigenous students in reading, writing and numeracy
within a decade;
5. Halving the gap for Indigenous people aged 20-24 in Year 12 attainment
or equivalent attainment rates by 2020; and
6. Halving the gap in employment outcomes between Indigenous and non-
Indigenous Australians within a decade (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008, p. 8).
This understanding of the targets set within the NIRA highlights the importance of
addressing the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students with three of the six targets referring to education. The targets were
revisited in 2014 and an additional goal included, “namely:
closing the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous schools attendance
within 5 years” (Productivity Commission, 2015, p. 19).
Monitoring and evaluation strategies were embedded within the NIRA (Council of
Australian Governments, 2008).
Monitoring and evaluation on the performance of institutions and people in
addressing the targets set within the NIRA (Council of Australian Governments,
2008) are conducted by internal parties such as the Productivity Commission as well
as annual reports (see, for example: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 93
2016; Productivity Commission, 2015). Other examples of the types of reports
produced include the Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service
Provision (SCRGSP) who provide bi-annually reports on how to approach and/or
how institutions and people have addressed Indigenous disadvantage in regards to
COAG’s targets set within the NIRA (see; for example:Steering Committee for the
Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP), 2014).
In more recent years, there has been contention in regards to the discourses
within the NIRA. Pholi, Black, and Richards (2009) argue that the NIRA
is […] an approach that reduces Indigenous Australians to a range of
indicators of deficit, to be monitored and rectified towards government-set
targets. This illustrates a substantial imbalance in power and control over
the Indigenous affairs agenda in Australia, which is the ‘gap’ that must be
addressed for the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians to improve
(p. 1).
Altman, Biddle and Hunter (see, for example: 2008; Altman, et al., 2009) have
produced numerous reports on the development and objectives of the NIRA as well
as the viability of the policies being achieved. They highlight how the parameters of
being measured against the achievements of non-Indigenous peoples are subjective.
In other words, the ‘standard’ is variable, that “obviously ‘the gap’ is directly
affected if the non-Indigenous benchmark changes” (Altman, et al., 2009, p. 228).
Here, Altman, et al., makes the point that the coloniser is the standard in which
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander achievements are measured; thereby, further
demonstrating the power and control of the coloniser over Indigenous populations.
94 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians
The Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians
(MCEETYA, 2008), from here on referred to as the Melbourne Declaration, released
in 2008 superseded the Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the
Twenty-First Century (MCEETYA, 1999). The Melbourne Declaration
(MCEETYA, 2008) asserts that
[i]n the 1989 Hobart Declaration and the 1999 Adelaide Declaration, the
State, Territory and Commonwealth Education Ministers committed to
working together to ensure high-quality schooling for all young Australians.
The Melbourne Declaration acknowledges major changes in the world that
are placing new demands on Australian education (p. 4).
The obligations of government in providing education are changing as a result of
globalisation, technological advancements, and the growing influence of Asia in the
world as well as climate change, hence the production of the Melbourne Declaration.
Its objective is to reiterate Australia’s stance on the role of education as a means to
ensure an equitable society that “values Australia’s Indigenous cultures as a key part
of the nation’s history, present and future” (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 4). Here,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Indigenous peoples of Australia
are acknowledged.
There are two goals set within the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008).
They are:
Goal 1: Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence
Goal 2: All young Australians become
- Successful learners
- Confident and creative individuals
- Active and informed citizens (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 7).
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 95
Here, the potential futures of all Australian students are addressed. That is, it is
anticipated that through education, students will gain the knowledge and skills to
contribute to the prosperity of Australia.
To achieve these two goals, eight areas of action have been distinguished
within the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008). They are:
1. Developing stronger partnerships
2. Supporting quality teaching and school leadership
3. Strengthening early childhood education
4. Enhancing middle years development
5. Supporting senior years of schooling and youth transitions
6. Promoting world-class curriculum and assessment
7. Improving educational outcomes for Indigenous youth and disadvantaged
young Australians, especially those from low socioeconomic backgrounds
8. Strengthening accountability and transparency (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 10).
As this study’s focus is on Indigenous education, particular focus here is placed on
the seventh area – Improving educational outcomes for Indigenous youth. The
perceived limitations of Indigenous education are listed including attendance,
literacy, numeracy and so forth. Furthermore, within this area, there is an ideology
shared that high expectations are to be held for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students, their parents and their communities. In particular, Indigenous education
stakeholders are advised that schools need to engage Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students as well as create opportunities to involve parents and community in
the school environment.
In turn, the Melbourne Declaration states that “Australian governments must
support all young Australians to achieve not only equality of opportunity but also
96 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
more equitable outcomes” (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 15). Equality of opportunity is
equivalent to equality of condition (Lynch & Baker, 2005). Further to this, reference
is made to closing the gap which refers to the NIRA (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008) and further provides exemplification of the incremental and
intertextual properties of policy.
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
Adopted by the United Nations in 2007, the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly, 2008), from here
on referred to as UNDRIP, was the product of decades of consultation and
negotiation with Indigenous organisations and peoples by the Working Group on
Indigenous Populations (Ferreira, 2013). Although the UNDRIP was not fully
approved by all the members of the United Nations with notably “Canada, Australia,
New Zealand, and the United States, all states with small, historically oppressed
Indigenous populations” (Ferreira, 2013, p. 13) voting against its adoption. Australia
did not change its position until 2009. A change in government allowed for
Australia’s vote to be reversed. As a result of Australia’s late endorsement, the
UNDRIP is sequenced in this chapter after the NIRA (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008) and the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008).
The particular articles within the UNDRIP (United Nations General
Assembly, 2008) that are relevant to the production of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) in regards to self-determination are Articles 3 and 4.
They are as follows:
Article 3
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 97
Indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination. By virtue of that
right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their
economic, social and cultural development.
Article 4
Indigenous peoples, in exercising their right to self-determination, have the
right to autonomy or self-government in matters relating to their internal and
local affairs, as well as ways and means for financing their autonomous
functions (United Nations General Assembly, 2008, pp. 4-5 [original
emphasis]).
With this understanding of self-determination, emphasis is placed on Indigenous
peoples’ rights to be Indigenous and acknowledges their sovereign rights as the
traditional owners of the land. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples of
Australia have been oppressed and marginalised by the coloniser since 1788 and the
principles shared within the UNDRIP differ to the colonial and racist ideologies
provided in previous sections.
Articles 14 and 15 within the UNDRIP (United Nations General Assembly,
2008) are also relevant to the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
Here, Article 14 speaks directly to the education of Indigenous peoples stating,
“Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems
and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate
to their cultural methods of teaching and learning” (United Nations General
Assembly, 2008, p. 7). Emphasis has been placed on the use of language with
reference to pedagogy and Indigenous peoples being actively involved in the
education of their children. Article 15 complements these ideals by emphasising the
importance of cultures and histories being embedded within curriculum and for
schools and education stakeholders to “combat prejudice and eliminate
98 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
discrimination and to promote tolerance” (United Nations General Assembly, 2008,
p. 7). In Australia, the introduction of the Australian Curriculum and the cross-
curriculum priority – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures
realized the incorporation of Indigenous knowledges into teaching and learning for
all Australian students (ACARA, 2015a, 2015b).
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014
(MCEECDYA, 2011b), from here on referred to as the Plan, was endorsed in 2011.
Its purpose was
to progress the goals of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Policy and the Melbourne Declaration on the Educational Goals
of Young Australians and is part of a broader COAG reform agenda for
school education that will contribute to closing the gap between the
educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and
their peers (MCEECDYA, 2011b, p. 4 [original emphasis]).
Here, the incremental and intertextual properties of policy are again emulated
whereby the Plan is built on other broader policies.
The Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) had six domains in which it guided schools
and Indigenous education stakeholders on addressing the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. They were 1) Readiness for School;
2) Engagement and Connections; 3) Attendance; 4) Literacy and Numeracy; 5)
Leadership, Quality Teaching and Workforce Development; and, 6) Pathways to
Real Post-School Options (MCEECDYA, 2011b, p. 5). The domains mirror the
concerns identified within the Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008) with clear
alignment with such concerns such as developing stronger partnerships and
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 99
supporting quality teaching and school leadership with the Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Education Action Plan’s domains of Engagement and Connections
and, Leadership, Quality Teaching and Workforce Development, respectively.
The Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) provided 55 actions for key stakeholders to
enact. The actions were separated into three distinct categories whereby National,
Systemic and Local level action was articulated to assist in addressing the targets set
within the NIRA (Council of Australian Governments, 2008). In doing so,
government, school sectors and schools were informed about the targets, indicators
and expected outcomes with the implementation of the Plan.
Annual reports were provided on the progress of each sector - government;
school sectors and schools. The Report to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Advisory Group of the Education Council: Evaluation of the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 (Acil Allen Consulting,
2014) was the final evaluation of the Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) made available to
public access in mid-2015. Focus was placed on the influence of the Plan; the
funding made available to assist in implementation, the monitoring and evaluation
programmes executed to determine the progress; and, impact of enactment and future
directions that policy could take (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014). In particular, ACIL
Allen Consulting (2014) stated that there was a need for
ongoing nationally coordinated activity […] to retain and extend the
commitment by school sectors and to engage schools that were not heavily
involved in the Action Plan. This does not necessarily require a new plan
but should build on lessons from the current Action Plan (p. iv).
Through this interpretation, the benefits of the Plan implementation was not
mandatory within all schools and therefore, Acil Allen Consulting recommends that
100 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
a national approach was necessary and that it should be developed on the experiences
learnt from the accomplishments of previous policy. The resulting policy produced
was the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is the most recent policy to address the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and young
people. The introductory statement written by the Chair of the Education Council,
Kate Jones acknowledges that “despite determined effort much more needs to be
done to close the gap in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education outcomes”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 1). The disparities between Indigenous and non-
Indigenous students’ educational attainment became apparent in the late 1960s and
early 1970s (Beresford, 2012; Cadzow, 2007; Hickling‐Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003;
Zubrick & Silburn, 2006). Since that time, government has been producing policy to
address this critical social issue.
The Strategy builds on the practices of previous policy and initiative
(Education Council, 2015). It differs to the Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) setting “the
principles and priorities that act as a framework to guide jurisdictions in developing
and implementing localised policies and actions to improve outcomes for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander people” (p. 2). This understanding of the Strategy
demonstrates the difference between it and the Plan; in that, systems and schools are
to develop and review their Strategic and Operational plans in addressing Indigenous
educational attainment.
The priority areas of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) has seven priorities to assist in
addressing its principles. They are 1) Leadership, Quality Teaching and Workforce
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 101
Development; 2) Culture and Identity; 3) Partnerships; 4) School and child
readiness; 5) Literacy and Numeracy; 6) Attendance; and, 7) Transition points
including pathways to post school options. These priority areas are interdependent
and correlate to one another as well as supporting the principles. Figure 2.5 provides
a visual representation of the priority areas.
Figure 2.5 The priority areas of the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015. Taken from “The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Strategy 2015”, by Education Council, 2015.
© Education Services Australia as the legal entity of the Council of Australian
Governments Education Council.
102 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
Leadership, Quality teaching and Workforce Development
Leadership, Quality teaching and Workforce Development focuses on the skills
and knowledge of classroom teachers (Education Council, 2015). Further to this, it
looks at school and principals engagement with community. In doing so, the priority
area primarily aligns with the principle, Accountability but also loosely supports the
principle, Equity. That is, the priority area makes systems and schools accountable
for improving the educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students.
The priority area also encourages schools and systems to increase the
proportion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representation within the
workforce (Education Council, 2015). Such positioning indicates that the priority
area also addresses the principles, Partnerships; and, Relationships, whereby
stakeholders are encouraged to ensure community is engaged with schools, systems
and institutions both State and Federal governments.
Culture and Identity
The second priority area, Culture and Identity, requires systems and schools to
“respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and cultures of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people” (Education Council, 2015, p. 5). Here, the Education
Council makes a point of the Australian Curriculum and in particular, the Cross-
Curriculum priority – Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures
(ACARA, 2015a). This priority area is closely related to the principle – Cultural
recognition.
Partnerships
The third priority area, Partnerships, is directly linked to the principle of the
same name, Partnerships. The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) states that,
“quality partnerships are encouraged between education sectors and local Aboriginal
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 103
and Torres Strait Islander communities and other stakeholders” (p. 5). The emphasis
on localised approaches is evident in the Strategy. This is exemplified where it states
the “Ministers have collectively identified seven priority areas that will inform local
approaches” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3 [emphasis added]). That is, that schools
and systems are required to develop partnerships with community.
Attendance
Attendance is the fourth priority area. This particular priority area is also one
of “five national collaborative actions…to help engage children and young people”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 6). Another component of this priority area revolves
around the engagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander community and
stakeholders in education. This priority area also upholds the principles:
Relationships; Partnerships; and, Local approaches.
Transition points including pathways to post-school options
The fifth priority area, Transition points including pathways to post-school
options, like Attendance, is also a national collaborative action (Education Council,
2015). Its purpose is to ensure “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and
young people are supported at critical stages of their education to improve
engagement and develop the skills to participate fully in schooling, society and
work” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6). This priority area, therefore, is loosely
connected to the Achieve potential principle where education providers are to set
high expectations for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people. By
providing support at key junctures and/or transitions of schooling, the Education
Council seeks to promote the engagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
young people in education.
104 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
School and Child readiness
The sixth priority area, School and Child readiness, supports transition points
including pathways to post-school options (Education Council, 2015). Its focus is on
ensuring that engagement and transition from early learning to school is provided.
This priority area is also a national collaborative action. Owing to its relation to
early childhood schooling, this priority area will not be a focus of this study.
Literacy and Numeracy
The final priority area is Literacy and Numeracy. This particular priority area
looks to improving the literacy and numeracy proficiencies of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander young people (Education Council, 2015). It acknowledges that
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are English as Additional Dialect
(EAD) learners’ and that personalised learning approaches are necessary.
The principles of Equity and Quality are overarching in relation to all seven
priority areas (Education Council, 2015). The previous section discussed the issues
of equity and equality in education. Through moderation and evaluation of the
programs implemented and the strategic planning of systems and schools,
stakeholders have to document how they are addressing Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students’ educational attainment.
The gap in the literature
There is a need for a comprehensive investigation of Indigenous education
policy and how it positions, addresses and represents the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ from a female Aboriginal educator
and researcher’s standpoint. Existing literature looks at the development of
education policy, the numerous social determinants and contextual factors that
influence Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ such as engagement,
Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings 105
participation as well as retention in primary and secondary schooling (Altman, et al.,
2009; Altman, 2009; Guenther, 2013; Guenther & Bat, 2013; Guenther, Bat, &
Osborne, 2013; Ladwig & Luke, 2014; Nakata, 2007b; Osborne & Guenther, 2013).
An overview of Indigenous education policy investigating how policy
discourses position the very people it advocates for is limited. Further to this,
analysis of Indigenous education policy from a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher’s standpoint is minimal. This study will contribute to the corpus by
building on the existing research with a focus on Indigenous education policy. In
turn, this allows me to critically analyse policy with the goal of ensuring that my
study has political integrity by contributing to the struggle for self-determination for
Indigenous peoples.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples in the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors were
discussed. The education of Indigenous children and youth prior to colonisation was
presented. The education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young people post
1788 was examined. The varying policies that influenced and enabled government to
oppress and marginalise Indigenous peoples were explained. The policy cycle and
its steps that determine the production of policy were explored. The difference
between equality and equity were provided. Finally, the key Indigenous education
policies, strategies and plans were considered.
In Chapter 3, I articulate how the Indigenous theoretical frameworks inform the
methodological approach. The interrelationships between Indigenist Research
Principles (Rigney, 1999), and Indigenous Standpoint Theory (Nakata, 2007a) are
106 Chapter 2: Gathering the knowledge winds under my wings
provided. Articulation of the principles and how they inform each other are
explained. Finally, my standpoint is explicated.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 107
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the
Indigenous lens
A thesis is a 100,000 word struggle with identity. You cannot
undertake higher degree research without exploring the ultimate
questions: ‘Who am I? What do I represent? What do I value?” It is
a medical procedure where you dissect the very essence of you,
weighing up the very elements of the soul to determine your
purpose. It is not a light nor easy procedure. You are broken down
to the very bones that make up who you are. Indigenous
methodologies, ontologies, axiologies helped to break down and
identify these very elements. It helped put me back together, to find
the strength to stand and shout: “I will not be silenced. I will not be
denied”. On the waves of higher degree research, I met a number of
other Indigenous peoples sailing and sometimes sheltering their own
boats as they navigated the peaks and troughs. In our shared
stories, I found strength. You see, I needed to find sustenance and I
found it in my Indigeneity, my relationality with others and a map to
follow by those who had sailed these seas before.
Within Indigenous research, I search for a means to ‘see’ myself.
My lived experiences do not fit in the space already established. I
needed to develop a methodological approach to ensure that I
could ‘find’ me. Combining a Western and Indigenous
methodological approach was best suited. I did not grow up in a
108 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
space as an Aboriginal child. I had Indigenous friends and
interacted on a daily basis with Indigenous peoples but I was
‘hidden’ in the lie. I did not experience the racism. I was accepted
as the ‘norm’. However, everytime Elders came to the school, they
always enquired about my mob and got that sad smile as I
explained I was adopted and Greek. They knew but they did not
share with me. It was not until destiny took its stand and brought
me to my biological family that I learnt of who I was.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 109
Chapter 3 explicates the reasons for personalising the methodology. The
Indigenous theoretical frameworks – Indigenist Research Principles[IRP] (Rigney,
1999) and Indigenous Standpoint Theory [IST] (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b), that inform
this study are provided to foreground and demonstrate their application in the
analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). An introduction to the use of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework to
determine the positioning of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within
policy discourses occurs.
Particular focus in this chapter and in Chapter 4 is placed on the principles and
finite details of each of the theoretical and methodological frameworks that inform
and guide the methodological approach, Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis
[ICDA], which is discussed in Chapter 5. Articulation of what is Indigenous
research and how it positions the Indigenous researcher follows.
Indigenous research
Indigenous research methodologies draw upon and evolve from the Feminist
and Critical Theory platforms established within Western methodologies (Foley,
2003; Moreton-Robinson, 2013; Rigney, 1999; Smith, 1999). Feminist and Critical
theories seek to challenge the patriarchal social constructs and ideologies maintained
within the corpus that oppress and marginalise groups. In doing so, Feminist and
Critical Theory research employ liberatory epistemologies which in turn,
demonstrate the “emancipatory potential of research undoing or deconstructing the
dominant paradigms by which most scientific research was bounded” (Smith, 1999,
p. 166). Here, Smith asserts that Indigenist research seeks to identify the inequalities
and inequities prevalent for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, to
challenge and transform the dominant colonialist views of Aboriginal and Torres
110 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
Strait Islander peoples, and to critique the Westernised views of our history (Rigney,
1999; Smith, 1999).
Indigenous research provides a means to critique the historical accounts of
Indigenous as ‘subject’. However as Rigney (1999) highlights, there are few
Australian Indigenous research methodologies to guide Indigenous researchers.
Rigney (1999) writes that he “wish[es] it were the case that we had a rich field of
Indigenous intellectual theorizing of research epistemologies on which to draw.
Unfortunately, we do not” (p. 110). However since 1999, the number of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander academics has increased along with the number of
Indigenous Australian research methodologies including IST (Nakata, 2007a,
2007b), Indigenous Women’s Standpoint Theory (Moreton-Robinson, 2013), and
Ways of knowing, being and doing (Martin & Mirraboopa, 2003). Often referred to
anecdotally as ‘the trailblazers’ of Indigenous research in Australia, emerging
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers are charged to build on and develop
frameworks based on concepts and principles articulated within Indigenous research.
Positioning approaches
The transition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples from being the
‘researched’ to the researcher not only challenges the observations and rhetoric of the
coloniser but challenges the institutional constructs of the academy. Henry, et al.
(2004) highlight that, as a result, proposals for reform in research redress the
marginalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice but also decolonises
the rhetoric. They argue that Western methodologies and approaches “perpetuate the
positioning of Indigenous as research ‘subjects’ and [non-Indigenous] researchers as
‘experts’ [and that the assumed hegemonic positioning] should be rejected” (Henry,
et al., 2004, p. 6). Here, Henry, et al., make a point that in resisting the established
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 111
institutional constructs of the academy and research, more broadly, Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples are able to be positioned as agents of change.
Rigney (1999) further emphasizes the importance of resisting the corpus of
knowledge about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as ‘subject’. He
highlights how “the research by such people [, the coloniser,] and their institutions
[are] responsible for the extraction, storage, and control over Indigenous
knowledges” (Rigney, 1999, p. 109). It is important to note that he does not dismiss
the works of non-Indigenous academics whose research has contributed to the
Indigenous struggle for self-determination; however, he argues the need for
Indigenous voice and methodologies to be applied to Indigenous research to counter
racist discourses. In doing so, he highlights how Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander research by Indigenous researchers come from a place of knowing.
Literature in the corpus by non-Indigenous researchers about Indigenous issues
does not come from a lived experience but from, observation. Smith (1999)
highlights how there is a perceived assumption that a primary goal of all research is
for the greater good, that it seeks to work for a better society. She questions how the
greater good is represented in “the ways in which knowledge about [I]ndigenous
peoples was collected, classified and then represented in various ways back to the
West, and then, through the eyes of the West, back to those who have been
colonized” (Smith, 1999, pp. 1-2). Smith further illustrates how non-Indigenous
researchers can assume the position of the ‘knower’ of Indigenous peoples, issues
and livelihoods.
With the growing number of Indigenous academics, an alternative lens is being
provided whereby research by an Indigenous researcher about Indigenous issues is
research through the eyes of the colonised. As Smith (1999) asserts “research is not
112 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
an innocent or distant academic exercise but an activity that has something at stake
and occurs in a set of political and social conditions” (p. 5). Smith highlights how, as
Indigenous peoples, we are already politicised but furthermore, as Indigenous
researchers we are challenging the imperialism and colonialism prevalent and
normalised within the social order.
To counter the colonial lens, Smith (1999) encourages the decolonising of
methodologies whereby we critically engage with “the underlying assumptions,
motivations and values which inform research practices” (p. 20). To do this, Smith
advocates that an Indigenous researcher is to make explicit the research design, the
cultural protocols, values and behaviours that inform the research. There is a direct
linkage here to IST whereby the position of the Indigenous researcher is established
to speak back to and challenge the contested space (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b). Further
to this, Rigney’s Political Integrity principle states that research conducted by
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples “takes the research into the heart of the
Indigenous struggle” (1999, p. 117); the lived experiences, the attitudes, and beliefs
held by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are reflected, discussed and
declared throughout the research.
There is a need to personalise the methodological approach. Smith (1999)
asserts that researchers should work “within a framework that privileges the
[I]ndigenous presence” (p. 6). Battiste (2000) encourages researchers to synthesise
Indigenous and Eurocentric knowledges as a means to heal the effects of
colonisation. Rigney (1999) proposes that there be a shift in the research paradigm
to address the racist oppression experienced by Indigenous peoples. Nakata (2007b)
highlights the contentious space within the cultural interface where Indigenous and
Western knowledges meet and/or collide; as in policy.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 113
The sentiment of personalising methodologies is not unique to Indigenous
academics. Foucault (1974; as cited in Ball, 2013) articulates the use of a ‘toolbox’
approach. He encourages others to build on his concepts (his ‘toolboxes’) to
breakdown systems of power. Weiss and Wodak (2003), critical discourse analysts,
propose that researchers develop conceptual tools that are adopted from various
theoretical frameworks. Both Indigenous and non-Indigenous researchers advocate
for the personalisation of methodologies to address the differing ontological
viewpoints of individuals and in turn, this enables researchers to promote their own
positioning within their research. A synopsis of IRP follows.
Indigenist Research Principles
The need for Indigenous researchers to gain an understanding of Australia’s
colonial history as well as the resistance by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples in their struggle for self-determination enables them to position themselves
within the literature (Rigney, 1999). In doing so, the Indigenous researcher is
positioned to “critique […] a Western view of history” (Smith, 1999, p. 34).
Rigney’s IRP provides a means to challenge the social and institutional constructs
that are embedded in policy discourses and to analyse the dialectical relationship
between language and society.
Further to this, Rigney maintains that IRP is not definitive in nature therefore
encouraging emerging Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers and
communities to build on and develop the principles. He provides three research
principles that enable “Indigenous peoples [to] be involved in defining, controlling
and owning epistemologies and ontologies that value and legitimate the Indigenous
experience” (Rigney, 1999, p. 114). They are: Resistance as an emancipatory
imperative, Political Integrity, and Privileging Indigenous voice. Extrapolations of
114 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
the principles are provided here to further demonstrate their influence and relevancy
to this study and ICDA.
Embedded within IRP are the theoretical concepts of what Rigney (1999) and
Smith (1999) refer to as colonialism whereby the power and privilege assumed by
the coloniser is founded within “their legacy as colonizers” (p. 7). Here, Smith
makes reference to another guiding theoretical concept, namely White Privilege as
articulated in Chapter 2 (McIntosh, 1998; Moreton-Robinson, 2004, 2015b). A
consequence of colonialism and White Privilege is institutionalised racism. In
Chapter 2, the notion of superiority assumed by the coloniser and the positioning of
Indigenous peoples, knowledges, languages and cultures as inferior was explored.
The theories of superiority, colonialism, institutionalised racism and positioning
guide the analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015); to speak back to the
institutional and societal constructs and the processes of production and
interpretation that influence policy discourses. In doing so, the decolonisation of the
dominant Westernised ideologies, bias and taken for granted assumptions of
Indigenous peoples is necessitated (Smith, 1999). Figure 3.1 provides a visual
representation of IRP and their interconnectivity. Explication of IRP follows
providing insight into how the principles inform the methodological approach.
Resistance as an emancipatory imperative
The first principle, Resistance as an emancipatory imperative, from here on
referred to as Resistance, according to Rigney (1999) sees research needing to
contribute to the struggle for self-determination. By gaining an understanding of the
historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors and the impacts of
colonialism on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, I am positioned to
critically analyse the effects of colonization on policy discourses. Rigney (1999)
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 115
Figure.3.1 IRP and their interconnectivity
refers to the critique of colonialism as “anti-colonial cultural critique” (p. 110)
whereas Smith (1999) sees the process of “Coming to know the past [as] part of the
critical pedagogy of decolonization” (p. 34 [original emphasis]). Therefore, Rigney
and Smith encourage the critique and/or challenge of the normalised Westernised
dominant ideologies, perceptions, bias and taken for granted assumptions of
Indigenous peoples.
Resistance requires the research to speak back to the notions of domination and
oppression. In other words, the research needs to engage with the narratives of
resistance and examples of oppression experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. Further to this, the research “attempts to support the personal,
116 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
community, cultural, and political struggles of Indigenous Australians to carve out a
way of being for ourselves in Australia in which there can be healing from past
oppressions and cultural freedom in the future” (Rigney, 1999, p. 117).
Distinguished Māori academic, Graham Hingangaroa Smith, notes the new forms of
colonisation. Exemplification of the new forms of colonisation include the consistent
positioning of Indigenous peoples in a deficit hidden within the bias, taken for
granted assumptions and normalised discourses prevalent in wider society. He states
that research should involve “the freeing of the [I]ndigenous mind from the grip of
dominant hegemony” (G. Smith, 2003, p. 3). That is, Indigenous peoples need to
develop critical literacies to challenge the colonisers’ ideologies, bias and taken for
granted assumptions; to question the normalised oppressive racism.
The extent to which Resistance informs this study can be defined in several
ways. They are:
Guiding the investigation of the literature in Chapter 2;
Exploring the institutional and societal constructs that influence the
production and interpretation of Indigenous education policy;
Developing my knowledge of the implicit and explicit dominant ideologies
held in regards to the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students;
Extending awareness of the attitudes, beliefs and values held within
historical and their influence on contemporary contexts;
Ensuring that I am better positioned to counter and challenge how
discourse is used to maintain power and control over Indigenous
education; and,
Informing the analysis of the data by challenging the positioning of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students within policy discourses.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 117
Therefore, in this study, Resistance enables me to challenge dominant ideologies,
values and beliefs from my standpoint as a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher.
Political Integrity
Political Integrity, according to Rigney (1999), is “research […] undertaken by
Indigenous Australians” (p. 117). Not undermining the contributions of non-
Indigenous researchers to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander struggle for self-
determination, Foley (2003) highlights the need for Indigenous peoples to take
control of research in and about Indigenous issues. That is, for there to be longevity
in the struggle, Foley and Rigney indicate the actions and strategies must come from
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Rigney (1999) explains this is because
of the “social link between research and the political struggle of our communities”
(p. 117). In other words, the research, the research design, the questions being asked
are all determined by what are considered Indigenous priorities centralising the
issues and discussions for addressing and challenging the hegemonic and taken for
granted assumptions normalised within dominant Western views (Smith, 1999).
In regards to this study, Political Integrity is understood to be research about
Indigenous issues from an Indigenous standpoint. As a female Aboriginal educator
and researcher, my own lived experiences as a student and as a teacher connect the
research and myself to the struggle for self-determination. Political Integrity guides
the research and makes me accountable not just to the academy but also, the
community. With this in mind, the research seeks to identify within policy
discourses how social structures and practices are influenced, maintained and/or
challenged in regards to Indigenous students’ primary and secondary schooling. To
do so, the research illustrates the relations of power and the tensions prevalent at the
118 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
cultural interface where Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges intersect and
meet (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b).
Privileging Indigenous voice
Rigney’s final principle (1999), Privileging Indigenous voice, informs the
Indigenous researcher that the research needs to strive for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples, and their lived experiences. In turn, the historical, political,
cultural and social contextual factors, Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing,
ideologies, traditions, values, interests and struggles become central to the study.
Smith (1999) writes that the push for self-determination by Indigenous peoples
encourages “a much more active and knowing engagement in the activity of research
by [I]ndigenous peoples” (p. 9). As a result, Indigenous peoples’ voices are being
provided to present an alternative lens countering the historically dominant voices
based on the observations and positions of non-Indigenous academics (Moreton-
Robinson, 1998; Nakata, 2007b).
Privileging Indigenous voice contributes to this study guiding the research and
ICDA. The principle:
Ensures that not only the voice of non-Indigenous academics is drawn on;
Confirms the need for Indigenous voice to be included; and,
Advocates for research that contributes to the struggle for self-
determination.
Therefore, this study draws on the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) to provide a collective Indigenous voice on Indigenous peoples’ rights in
education to analyse the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The use of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework
allows for Indigenous voice to be privileged in this study.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 119
The Coolangatta Statement as an explanatory framework
The theoretical frameworks, IRP, IST and CDT (Chouliaraki & Fairclough,
2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015; Nakata, 2007a, 2007b; Rigney,
1999) support and encourage the use of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework in this study. For example, the focus of
Rigney’s Privileging Indigenous voice principle provides opportunity for Indigenous
voice to be heard. The focal point of the Coolangatta Statement is on the rights of
Indigenous peoples in education. The producers of the Coolangatta Statement are all
Indigenous. As a result, the Coolangatta Statement privileges Indigenous voice on
an Indigenous issue, being education. Resistance as an emancipatory imperative
principle is also applied by providing the means to analyse the Strategy’s (Education
Council, 2015) discourses through an Indigenous lens challenging the dominant
discourses. In turn, the political integrity of the Strategy is questioned through the
analysis of the implicit and explicit social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation.
The principles of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
enable the analysis of the discourses within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
to be broken into five categories:
The right to be Indigenous;
The right to self-determination;
The right to practice and maintain language and culture;
The right to an education; and,
The right to be actively engaged in educational decision making.
The Coolangatta Statement draws on the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors to situate itself within the rights of Indigenous peoples in
120 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
education. The Strategy instructs the key stakeholders on the actions necessary to be
considered to address the educational rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples and in turn, close the gap between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students’
educational attainment.
The influence of Indigenist Research Principles on this study
Rigney’s IRP therefore positions me and the research within the study (1999).
In relation to this study, IRP ensure that my responsibilities to community are
explicit; that is, the research contributes to the struggle for self-determination. When
critically analysing the policy discourses and how Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples are positioned, IRP provide a framework to speak back to the
discourses through the identification of the influence of social constructs, institutions
as well as processes involved in the production and interpretation of policy. The
theoretical concepts of colonialism, White Privilege, institutionalised racism and
decolonisation are located within IRP and inform and guide the methodological
approach. Nakata’s IST (2007a, 2007b) also extends and specifies my position
within the study.
Indigenous Standpoint Theory
Nakata (2007a, 2007b) argues that IST is not just based on lived experiences
but is a developed position that Indigenous scholars establish based within an
understanding of Western knowledges about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples. He highlights how “these knowledges [being Western knowledges], both
historical and current, still contribute to the shape and form of both popular
understanding and intellectual understanding of what it has meant historically and
what it still means to be [an Indigenous person]” (Nakata, 1998, p. 3). Further to
this, Nakata acknowledges the difficulties to speak back to and challenge the
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 121
representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the dominant
corpus of knowledge is based and produced within “Western understanding, logic
and rationality” (Nakata, 1998, p. 4). Smith (1999) also writes about the assumed
dominant position of the coloniser that validates the authority of Westernised
knowledge “over all aspects of Indigenous knowledges, languages and cultures” (p.
64). In turn, by analysing and investigating the literature that provides
representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, Indigenous scholars
are attempting to negotiate, challenge and contest the knowledge with knowledge.
Figure 3.2 provides a visual representation of the three stages of IST and their
interconnectivity to assist the reader with the following sections where the stages are
further extrapolated.
The cultural interface as a contested space
The cultural interface is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges
about the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples meet and is
rife with tensions and complexities. Nakata (2007b) identifies that it is at the cultural
interface where “the explication and analysis of how the social organisation and
practices of knowledge through its various apparatuses and technologies of the
textual production organise and express themselves” (p. 215). The lived experiences
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars are the point of entry to the
investigation. In regards to this study, the engagement and experience of being a
student at school as well as a classroom teacher in schools where Indigenous
education policy was and is produced and interpreted provides the foregrounding to
the phenomenon.
122 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
Figure 3.2 The three stages of IST and their interconnectivity
The cultural interface as a contested space informs this study and my
standpoint in several ways. In regards to the investigation of the literature (Chapter
2), the contested space is made evident through the:
Identification of the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples in Indigenous education;
Recognition of the oppositional challenges and resistances put forward by
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander parents and communities to access
and engage in education;
Acknowledging the historical, political, cultural and social contextual
factors that influenced and still influence policy production and
interpretation; and,
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 123
Establishing an understanding of the social conditions and processes that
affects Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education.
Knowledge and recognition of the corpus of literature informs the interpretation and
analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The use of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework to analyse the
Strategy further provides a means to focus on policy discourses and how they reflect
the dialectical relationship between language and society.
The investigation of the contested space at the cultural interface provides
insights into my social positioning. Moreton-Robertson (2013) states that, “our way
of knowing is thus […] informed by our social positioning” (p. 341). Through this
interpretation, my lived experiences as an Aboriginal woman, the effects of
colonisation, the dominant position of the coloniser in society, the decolonisation of
the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as well as the
contested space of Indigenous knowledges in the academy all influence my
standpoint. I acknowledge that I am in a privileged position being an educated
Aboriginal woman and that my experiences and the way in which I interpret and
interact within the education paradigm differ to that of Indigenous parents and
community members that have not engaged in education. Therefore, I need to reflect
on my own representations and position throughout the study. In turn, the
continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency are examined.
The continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency
The contentious space at the cultural interface provides insight to the tug of
war experienced by Indigenous academics. That is, as Nakata (2007a, 2007b)
proposes, the position of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander scholars is shaped by
the limitations and possibilities bound within the social structures and constraints of
124 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
their social positioning. He writes that “at the cultural interface we are constantly
being asked to be both continuous with one position at the same time as being
discontinuous with another” (Nakata, 2007b, p. 216). This lens helps make visible
the need for me, as an Aboriginal researcher within a Western academy, to
consistently make decisions that either agree or disagree with Westernised values,
beliefs and attitudes despite being a female Aboriginal educator and researcher with
my own ways of knowing, being and doing. The internal tug of war requires me to
position myself within the knowledges, gaining an understanding of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander “position within knowledge, and in relation to other
communities of ‘knowers’” (Nakata, 2007b, p. 216). In turn, by comprehending the
position of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within the historical,
political, cultural and social contextual factors of education, I am able to locate
myself as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher within the ‘knowers’ of
Indigenous education research; to provide an alternative lens to the corpus of
literature on Indigenous education policy and encourage change.
By investigating the policy cycle and the incremental and intertextual
properties of Indigenous education policy, the tensions and complexities of speaking
back to the policy discourses become apparent. That is, the tug of war between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges, ways of knowing, being and doing,
place me in a contentious position. The embedded means in which policy is
produced, the clear and succinct steps that are outlined in Chapter 2 have been
normalised as are the bias and taken for granted assumptions on how policy will be
interpreted and enacted. To provide an alternative lens in which policy positions
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is example of the continuities of
Indigenous agency.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 125
However, as Nakata (1998) writes, “in argument and debate where opposing or
differing points of view are proffered and extended, an [I]ndigenous scholar is still
bound to academic convention and must substantiate the argument within the
academic corpus” (p. 4). Through this interpretation, Nakata is seen to further
demonstrate the continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency. That is, when
challenging the dominant ideologies, values and beliefs, I must be able to validate
and position myself within knowledge. Therefore, it is necessary for me to have an
understanding of the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that
position Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to encourage change. The
continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency are exemplified in this study
by:
Providing a female Aboriginal educator and researcher’s standpoint on
how policy discourses influence, maintain and/or challenge dominant
ideologies;
Making explicit how policy discourses position Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples, the very people it advocates for;
Demonstrating the tensions and complexities of Indigenous and non-
Indigenous knowledges; and,
Presenting the dialectical relationship between language and society.
The continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous agency make explicit the tensions
that inform and limit what can and cannot be said in the everyday.
The continual tensions that inform and limit what can/cannot be said in
the everyday
Indigenous researchers need to go beyond a descriptive analysis of power and
this is where CDA is very useful. Nakata (2007b) states that
this will allow us a more sophisticated view to the tensions created between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous dualities, not as the literal translation of
126 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
what is said or written in propositions, but the physical experience and
memory of such encounters in the everyday (p. 216).
Through this lens, I need to extend my understanding about the intricate differences
between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous ways of knowing,
being and doing by drawing on the historical, political, cultural and social contextual
factors that inform my position.
There are clear links here to Fairclough’s work (2001b) on the dialects of
discourses. Fairclough makes explicit how we interpret what is and what is not said
and determine what can and what cannot be said, dependent on the other people
involved in the social event. That is, each participant is aware of their social position
and takes this into consideration. Therefore, social position dictates how we act,
what we say and what we do not say. The lens in which Nakata views the continual
tensions includes the lived experiences as well as the normalised, taken for granted
assumptions which also determine social position (Nakata, 2007b). This lens further
validates the importance of being aware of the contested space and the continuities
and discontinuities of Indigenous agency.
Therefore, in this study, the theoretical concepts inform the interpretation of
the positioning of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within policy
discourses. However, as Nakata (2007b) states, “the constellation of a priori
elements […] inform and limit not just the range but the diversity of responses from
us” (p. 216 [original emphasis]). In other words, what can and cannot be said is
dictated by my social positioning and my ability to locate and validate my arguments
within the Western corpus of knowledge. Thus, the interrelatedness of Nakata’s
stages in establishing an Indigenous standpoint is made explicit. Exemplification of
how the three stages of IST establish my standpoint is provided in Chapter 5.
Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens 127
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, the need to personalise a methodological approach was
considered. The Indigenous theoretical frameworks that inform this study were
explored. Introduction of Rigney’s IRP (1999) were provided. Explication of IST
(Nakata, 2007a, 2007b) and how each stage informs the establishment of my
standpoint were given.
In Chapter 4, CDT and Critical Discourse Analysis are discussed. Illustration
of the orders of discourse and how they influence what can and cannot be said are
examined. The textual features that guide this study are reviewed. The social
conditions of production and interpretation are taken into consideration.
128 Chapter 3: Theorising the landscape: Looking through the Indigenous lens
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 129
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
The power of language has never been so evident than with the introduction
of social media. Everyone has an opinion, there is no filter as it is being sent
out into the nether where the peoples, the subject, has no face. Media also
plays an important part in forming these opinions. They filter and shape the
stories to evoke a reaction, to maintain the societal structures and social
practices, to perpetuate stereotypical representations of groups, to ensure
that dominant ideologies become the given. Language gives opportunity for
my voice and the voices of the marginalised to be heard - countering,
challenging, resisting, speaking back to the deficit discourses! The
dichotomy is I must use language to counter the discourses. My own voice
is but one in a sea of billions! But to make sure my voice stands out, I must
know the knower. I must engage in the dominant discourses to understand
and validate my position. Language is my ‘frenemy’; my friend and my
enemy.
130 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
131
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 131
Chapter 4 provides insight into Critical Discourse Theory [CDT] and Critical
Discourse Analysis [CDA] (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b,
2001c; Fairclough, 2015) and how it informs this study and Indigenous Critical
Discourse Analysis [ICDA]. This chapter is divided into two parts. Discussion of
CDT and how discourses shape and are shaped by institutional and societal
constructs is presented first. This is important to this study as it illustrates how
theoretical constructs are normalised within society. Extrapolation of how orders of
discourse position social actors is also given.
The following section articulates the methodological framework provided in
CDA. The three stages of analysis, being:
1. Description – analysis of the text at the micro-level;
2. Interpretation – analysis of the interdiscursive properties that inform the
production and interpretation of texts at the meso-level; and,
3. Explanation – analysis of the theories and ideologies that inform text
production and interpretation at the macro-level.
Exemplification of the dialectic relationship between language and society is
explored. Elaboration of CDT follows.
Critical Discourse Theory
CDT (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough,
2015) provides a means to explicate the ideologies, beliefs, attitudes and assumptions
that implicitly shape and are shaped by society. Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999)
illustrate how CDA based on CDT is to be seen
as a [theorised] method for analysing social practices with particular regard
to their discourse moments – within the linking of the theoretical and
practical concerns and public spheres (politics, economy, society, culture
132 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
[…] where the ways of analysing ‘operationalise’ – make practical –
theoretical constructions of discourse […], and the analyses contribute to the
development and elaboration of these theoretical constructions (p. 16).
What Chouliaraki and Fairclough are arguing here is that CDT and CDA are
interdependent. That is, the analysis contributes to and is contributed by my
members’ resources [MR] that are informed by theoretical constructs.
In the following section, emphasis is placed on discourse as a social practice.
Explanation of the interdependence of social structures and discoursal practices is
provided. The elements of social practice are explored. Explication of genres,
discourses and styles and how they structure the orders of discourse occurs.
Discourse as a social practice
Every social event and/or activity is an example of discourse as a social
practice and demonstrates the various social processes that occur. Fairclough
(2001b) writes that, “the reason for centering the concept of social practice is that it
allows an oscillation between the perspective of social structure and the perspective
of social action and agency – both necessary perspectives in social research and
analysis” (p. 231). That is, the interdependence of the social, interdiscursive and
discoursal elements of social life need to be made explicit.
Kettle (2005) has drawn together the social and discursive elements of
discourse to demonstrate the interdependence of social structures and discoursal
practices. In doing so, she has produced a model in which the relationship between
texts, social practice and social structures are made explicit. In Table 4.1, I have
adapted Kettle’s model, as well as Alford’s interpretation of Kettle’s model (2015),
to show how it relates to my study. That is, how policy as a social event and a genre
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 133
Table 4.1 The social and discursive elements of CDA with a focus on social practice.
The social Discourse elements in relation to my study
Social structures
“..social structures not only determine discourse, they are the product of discourse” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 68).
Institutional and societal constructs
Language to establish social class and language to marginalise and/or silence voice; Language to establish and maintain politics and political agenda
Social order
“…structuring of a particular social ‘space’ into various domains associated with various types of practice” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 61)
-has a mediating role
Orders of discourse – interdependent networks of social practices
Networks of social practices e.g. politicians and schools, government and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; sheds light on power and ideology
Explanation (ontological perspective) – macro-level
Social practice
“…a relatively stabilised form of social activity” (Fairclough, 2001b, p. 231)
Inclusive of activities, subjects, instruments, objects, time and place, forms of consciousness, values, and discourse
Discourse as a social practice- discoursal action, where talk and text are produced and interpreted
Genres – ways of acting and interacting
Styles – ways of being and identifying
Discourses – ways of representing
Interpretation (interdiscursive analysis) – meso-level
Social activity
Instance of interaction; written and/or spoken
discourse
(embedded in social practice as indicated above)
Text – produced in social events
The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in education
Mediated quasi-interaction
Description (linguistic/semiotic analysis) – micro-level
NOTE: Adapted from “Agency, discourse and academic practice: Reconceptualising international students in an Australian University” by M. Kettle, 2007 and “Conceptualisation and enactment of critical literacy for senior high school EAL learners in Queensland, Australia: Commitments, constraints and contradictions”, by J. Alford, 2015.
Elements of social
practice
Relevance of elements of social practice to this study
Activities Mediated quasi-interaction; monological in nature
Subjects, and their social
relations
Social actors and their positioning; notions of power and dominance; resistance
Instruments Policy;
Systems and schools: strategic and operational plans (product of interpretation)
Monitoring and evaluation reports
Objects Policy:
The National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 (Education Council, 2015)
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in education (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
Time and place “Spatially and temporally dispersed people” (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999, p. 43), hence mediated quasi-interaction
Forms of consciousness
Social representations; “the concepts, values, norms and images shared in a social group, and activated and maintained in discourse” (Tenorio, 2011, p. 191)
Shared ideologies that are normalised in society
Values
Discourse Policy – written text; “language as a form of social practice” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 71)
NOTE: Adapted from “Dialectics in discourse”, by N. Fairclough, 2001.
ELEMENTS
OF SOCIAL
PRACTICE
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 135
at the micro-level is informed by the institutional and societal constructs at the
broader macro-level. Extrapolation of the elements of social practice occurs to
further foreground how they inform this study. In turn, the elements of social
practice begin the conversation on the dialectical relationship between language and
society.
Elements of social practice
Fairclough (2001b) provides eight elements of social practice (see Table 4.1).
They are:
1. Activities;
2. Subjects;
3. Instruments;
4. Objects;
5. Time and place;
6. Forms of consciousness;
7. Values; and,
8. Discourse.
Fairclough emphasizes that each of the elements is interdependent with the other.
“That is to say they are different elements but not discrete, fully separate elements”
(Fairclough, 2001b, p. 231). For example: in regards to this study, the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) are both the instruments, the objects, and the means of discourse of the social
activity. In Table 4.1, I draw out the elements of social practice and their application
in this study. This is important to this study as the elements inform the
interdiscursive analysis of the policies.
136 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) define mediated quasi-interactions as the
“communicative interaction [whereby] the time-space distantiation of mediated
interaction […] entails a division between an individual producer or relatively small
production teams and a body of receivers that is indeterminate in size and
membership” (p. 43). The producer makes the assumption that there are shared
forms of consciousness and values with the reader/interpreter (subjects). Such
assumptions are embedded within the discoursal elements. That is, as educators,
practices and processes regarding the importance of education, the knowledges and
skills required to provide education are all normalised within their practice.
However, as Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) warn, the time-space
distantiation (time and place) reduces and narrows “the range of symbolic resources
available for making and interpreting meaning” (p. 42). Therefore, the notion of
shared ideologies, values and beliefs that are embedded within social life are
necessary but I would argue that a broader understanding from other perspectives is
also necessary. Theoretical constructs form the societal norm. The shared
ideologies, assumptions and representations held in society assist in the making
meaning and interpretation of policy. These theoretical constructs inform our
members’ resources [MR]. Elaboration of MR is provided in the following section.
Theoretical constructs and members’ resources: The establishment of
societal norms
Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) writes, CDA “is a shifting synthesis of
other theories, though what it itself theorises in particular is the mediation between
the social and the linguistic – the ‘order of discourse’, the social structuring of
semiotic hybridity (interdiscursivity)” (p. 16). What Chouliaraki and Fairclough
highlights here is the unconscious processes social actors draw on when interacting
within social practices - our members’ resources [MR].
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 137
How the theoretical constructs inform my members’ resources
Ideologies, values, beliefs, attitudes and knowledges that are informed and
inform institutional and societal constructs are found in Figure 4.1. More
specifically, the theoretical constructs of discourse as a social practice and process
and therefore, my MR relevant to this study are:
1. Positioning;
2. Orders of Discourse;
3. Knowledge/evidence;
4. Ideology;
5. Institutional/Society constructs;
6. Assumptions;
7. Access/equity;
8. Representations; and,
9. Consistency.
These are also examples of the discursive interactions that occur in policy production
and interpretation.
Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) state that, discursive interaction is “an
active, reflexive, interpretative and collaborative process with others and one’s own
identity, as one moment in social practice” (p. 46). Here, Chouliaraki and Fairclough
argue that social interaction is multifaceted where individuals draw on their own MR,
while at the same time, being aware of their positioning and therefore, what can and
cannot be said within an interaction. However, it is important to note that the
outcomes of any social interaction are not static (to an extent) and therefore,
unpredictable (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999).
138 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Figure 4.1 The theoretical constructs that inform my member’s resources and therefore, the
interpretation of policy
Orders of Discourse and Positioning
Positioning of social actors dictates the orders of discourse. That is, the orders
of discourse, being “networks of practices […] held in place by social relations of
power” (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999, p. 24), illustrate and are the product of the
positioning of social actors. For example: The producer of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015), being Education Council, holds an authoritative and privileged
position within the social order, or the Australian education ‘architecture’, as
illustrated in Figure 4.2 (Hogarth, 2015). The figure illustrates the institutional and
societal constructs that validate and position the social actors.
The process of making meaning of a text is influenced by the orders of
discourse. Fairclough (2015) explains that “how discourses are structured in a given
order of discourse, and how structurings change over time, are determined by
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 139
Council of Australian Governments
(COAG)
Education Council
Australian Education Senior Officials Committee
(AESOC)
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting
Authority
(ACARA)
Australian Institute for
Teaching and School
Leadership
(AITSL)
Education Service Australia
(ESA)
Australasian Curriculum, Assessment and
Certification Authorities
(ACACA)
Queensland Curriculum and Assessment
Authority
(QCAA)
Independent Schools Queensland Queensland Catholic Education
Commission
Education Queensland
Figure 4.2 The Australian education ‘architecture’. Adapted from “A critical analysis of the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan”, M. Hogarth, 2015.
140 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
changing relationships of power at the level of the social institution or of the society”
(p. 62). In other words, the orders of discourse are not static and can change when
there is reform in power relations. The apparent interrelationships of power and
social positioning are important when analysing the orders of discourse and their
influence in text production and interpretation. In this section, the elements of social
practice that influence the networks of practices and the positioning of social actors
as well as how language is used to maintain and/or challenge institutional and
societal constructs follows.
Genres, styles and discourses
The three elements of social practice - genre, styles and discourse - act to
structure the orders of discourse (Fairclough, 2003). As Fairclough (1992) states, “in
describing orders of discourse, one is concerned with specifying what discourse
types are used in the domain in focus, but also what relationships there are between
them” (p. 284). That is, the genre type exemplifies the type of social practice as well
as the processes and actions social actors/participants are to undertake, the style
exemplifies the relationship between the participants whereby the mode of
communication is significant, and the discourses provide the subject matter and the
particular processes involved in the production and interpretation of the text.
In relation to this study, the focus is on how policy discourses represent
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students’ educational attainment. To do this, I
must recognise discourse as a social practice and therefore, social process and in
doing so, that the social conditions are organised into three elements. Figure 4.3
provides a visual representation of the three elements of social practice and their
interconnectivity.
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 141
CDT is interdependent of establishing not only the social and discursive
elements but also the elements of social practice. Fairclough (2015) asserts that,
“social practice does not merely ‘reflect’ a reality which is independent of it; social
practice is an active relationship to reality, and it changes reality” (p. 68). This lens
helps make visible the dialectic relationship between structures and practices and in
turn, highlights how transformation is possible within institutional and societal
constructs through awareness of the power of language. Elaboration of each of the
elements of social practice follows.
Figure 4.3 The three elements of social practice and their interconnectivity
142 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Genres
Genres are the semiotic products that constitute the ways of acting and
interacting within society (Fairclough, 2001b; Kettle, 2007). The genres within this
study are the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The fact that the Strategy and the Coolangatta
Statement are written texts produced from a position of authority or knowing validate
the implicit desires for change. The policy documents are embedded within
particular desired ways of acting and interacting and therefore, provide discourses of
imaginaries.
Discourses
As discussed in Chapter 1, discourse is the dialectical relationship between
language and society (Fairclough, 2015). Therefore, discourses involve the analysis
of “how texts figure (in relation to other moments) in how people represent the
world, including themselves and their productive activities” (Fairclough, 2010, p.
174). Through this interpretation, discourses are seen as ways of representing
informed by the social positioning of social actors (Kettle, 2007). The ways of
representing are relevant to this study as the educational attainment of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander young people in primary and secondary schooling are
represented within various discourses including policy discourses, media discourses
and so forth.
Styles
Finally, styles refer to the ways of being and identifying (Kettle, 2007). That
is, each social actor participates in various social institutions and constructs and plays
a particular role within these contexts which shape their interactions within the
discourses. Styles are important to this study as they allow the theoretical constructs
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 143
and MR to be identified. In turn, styles demonstrate how the position of the
‘interpreter’ is informed by and informs social practices.
Positioning of social actors
The social positioning of social actors also informs the orders of discourse. For
example, in the production of policy at the school level, if the Principal and other
members of the Executive team choose to involve Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander parents within the decision making process, as is advocated for in the
principles of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), the authoritative positioning of the Principal as opposed
to Indigenous parents will influence the interaction that occurs. The interaction
between the Principal and parents will also depend on other factors such as previous
engagement and interaction prior to the social event as well as whether the Principal
is Indigenous or non-Indigenous owing to the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors as discussed in Chapter 2. As Fairclough (2015) highlights, “the
relationship between discourse and social structures is dialectical in this way [that is,]
control over orders of discourse by institutional and societal power-holders is one
factor in the maintenance of their power” (pp. 67-68). This understanding of the
relations of power and its influence on the orders of discourse further demonstrates
how Indigenous voice can be marginalised.
Relations of power and hegemony
Power relations also determine the orders of discourse. The ways of making
meaning may be informed by the normalised and common-sensical ideologies
embedded within society. As Fairclough (2001a) states, “a particular social
structuring of semiotic difference may become hegemonic, become part of the
legitimizing common sense which sustains relations of domination” (p. 124).
144 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Therefore, the orders of discourse inform and are informed by the social positioning
and MR that participants draw upon to make meaning.
In relation to this study, power relations and hegemony are important to
identify as the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is a policy text. Fairclough (2003)
states that,
in a Gramscian view, politics is seen as a struggle for hegemony, a particular
way of conceptualizing power which amongst other things emphasizes how
power depends upon achieving consent or at least acquiescence rather than
just having the resources to use force, and the importance of ideology in
sustaining relations of power (p. 45).
Through this lens, the notions of ideologies, bias and taken for granted assumptions
establish ‘common ground’ and are drawn on to interpret policy.
The production and interpretation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) further exemplify the
orders of discourse. For example, the policy cycle as illustrated in Figure 2.3 and as
examined in Chapter 2, articulate the processes of production. In regards to policy,
participants/social actors that are involved in the production of policy at a National
level are determined by societal constructs and institutions. That is, Ministers and
other governmental bodies as well as consultative groups are socially positioned to
produce policy. Education policies, such as the Strategy and the Coolangatta
Statement, are then able to be interpreted or excluded by schools when producing
their Operational and Strategic plans to address the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students (Department of Education and
Training, 2015). Schools also hold a hegemonic position in that they can determine
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 145
who is involved in the interpretation of policy and the production of consequential
plans, strategies and actions to be taken.
Ideologies and assumptions
The historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors act to normalise
Ideologies, Assumptions and the Representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students. In turn, linguistic theories ensure that there is consistency in social
theories. Fairclough (2003) highlights the interdependence of ideologies and
assumptions. He writes,
a particular discourse includes assumptions about what there is, what is the
case, what is possible, what is necessary, what will be the case, and so forth.
In some instances, one might argue that such assumptions, and indeed the
discourses they are associated with, are ideological (Fairclough, 2003, p. 58).
In regards to this study, assumptions and ideologies can be located within the varying
discourses – policy discourses, deficit discourses and neo-liberal discourses, for
example. The normalisation of bias and taken for granted assumptions then inform
societal norms and the representations of individuals and social groups.
Access, equity and representations
The question of Access and equity is best exemplified in the recent More
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Teacher Initiative (MATSITI) Project which
sought to respond to the goal of 1000 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teachers
within schools set in 1982 by the National Aboriginal Education Committee and the
work of Paul Hughes and Eric Willmot […] by 1990” (Johnson, Cherednichenko, &
Rose, 2016, p. i). The MATSITI Project reports the increase of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander teachers by 439 teachers from 2012 to 2015 with only 10 per
cent being in an executive position (e.g. Deputy Principal/Principal). Access and
146 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
equity can also be represented by the issues of access for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students to education and the equitable conditions provided, as
discussed in Chapter 2.
What the MATSITI Project highlights is that the Representations of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples within schools at a direct decision-making level
are limited. Therefore, there are minimal opportunities for Indigenous voice to be
heard when recontextualising and interpreting the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) within State policies and schools’ Strategic and Operational plans. This is
important to this study as the development of partnerships between schools and
Indigenous communities is one of the guiding principles of the Strategy.
Consistency, knowledge and evidence
In this study, Consistency is represented by the monitoring and evaluation
processes that are embedded within the policy cycle. That is, to ensure that strategies
employed by systems and schools are addressing the educational attainment of
primary and secondary Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. Further to
this, consistency ensures that the processes of monitoring and evaluation are static.
Consistency is also recognised within the terms of reference throughout the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006).
Knowledge and evidence held and provided in regards to addressing the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and
secondary students also determines access to policy production and interpretation.
Moreover, consistency is also evident in the incremental and intertextual properties
of policy. Fairclough (2003) states that, “intertextuality is the presence of actual
elements of other texts within a text” (p. 39). In regards to this study, the Strategy
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 147
and the Coolangatta Statement have built on and been informed by numerous
policies as articulated in Chapter 2.
Institutional and societal constructs
Discourse is open to interpretation. As Chouliaraki and Fairclough (1999) state
“all analysts are operating in theoretical practices whose concerns are different from
the practical concerns of people as participants, and all analysis brings the analysts’
theoretical preoccupations […] to bear on the discourse” (p.7). While Chouliaraki
and Fairclough were referring to CDA, I would argue that social actors are quasi-
analysts as they interpret, analyse and respond within social practices in the everyday
as evidenced in the varying processes that they unconsciously enact within each
social activity. That is, the social conditions of production and interpretation are
internalised but they are also constrained within the orders of discourse.
In this section, articulation of the elements of social practice provides insight
into the dialectical relationship between discourse and society. Explication of the
theoretical constructs that inform my MR contextualises the processes of analysis.
Extrapolation of Critical Discourse Analysis follows.
Critical Discourse Analysis
Critical Discourse Analysis [CDA] (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010;
Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015) is the methodological approach that
informs the innovative methodological approach, Indigenous Critical Discourse
Analysis [ICDA], being proposed in this study. In this section, the analytical
framework of CDA is discussed. The three levels of CDA – Description,
Interpretation and Explanation (see Figure 1.4), are articulated. Explication of the
textual features that guide the analysis at the Description level occurs. The processes
148 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
and social conditions that inform the production and interpretation of policy are
discussed.
Stages of Critical Discourse Analysis
There are three stages of CDA (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough,
2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015). They are: 1) Description, 2) Interpretation, and 3)
Explanation. Presented in Chapter 1 in Figure 1.3 and adapted in Figure 4.4, the
dimensions of CDT and the stages of CDA are provided to illustrate the
interdependence of theory and methodology. Explication of Description at the
micro-level follows.
Figure 4.4 The dimensions and stages of CDA
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 149
Description at the micro-level
The initial stage of CDA is the Description stage (Chouliaraki & Fairclough,
2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015). Here, the network of practices
or orders of discourse and the structural layout of the policy genre are analysed
(Fairclough, 2001c). Further to this, analysis of the interdiscursive, linguistic and
semiotic elements of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) occurs. Fairclough (2015) asserts that, “one’s
focus [should] constantly alternat[e] between what is ‘there’ in the text, and the
discourse type(s) which the text is drawing upon” (p. 129) when analysing the text.
My interpretation of Fairclough’s statement is that there is a constant reflexive tug of
war occurring when analysing policy at the micro- level.
In this study, six textual features have been selected specifically to guide the
analysis. They are:
1. Binary constructs;
2. Euphemistic expressions;
3. Relational modality;
4. Expressive modality;
5. Metaphors; and,
6. Declarative statements.
The textual features selected enable the investigation and identification of genres,
discourses and styles. More specifically, the textual features focus the descriptive
analysis of the study and provide a means for the linguistic features and discourses of
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006) to be investigated. That is, the structural, grammatical, linguistic,
and semiotic features of the texts provide foregrounding to interpret and explain how
150 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
institutional and societal constructs (social conditions), taken for granted
assumptions, beliefs and values (processes of production and interpretation) held
within dominant ideologies maintain, sustain or challenge social practices
(Fairclough, 2015). Elaboration of each of the textual features that inform this study
follows.
Binary constructs
Binary constructs are used to represent two things in opposition to each other
(Luke, 1995). In texts, binary constructs can be used to make explicit social
determinants that divide individuals and social groups highlighting the difference to
the accepted societal norm. Exemplification of such social determinants in Chapter 1
included gender (male and female); race (black and white; Indigenous and non-
Indigenous); and, socio-economic positioning (rich and poor). Chouliaraki and
Fairclough (2010) state that, “relations of power at the level of networks are relations
of domination and include not only capitalist relations between social classes but also
patriarchal gender relations as well as racial and colonial relations, which are
diffused across the diverse practices of society” (p. 24). Through this lens,
Chouliaraki and Fairclough argue that certain social practices and, therefore, the
positioning of social actors, are embedded within the social order and normalised
encouraging and maintaining systemic imbalances within society as a whole. The
use of binary constructs is just one means in which the imbalance is maintained
and/or challenged (Fairclough, 2015).
In regards to this study, the policy discourses are analysed to identify if binary
constructs have been used. This is important to this study as if binary constructs
have been used in policy discourses, the reasons and effects of such discoursal
elements may lend some insight into how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 151
peoples are positioned and illustrate relations of power. The use of other discoursal,
lexical, grammatical and semiotic elements such as euphemistic expressions further
foreground how language is used to maintain, influence and/or challenge social
structures and practices.
Euphemistic expressions
Euphemistic expressions have a relational value and are used to avoid the use
of words that have negative connotations (Fairclough, 2015). For example: The use
of the term gap in preference to statistical equality when referring to the disparity
between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples “employment, income, and
educational status” (Altman, et al., 2009, p. 226). In doing so, euphemistic
expressions are used to develop and transform societal relationships between social
actors. In relation to this study, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are analysed to identify whether
euphemistic expressions have been used. This is important to this study. This is
because, for example: the Strategy is a governmental policy addressing the education
disparity between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and their non-
Indigenous counterparts, consistency in terms of reference and therefore, the use of
euphemistic expression, the use of formal language and the formality in the genre
layout all work to position the producer as a voice of authority and trustworthiness
but also, positions the interpreter of the policy. Complementary to the identification
of euphemistic expressions and binary constructs and assists in further establishing
how social and institutional constructs shape and are shaped by discourse is
modality.
Modality
Modalities represent the realities of society. As Sulkunen and Törrönen (1997)
states, “modalities are understood as structures that in one way or another evaluate
152 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
the state of affairs” (p. 45). This interpretation suggests that modalities are value-
laden. Fowler (1985) divides modality into five categories “which indicate speakers
“or writers” attitudes to the proposition they utter” (Lillian, 2008, p. 3). The five
categories are:
1. Validity – the level of conviction in the authenticity of the proposal;
2. Predictability – the credibility of the proposal occurring;
3. Desirability – the sincerity in the judgments made;
4. Obligation – the responsibility to enact the proposal; and,
5. Permission – the speaker/writer allowing the listener/reader to act.
In contrast, Fairclough (2015) describes two distinct modalities that are
necessary to be identified and analysed in CDA; being: 1) Relational modality; and,
2) Expressive modality. In Table 4.2, I draw together Fowler’s modalities and
Fairclough’s modalities and how they defined these terms. In this study,
Fairclough’s two categories of modality are used in the initial analysis of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) and Fowler’s five categories of modality for the finite analysis of the data.
Elaboration of modality and how they are applied in this study occurs in the
following sections.
Expressive modality
Under the overarching label of epistemic/expressive modalities as illustrated in
Table 4.2, Fowler (1985) presents the varying practices that speaker/writer’s operate
in their claims to truth. Validity and Predictability articulate the speaker/writer’s
faith in the credibility of the proposition and the plausibility of future events to occur.
He indicates the importance of these categories, by stating: “validity, predictability,
and (un) desirability are an important part of the practices by means of which claims
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 153
Table 4.2 The interrelationship between Fowler (1985) and Fairclough’s (2015) categories of
modality.
NOTE: Fowler’s five categories of modality are adapted from “Power”, by R. Fowler, 1985, p. 72 and
“Modality, persuasion and manipulation in Canadian conservative discourse “, by D. Lillian, 2008.
NOTE: Fairclough’s categories of modality are adapted from “Language and Power”, by N.
Fairclough, 2015, p. 142.
Fowler’s five categories of modality (1985) Fairclough’s two categories of
modality (2015)
Epistemic modality Validity
“…the speaker expresses
greater or lesser confidence in
the truth of the proposition”
(Lillian, 2008, p. 3 [emphasis
added]).
Expressive modality
“…the speaker or writer’s authority
with respect to the truth or
probability of a representation of
reality […], i.e. the modality of the
speaker/writer’s evaluation of truth”
(Fairclough, 2015, p. 142 [emphasis
added]). Predictability
The probability or possibility
of the proposition occurring
Deontic modality Desirability
The practicality and integrity of
judgments made by the
speaker/writer
Relational modality
“a matter of the authority of one
participant in relation to others”
(Fairclough, 2015, p. 142)
Obligation
The listener/reader’s
commitments to perform an
action
Permission
The speaker/writer allowing the
listener/reader “to perform
some action” (Fowler, 1985, p.
72)
154 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
to authority are articulated and legitimated authority is expressed” (Fowler, 1985, pp.
72-73). Therefore, Fowler indicates that desirability can also play a role in
epistemic/expressive modalities. Furthermore, Fowler asserts that validity and
predictability indicate the practicality and integrity of judgments made by the
speaker/writer.
Expressive modality provides three properties that will guide and inform the
analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). Firstly, expressive modality
establishes a speaker and/or writer’s evaluation of truth or their evaluative judgment
of what could or should be done for a better future (Fairclough, 2015). Secondly,
Fairclough suggests that the use of expressive modality is ideological and informs
and is informed by institutional and societal constructs. Thirdly, policy incorporates
discourses of imaginaries – representations of how social life could be and therefore,
is capable of transforming constructs (Fairclough, 2001b). Thus, when analysing the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), identification of expressive modality assists in
answering the third research question: What discourses are identifiable in the
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 and the
Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Rights in Education and how do they
influence, maintain and/or challenge social structures and social practices?
Relational modality
Relational modality defines the position of each social actor in relation to other
participants engaged in the social interaction (Fairclough, 2015). As evidenced in
Table 4.2, Fowler (1985) refers to relational modality as deontic modality. There are
three categories, being: 1) Desirability, 2) Obligation, and 3) Permission. Fowler
asserts that desirability indicates the practicality and integrity of judgments made by
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 155
the speaker/writer. Obligation, as the name suggests, indicates the listener/reader’s
commitments to perform an action. The third modality, Permission, indicates the
speaker/writer allowing the listener/reader “to perform some action” (Fowler, 1985,
p. 72). Here, the speaker/writer claims a position of authority. The use of these
modality categories assist in determining how discourse has been used within the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) to position the speaker/writer and the listener/reader.
Lillian (2008) states,
within critical discourse analysis, modality is understood as encompassing
much more than simply the occurrence of modal auxiliaries such as may,
might, can, could, will, would, shall, should, must, and ought. Rather
modality concerns the writer’s (or speaker’s) attitude toward and/or
confidence in the proposition being presented (p. 2 [original emphasis]).
Here, Lillian highlights the dialectical relationship between discourse and society and
how relational and expressive modalities are intertwined. Within this study, the
relational and expressive modalities within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are investigated.
Metaphors
Metaphor is used within discourses to establish authority and trustworthiness.
The relevance of metaphor in this study is exemplified when Charteris-Black (2005)
states that,
in political contexts metaphor can be, and often is, used for ideological
purposes because it activates unconscious emotional associations and
thereby contributes to myth creation: politicians use metaphor to tell the
right story (p. 28).
156 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Whilst Charteris-Black’s application focused primarily on the speeches of England
and America’s political leaders, public policy and peoples’ interpretations of these
policies allow for the use of metaphor to occur and be analysed. Fairclough (2015)
further indicates how metaphors are used to build the accepted ideologies within
social constructs. In this study, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) has been
produced by Education Council to address the educational attainment of primary and
secondary Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. Therefore, there is reason
to explore how, and if, metaphors have been used and in the discourses.
Declarative statements
Declarative statements enable producers to establish a position of authority and
truth (Thomas, 2005). Further to this, declarative statements can also establish
discourses of imaginaries much like indicated when describing aspects of relational
modality (Taylor, 2004). Fairclough (2015) states, “the subject position of the
speaker/writer is that of a giver (of information), and the addressee’s position is that
of a receiver” (pp. 141-142). Fairclough highlights how declarative statements
establish the relationships between social actors and provides the means to establish
authority.
In regards to this study, identification of declarative statements allows for the
positioning of the producers of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the interpreters of the
policies to be investigated. Thus, the investigation of declarative statements within
the policy discourses assists in answering the fourth research question: How do the
discourses within the texts illustrate relations of power and the tensions at the
cultural interface?
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 157
In this section, the Description stage of CDA was discussed. Explication of the
textual features and how they inform this study occurred. A synopsis of the
Interpretation stage and how interdiscursive analysis informs the processes of
production and interpretation follows.
Interpretation at the meso-level
At the Interpretation stage of CDA, the focus is on the processes of text
production and interpretation (Fairclough, 2015). Here, the theoretical constructs
and the socio-cognitive understandings of the world in which we live that inform our
MR are significant in generating interpretations. Fairclough describes two levels of
interdiscursive analysis that occurs at the meso-level, being: 1) situational context,
and 2) intertextual context. Key elements of the two levels of interdiscursive
analysis are provided in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3 The key elements of interdiscursive analysis at the meso-level
Levels of interdiscursive
analysis
Key elements
Situational context Partially based on external cues/partially based on
social actors’ MR
Cues informed by institutional and societal
constructs/social order
Discourse types
Intertextual context Assumptions based on previous social activities
Assumptions of position and therefore, orders of
discourse
Assumptions of purpose of social activity
NOTE: Adapted from “Language and Power”, by N. Fairclough, 2015, pp. 157-158.
158 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
As illustrated in Table 4.3, social order and orders of discourse influence and
inform the production and interpretation of text. Fairclough (2015) highlights that,
social orders and orders of discourse are relative to particular ideologies and
to particular power relations. One consequence of this is that situations may
be differently interpreted if different social orders are being drawn upon as
interpretative procedures by different participants (p. 163).
Here, Fairclough describes situational context and its significance, as well as how
different social actors may interpret texts differently. He highlights how shared
ideologies and notions of power are significant to influence social actors’ production
and interpretation of texts.
In regards to intertextual context, the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors are influential in the production and interpretation of texts.
Fairclough (2015) asserts that social actors find “what can be taken as common
ground” (p. 164) but that differing views are possible. Presuppositions are formed by
linguistic cues that purport to present to social actors things they already know; taken
for granted knowledge (Fairclough, 2015). Like situational context, social actors
may interpret social activities differently. However, intertextual context allows those
in a position of authority to influence and manipulate others (Fairclough, 2015).
Situational and intertextual contexts enable the interdiscursive elements; orders
of discourse, ideologies, and assumptions and so forth, to be identified. In
conjunction with the textual features identified in the Description stage, the influence
of any available theoretical constructs and the policy cycle allows insight into the
production and interpretation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and how they seek to influence,
maintain and/or challenge social structures and social practices. Identification of the
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 159
ideological representations of the social actors within the Strategy provides the
means to address the second research question: How does the National Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 position, address and represent
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young peoples’ primary and secondary
educational attainment? Further to this, interdiscursive analysis facilitates answering
a component of the fourth research question: How do the discourses within the texts
illustrate relations of power and the tensions at the cultural interface?
In this section, the Interpretation stage of CDA was explored. Illustration of
situational and intertextual contexts was provided. In the following section, the
Explanation stage of CDA is presented.
Explanation at the macro-level
The Explanation stage of CDA involves investigation of the social conditions in the
production and interpretation of texts (Fairclough, 2015). Fairclough (2015) writes
that, “when aspects of MR are drawn upon as interpretative procedures in the
production and interpretation of texts, they are thereby reproduced; […]
Reproduction is for participants a generally unintended and unconscious side-effect,
so to speak, of production and interpretation” (p. 172). Here, Fairclough makes the
point that MR are influential in the production and interpretation of text. He also
highlights the interdependence and interconnection between the Interpretation and
Explanation stages. In Table 4.4, the social conditions of production and
interpretation that inform this study are compared and contrasted with the
components of the policy cycle (processes of policy production) and the theoretical
constructs and MR (processes of policy interpretation) to illustrate reproduction.
Fairclough (2015) states that, “reproduction connects the stages of interpretation and
explanation, because whereas the former is concerned with how MR are drawn upon
160 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Table 4.4 The reproduction of social conditions and processes of production and interpretation in
this study
Social conditions of production
Processes of production
Social conditions of Interpretation
Processes of interpretation
Politics
Process
Paper
Programs and Performance
Contested space
Institutional/societal constructs: Orders
of discourse
Knowledge/evidence
Ideology/Assumptions/Representations
Access/equity
Society
People and place
Political agenda
Institutional/societal constructs: Orders
of discourse
Knowledge/evidence
Ideology/Representations
Culture
Process
Programs and Performance
Marginalisation of voice
Positioning
Institutional/societal constructs: Orders
of discourse
Access/equity
Economy
Price Tag
Deficit Discourse
Social practice/Social process
Institutional/societal constructs: Orders
of discourse
Ideology/Assumptions/Representations
Social justice
Knowledge/evidence
Ideology/Representations
Institutional/societal constructs
Access/equity
Consistency
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 161
in processing discourse, the latter is concerned with the social constitution and
change of MR, including of course their reproduction in discourse practice” (p. 172).
Through this lens, the social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation are interdependent and shape and are shaped by discourse.
The Explanation stage illustrates “discourse as part of a social process, as a
social practice, showing how it is determined by social structures, and what
reproductive effects discourses can cumulatively have on those structures, sustaining
them or changing them” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 172). In other words, social order is
shaped by ideologies and assumptions that in turn shape discourses. Interactions
between the macro-, meso- and micro-levels are also reversed. That is, discourses
can maintain or sustain the ideologies and assumptions held which can then
transform or challenge institutional and societal constructs. Figure 4.5 illustrates the
interdependence and interaction of the social conditions and processes of production
and interpretation and text – the product of the production process and the object of
the interpretation process.
The Explanation stage has two dimensions. Fairclough (2015) states that,
on the one hand, we can see discourses as parts of social struggles, and
contextualize them in terms of these broader (non-discoursal) struggles, and
the effects of these struggles on structures. This puts the emphasis on the
social effects of discourse, on creativity, and on the future. On the other
hand, we can show what power relationships determine discourses; these
relationships are themselves the outcome of struggles, and are established
(and, ideally, naturalized) by those with power (pp. 172-173).
Here, Fairclough highlights the significance and interdependence of the two
dimensions – the relations of power; and, the social struggles at the Explanation
162 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
Social conditions of production and interpretation: Insitutional and
societal constructs
Processes of production and interpretation:
Members' resources
Text :
Discourse
stage. That is, MR are informed by social structures and can provide varying
interpretations drawn from any of the three levels of social organisation. Therefore,
the Explanation stage requires the investigation of the discourses that influence,
maintain and/or challenge societal structures and social practices. As a result, the
analysis can be sociological in nature.
Figure 4.5 The interdependence and interaction of the social conditions and processes of production
and interpretation, and text.
In regards to this study, exploration of how power relations shape policy
discourses is necessary. This is important to answer the third and fourth research
questions. To do this, investigation of how the principles of the Coolangatta
Statement on Indigenous Rights’ in Education (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is
signified, represented and enacted in the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad 163
Islander Education Strategy 2015 (Education Council, 2015) illustrates power
relations. Further to this, analysis of the Strategy through the lens of the Coolangatta
Statement illustrates relations of power and the tensions at the cultural interface.
Social struggles for access to education by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
activists, for an education that encourages, supports and provides both a scholarly
and empowering education as well as one that embeds and respects Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander knowledges and cultures as advocated for in the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006); in other words, a holistic education, are
explored to recognise how past struggles influence current policy discourses.
In this section, articulation of the Explanation stage was provided. The
interconnectivity of the Interpretation and Explanation stages of analysis were
discussed. The significance of the social struggles by Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples to access and gain an education and its potential to influence policy
discourses was considered. In Chapter 5, articulation of the methodological
approach, ICDA occurs.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, elaboration of interdependencies of CDT, as a theory, and
CDA, as a theorised method, was provided. The social and discursive elements of
discourse were explored. Exploration of the theoretical constructs that inform and
form my members’ resources occurred. The importance of the social relations of
power, the authoritative position of Education Council and other governmental
bodies on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, and how the orders of
discourse are not static were discussed. Identification of how texts draw upon and
articulate genres, discourses and styles was proffered. Extrapolation of the three
levels of CDA and the textual features that guide the data analysis followed.
164 Chapter 4: Mapping the landscape: Informing the launch pad
In Chapter 5, introduction of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis (ICDA) as
a methodological approach occurs. Explanation of the conceptual representation of
ICDA is provided. Description of how the principles of the guiding theoretical
frameworks discussed in Chapters 3 and 4 inform and shape ICDA follows.
Consideration of how bias is addressed throughout the data chapters is presented.
The ethical considerations necessary to be attended to throughout the study are
articulated.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 165
Chapter 5: The launch pad
I am on the ebb of the wave. I know the route I must travel. I have
developed a mental map. I navigate using the stars in the sky. For now, the
cloudy skies have cleared but the storm clouds of self-doubt and fraud linger
on the horizons. I see my surroundings and know my position and where I
stand. I am almost ready to take flight but my connection to the ocean
remains; I am still tethered to my boat. It is not until I reach the shore again
that it will metamorphosise into my nest. On my way, I continue to collect
driftwood to add to my boat. I plot the route in which I take so that others
that take on this ocean can follow my lead if they so choose.
166 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Chapter 5: The launch pad 167
Figure 5.1 A conceptual overview of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis
Chapter 5: The launch pad 169
In this Chapter, the Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis, from here on
referred to as ICDA, conceptual framework is presented. This method of analysis is
my own design, bringing together Rigney’s Indigenist Research Principles [IRP]
(1999), Nakata’s Indigenous Standpoint Theory [IST] (2007a, 2007b), and
Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Theory/Analysis [CDT/CDA] (Chouliaraki &
Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough, 2015). The specific
semiotic properties of the framework are explored. The articulation of ICDA
through the explication of the ontological and epistemological approaches that are
drawn on to guide this study follows. Exemplification of how ICDA differs to CDA
is provided. Exploration of the procedures to implement and action the framework is
given. The ethical considerations when enacting the framework is provided.
Clarification of the ICDA methodological framework and its semiotic narrative
follows.
The semiotic narrative
Prior to explicating the conceptual overview for its theoretical and
methodological properties, it is essential to provide the narrative; that is, the story
behind the framework. Moreover, Figure 5.1 becomes a visual text and therefore,
has semiotic properties. In doing so, I am addressing the tensions prevalent in the
interpretation of Aboriginal art as illustrated by Myers (1991) when he purports that,
“the significance of [Aboriginal art, its design and story] – the meaning of their
meanings, as it were – is not controlled by the Aboriginal painters as they move into
the wider cultural arena” (p. 27). That is, when Indigenous objects of research are
observed from a non-Indigenous perspective, interpretation is subject to an
‘outsiders’ standpoint.
170 Chapter 5: The launch pad
The semiotic properties of the conceptual overview are dominated by the use of
circles. The symbolic significance of the circle has been well documented. Circles
are also significant within Indigenous art and symbolism. In Australian Aboriginal
art, the circle is used to represent meeting places or waterholes that are places that
provide life; that ensure the survival of the peoples (Bardon, 1991), and therefore in
turn, represents self. Self here is divergently different to the Western understanding
of self which espouses individualism. Self for Indigenous peoples is inclusive of
family, of community and exemplifies our relatedness (Martin, 2008). Therefore,
Martin (2008) highlights the importance of the circle as “there is no beginning and
no end and therefore no completions but continuous cycles” (p. 80), the
interrelationships of Indigenous peoples with Country, with each other and in a
contemporary context, with others.
In Figure 5.1, the use of the circle is intentional. The circle represents my
worldview from my standpoint. It indicates the cyclic processes and contexts that
inform my position as I draw on the social contexts, being the historical, political,
cultural and social factors that influence my view of the world. Aspects of my
position were explicated in My story: Positioning of self at the beginning of this
study. On a more abstract level therefore, Figure 5.1 can be recognised as a cross-
section of a sphere; a representation of the globe that informs my world. Further to
this, Figure 5.1 can be my eye illustrating the way I ‘see’ the world around me with
the central circles being my pupil, the middle circles being the iris and the outer
circles, my sclera. Each circle has symbolic imagery used to further illustrate the
interconnectivity of the macro- (Explanation), meso- (Interpretation) and micro-
(Description) levels.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 171
Semiotic representations at a macro-level
The semiotic properties also act as metaphors representing the tensions
prevalent at the cultural interface (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b) where Western and
Indigenous knowledges, worldviews, beliefs and attitudes meet. Figure 5.2 provides
a means to further explore the semiotic properties at the macro-level of the
conceptual overview.
Filtered within Figure 5.2 are ionic pillars based on the Doric columns of
Ancient Greek architecture. Plain and solid, the symbolism of the Doric order is
strength (Watkin, 2015). Here, the use of the Doric column is used as a visual
metaphor to emphasise the pillars that maintain authority and trust within society.
Figure 5.2 A focus on the macro level: social conditions of production and interpretation
172 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Circles, or more specifically ovals, have been used in the lower half of the
outer circle. Here the ovals represent the cyclic process of the key concepts, namely;
1) contested space, 2) political agenda, 3) marginalisation of voice, 4) deficit
discourses, and 5) social justice, that are bound and yet, interweave and inform an
individual’s interpretation and representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples in Australian society. Articulation of each of these concepts is provided in
Chapter 1. The positioning of the ovals within this space does not give privilege to
any of the concepts instead they are interlinked through the use of the wavy lines that
move throughout the lower section of the outer circle as if the ovals are floating on a
water surface or stones that are surrounded by the water that flows around the
concepts.
Semiotic representations at a meso-level
At the meso-level, circles have been used again to represent the continuity of
the policy cycle. Figure 5.3 provides a focus on the meso-level of the theoretical
frameworks to further articulate the semiotic properties found. Each of the
components of the policy cycle; being, People and place, Process, Price tag, Paper,
and Programs and Performance, are represented within a separate circle but are
surrounded by smaller circles and triangles to illustrate movement (see Chapter 2).
Here, each of the components of the policy cycle ‘bounce’ and interact with each
other to inform the production of policy.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 173
Figure 5.3 A focus on the meso-level: processes of production and interpretation
The bottom half of the middle circle at the meso-level makes use of
quadrilateral shapes. In particular, the shapes tend to expand as they radiate out from
the inner circle. The symbolism of the shapes extending out to the macro-level is to
indicate how an individual’s processes of interpretation or members’ resources [MR]
are informed by social and institutional constructs. The text within the shapes
174 Chapter 5: The launch pad
emanate from the macro-level to the micro-level and vice versa. Again, movement is
used to demonstrate the linkages between the three levels.
Semiotic representations at a micro-level
Finally, as illustrated in Figure 5.4, the micro-level or inner circle depicts a
star. Within Aboriginal narratives and in particular Dreaming stories, stars have
often been the physical object to tell the story (see, for example: Fuller, Anderson,
Norris, & Trudgett, 2014). Here, the text tells the story.
Figure 5.4 A focus on the micro-level: Textual features
Chapter 5: The launch pad 175
Drawn out from the star are the textual features that fill the spaces of the circle.
The star also acts as a metaphor shining a light on the texts that are the foci of this
study. That is, the textual features; being: binary constructs, euphemistic
expressions, relational and expressive modality, metaphors and declarative
statements, guide the analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) as explicated in Chapter 4.
Semiotic representations of the Indigenous theoretical frameworks
Figure 5.5 A focus on the theoretical frameworks: Indigenist axiologies, ontologies and
methodologies
176 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Each of the circles at a macro-, meso- and micro-level are then encapsulated
and bound within the Indigenous theoretical frameworks (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006;
Rigney, 1999). Extrapolation of IRP occurs, namely: 1) Resistance as an
emancipatory imperative, 2) Political Integrity, and 3) Privileging Indigenous voice,
as indicated in Figure 5.5, which in turn is held in position by IST. Here, the text is
formed within the negative space of the solid black bands. Thus, the use of black
and white acts as a metaphor to demonstrate the tensions between the representations
of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples of Australia.
Development of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis
The design of ICDA involves the articulation of the Indigenous theoretical
frameworks: IRP (Rigney, 1999) and IST (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b); and, Fairclough’s
CDT/CDA (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c; Fairclough,
2015). The inclusion of Indigenous theoretical and methodological approaches is a
key element of how ICDA differs to CDA. That is, that my position as a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher, my lived experiences as shared within My story:
Positioning of self and my knowledge of Education as a discipline inform and are
informed by my MR that I draw on as I interpret policy discourses and produce this
study.
Traditionally, CDA is used by allies of the marginalised. That is, the dominant
peoples who champion and are known as the CDA group are White including such
prominent academics as Fairclough, Wodak, Kress, van Leeuwen and van Dijk
(Wodak & Meyer, 2009). ICDA enables opportunity for the voiceless to speak back;
to make explicit their knowledges, understandings and experiences of the world from
a lived experience rather than a position of the observed; the subject. This statement
Chapter 5: The launch pad 177
is not to belittle the research of allies but moreover, to privilege the voices of the
marginalised as they are in a position to articulate the lived experience.
It is important to note that the MR that inform and form the interpretation of
the individual may or may not complement the narrative told by the coloniser. ICDA
privileges Indigenous voice. Articulation of the interdependence of the theoretical
frameworks follows and culminates into Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory, from
here on referred to as ICDT.
Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory
In this section, the interdependence and interconnectivity of the three
theoretical frameworks, inclusive of IRP (Rigney, 1999), IST (Nakata, 2007a,
2007b) and CDT (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b, 2001c;
Fairclough, 2015) and how they inform ICDA occurs. Extrapolation of Indigenous
research and the need to personalise and make use of Indigenous and Western
methodologies was explored in Chapter 3. Articulation of IRP and IST was provided
in Chapter 3, and CDT in Chapter 4.
I now begin the reconstruction of the theoretical frameworks into a single
framework, ICDT. Figure 5.6 amalgamates the three principles of IRP (Rigney,
1999); being: 1) Resistance as an emancipatory imperative 2) Political Integrity, and
3) Privileging Indigenous voice; the three stages of IST (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b);
being: 1) The cultural interface as a contested space, 2) The continuities and
discontinuities of Indigenous agency, and 3) The continual tensions that inform and
limit what can/cannot be said in the everyday; and the three elements of social
practice as identified in CDT (Fairclough, 1992); being 1) Genres – Ways of acting
and interacting, 2) Discourses – Ways of representing, and 3) Styles – Ways of being
and identifying, allowing for exploration of the theoretical frameworks.
178 Chapter 5: The launch pad
The top circle of the Venn diagram (see Figure 5.6) includes the IRP (Rigney,
1999) – Resistance as an emancipatory imperative, the IST stage (Nakata, 2007a,
2007b) – the cultural interface as a contested space, and CDT’s level of social
organisation (Fairclough, 1992) – Genres: Ways of acting and interacting. Key
elements of these three aspects of IRP, IST and CDT can be summarised as:
1. Rigney’s principle – Resistance as an emancipatory imperative encourages
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers to ensure their research
contributes to the struggle for self-determination. By challenging the
notions of superiority held by the coloniser, the research needs to
challenge the past oppressions of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples.
2. Nakata’s first stage of IST provides a means to resist the deficit discourses
prevalent. I am to critique the colonial and contemporary narratives within
the corpus and in turn, position myself as a knower.
3. The genres investigated inform how I am to act and interact within the
societal constructs.
Therefore, by drawing these three statements together, I seek ways of acting and
interacting that resist and challenge societal structures and social practices at the
cultural interface. In other words, I understand that upon collating and analysing the
data that I need to assert my position as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher
challenging the institutional and societal constructs found within the production and
interpretation of policy. In doing so, my position as a female Aboriginal educator
and researcher locates me on the margins of the academy and education paradigm.
In order to validate my position, I need to draw on the literature regarding the
historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that both influence the
production and interpretation of Indigenous education policy. Critical analysis of the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement
Chapter 5: The launch pad 179
Figure 5.6 The culmination of the principles of IRP, the stages of IST and the elements of social practice in CDT to form the principles of Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory
Chapter 5: The launch pad 181
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) enables the identification of how discourses influence,
maintain and/or challenge social structures and social practices.
The bottom left circle of the Venn diagram in Figure 5.6 comprises of the
Privileging Indigenous voice (Rigney, 1999); the continuities and discontinuities of
Indigenous agency (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b); and, the Styles: Ways of being and
identifying level of social organisation (Fairclough, 1992). Here, privileging
Indigenous voice charges me to draw on the work of other Indigenous researchers
wherever possible to validate our alternative lens. The need to increase Indigenous
voice, according to Smith (1999), is necessary to continue the struggle for self-
determination. Nakata’s stage – the continuities and discontinuities of Indigenous
agency (2007a, 2007b) requires me to gain an understanding of the social structures
and issues of power that influence the positioning of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. Further to this, I need to investigate the historical, political,
cultural and social contextual factors to speak back to the dominant knowledges
already established in the corpus. The ways of being and identifying further
positions Indigenous researchers (Fairclough, 1992). That is, I, as a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher, am socially positioned and therefore, the social
structures and institutions that I both work in and with constrain my responses.
As a result, I acknowledge and recognise the need to privilege Indigenous
voice throughout the study. The epistemological, ontological and axiological
workings of Indigenous academics have been drawn upon to inform my own
approaches to the study. Building on the methodological approach, CDA,
Indigenous Critical Discourse Theory provides a framework to not only describe the
generic attributes of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) but also to interpret and explain the processes
182 Chapter 5: The launch pad
of production and interpretation as well as investigate the social conditions that
influence the production and interpretation of Indigenous education policy. Further
to this, by drawing on the work of other Indigenous academics, I am advocating for
the continuities of Indigenous agency. Therefore, when analysing and collating the
data for this study, I am to demonstrate an understanding of how Indigenous
education policies, the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples in education and my own position are shaped by the social structures and
institutions. To encourage the agency for change in regards to the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students,
this study looks to determine how the policy discourses encourage, support and
provide an education that is, scholarly and empowering while embedding Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander knowledges and cultures.
The circle on the bottom right hand side of the Venn diagram (see Figure 5.6)
encompasses Rigney’s Political Integrity principle (1999); the continual tensions
that inform and limit what can/cannot be said in the everyday (Nakata, 2007a,
2007b); and, the third level of social organisation according to Fairclough (1992),
Discourses: Ways of representing. Political Integrity highlights the importance of
Indigenous peoples doing research in Indigenous issues. I am, therefore, accountable
not just to the academy but also the community. My MR help to illustrate my
position. The discourses used to both analyse and respond to texts further establish
my position.
In this study, I am therefore not only analysing a Western Indigenous education
policy but also, an Indigenous policy to determine what the key elements of the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) address the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples in education as prescribed in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
Chapter 5: The launch pad 183
al., 1999, 2006). The disparity between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students’
primary and secondary educational attainment is significant to the potential futures of
Indigenous peoples in the wider Australian society. In turn, the analysis of the
discourses enable me to investigate how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples are represented and thus, illustrate relations of power and the tensions at the
cultural interface.
Finally, the culmination of all three circles as they intersect allows the
identification of my social position within society as a social actor to be articulated.
My lived experiences as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher influences my
standpoint on the way discourses are used to position Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples. My experience as a classroom teacher informs my position on the
colonial ideologies still maintained in discourses, of the institutionalised racism
experienced by students and the marginalisation and exclusion of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander parents and communities in the decision making process of
Indigenous students’ primary and secondary educational attainment. The historical
account of the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in
education from pre-colonisation to the inclusion of Indigenous students after the
1960’s informs my standpoint. The lived experience of deficit discourses used
within media about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander issues everyday informs my
standpoint. These all inform my MR that inform my interpretation when critically
analysing Indigenous education policy.
ICDT therefore has three overarching principles. They are:
1. Analysis of discourses – challenging dominant discourses, institutional
and societal constructs by providing an alternative lens and privileging
Indigenous voice;
184 Chapter 5: The launch pad
2. Standpoint of researcher – Identification of how the lived and
professional experiences as well as theoretical constructs and members’
resources influence our standpoint; and,
3. Position of researcher – Recognition of how our position shapes and is
shaped by institutional and societal constructs.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) further guides the analysis
of the policy discourses.
The methodological approach
ICDA draws on the varying elements of CDA as discussed in Chapter 4. The
influence of the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that inform
the social conditions of production as they are understood in society are drawn on to
determine how they shape and are shaped by discourse. In regards to this study,
investigation of the processes of policy production – the policy cycle, are
investigated to analyse the constraints and tensions of social practices and its
influence on the interpretation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
The overarching social conditions of interpretation that influence and are
influenced by the hegemonic knowledges, attitudes and beliefs that form dominant
ideologies and therefore, how social actors interpret discourses is explored.
Examples of deficit discourses and where voice is marginalised within discourses are
sought to demonstrate how discourse positions Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples. Further to this, the theoretical constructs and discoursal elements are further
explored to demonstrate how interdiscursive properties influence policy
interpretation, recontextualisation and implementation.
The textual features – binary constructs, euphemistic expressions, relational
and expressive modality, metaphors and declarative statements, have been
purposively selected to further identify how discourses position Aboriginal and
Chapter 5: The launch pad 185
Torres Strait Islander peoples. Analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
and Coolangatta Statement’s (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) generic properties further
highlight how policies enforce consistency.
The role of IST (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b) in this study establishes my standpoint.
Complementary to this, CDT (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 2010; Fairclough, 2001b,
2001c; Fairclough, 2015) demonstrates my position within the study. My social
positioning, lived experiences and internalised and externalised knowledges,
attitudes and beliefs all influence my analysis of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015). As a female Aboriginal educator and researcher, the social problem that
guides this study – the disparity between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and
non-Indigenous students’ educational attainment in primary and secondary schooling
– requires the research to contribute to the struggle for self-determination. Rigney’s
IRP (1999) advocates for such an approach.
Analysis of discourses
Texts draw upon and articulate genres, discourses and styles together
(Fairclough, 2010, 2015). As Fairclough (2010) states, “texts […] are part of the
action (talking or writing constitutes ways of acting; often in conjunction with non-
semiotic action) [GENRES]; they simultaneously represent aspects of the world
[DISCOURSES], and they simultaneously identify social actors, contribute to the
constitution of social and personal identities [STYLES]” (p. 75). Furthermore,
genres, discourses and styles as parts of social practices, inform the orders of
discourse (Fairclough, 2010).
In this study, genres, discourses and styles act as another layer of analysis
when critically analysing the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) through the lens of
the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). That is, the two written
186 Chapter 5: The launch pad
texts, as components of social practice, inform and form the ways of acting,
interacting, representing, being and identifying (Fairclough, 2015). In turn, the
authors of both texts position themselves and the readers indicating the orders of
discourse. Hidden within the analysis are the processes of identifying how the texts
maintain and reproduce social life, affirm and/or challenge the representations of
people and how they represent the world sustaining dominant ideologies, values,
beliefs and attitudes (Fairclough, 2010). My approach to this analysis is shaped by
and shapes my standpoint.
Standpoint of researcher
In My story: Positioning of Self, at the beginning of this study, I shared some of
my lived experiences and how policy and those in positions of authority enacting
their interpretations of policy had denied me my Aboriginality. My subsequent
immersion into community and Aboriginal ways of knowing, being and doing has
developed my sense of self and identity and provides a unique standpoint as one who
in youth viewed the world from a coloniser perspective and who now reflects on
those knowledges from the standpoint of a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher. Therefore, my standpoint and lived experiences inform how I interpret
policy discourses.
My own knowledge of the historical, political, cultural and social contextual
factors in regards to the attitudes, beliefs and values towards Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples also influences my position. Furthermore, being an educated
female Aboriginal, my knowledge of the school system and Indigenous education
policy impacts my interpretation of policy discourses. Daily interactions within the
Western institution with both Indigenous and non-Indigenous academics further
weighs on the members’ resources I draw on when interpreting literature and data.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 187
Further to this, the exploration of the representations of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples in primary and secondary schooling, the extrapolation of the
policy cycle and the investigation of Indigenous education policy have all
contributed to my knowledge of key elements in Indigenous education policy.
Explication of the principles of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) enable me to position myself
within policy discourses. The social structures and practices, both historical and
contemporary, that position Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the
community of ‘knowers’ and their positions about and on Indigenous education
policy all inform my standpoint.
My own standpoint, as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher, seeks to
bring an alternative lens on the discourses within Indigenous education policy. In
doing so, I intend to promote critical dialogue about policy discourses. In turn, the
study seeks to present the varying contextual factors ‘at play’ when producing and
interpreting policy. That is, rather than to solve the inequitable educational outcomes
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous students, I wish to bring
to the policymakers’ attention an alternative lens on how Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples are positioned in Indigenous education policy.
My standpoint is informed by many extenuating factors but it comes from a
position of knowing, from lived experience, from a position that seeks to contribute
to the Indigenous struggle for self-determination and finally, a position that
acknowledges the importance and power of education. To understand how language
is used to position, represent and address Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples, I drew on the work of Fairclough (2015) as discussed in Chapter 4. My
position and Aboriginal lens which I bring to my study influences my standpoint.
188 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Position of researcher
Absolon and Willett (2005) write about the importance of positioning ourselves
within Indigenous research. They “are of the opinion that neutrality and objectivity
do not exist in research, since all research is conducted and observed through human
epistemological lenses. [L]ocation [,what I refer to as positioning,] is essential to
Indigenous methodologies and Aboriginal research/world view/epistemologies” (p.
97). Through this interpretation, my sharing of self in the Preface acts as a means to
position myself. Furthermore, in Chapter 1, I claimed my position as a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher. I highlighted how intersectionality influenced
and influences my position and what can and cannot be said (Moreton-Robinson,
2013; Nakata, 2007a). Dominant institutional and societal constructs influence my
positioning. However, I also asserted that I did not want to genderise my approach to
this study.
Nonetheless, I cannot deny my position as a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher is socially constructed and is bound within and by dominant White and
patriarchal constructs (Moreton-Robinson, 2013). As Moreton-Robinson asserts, as
Aboriginal women, “our social location [is defined] within hierarchical relations of
ruling within our communities and Australian society [which] factors into our
standpoint [and I would argue, position,] as researchers within the academy as does
our different disciplinary training” (Moreton-Robinson, 2013, p. 339). My training
as an educator positions me as a ‘knower’ about the education system and the
schooling system.
It is important to note, I do not speak for all Aboriginal peoples. I do not speak
for all Aboriginal women. I enter the analysis of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
Chapter 5: The launch pad 189
from my position. I draw on my members’ resources, my perceptions of the world in
which I live and from my own experiences when analysing, critiquing and
interpreting policy discourses. In turn, I speak back to the dominant White voices;
echoing the sentiments of Absolon and Willett (2005) who assert, “we will no longer
be the subjects of objective study; we are the subjects of our own knowledge
creation” (p. 113).
In summary, ICDA involves a layered analytical approach. More specifically,
it requires analysis of how the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) works
ideologically at the linguistic level as well as the level of social order from an
Indigenous standpoint and position. The use of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan,
et al., 1999, 2006) as an explanatory framework and its resistant discourses help me
to speak back to the colonisers’ assumptive position of being the ‘knower’ about
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and issues. In doing so, genres,
discourses and styles act as an additional layer or lens to my Indigenous
positionality. Explication of how bias is addressed in this study follows.
Addressing bias in this study
Scholars from dominant groups argue that bias is evident within CDA (Van
Dijk, 1993). That is, that the position of the critical discourse analyst is not neutral
but instead, takes “an explicit socio-political stance” (Van Dijk, 1993, p. 252). Three
specific strategies are employed to address bias within this study. They are:
1. Use an appropriate point of view: establish researcher’s standpoint and
position within the study;
2. Language: use of euphemistic expressions, specificity of language use;
and,
190 Chapter 5: The launch pad
3. Consistency: interconnections and linking of content and research
(Creswell, 2012).
An overview of each of these strategies follows.
Use an appropriate point of view – Establish standpoint and position
Within this study, the positions, interests and/or perspectives of the coloniser
on the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in
primary and secondary schooling are drawn on to illustrate how Indigenous peoples
are positioned within the discourses. The interests of the coloniser, however, are not
considered. The coloniser is already in a position of power and therefore, is able to
address the rights and interests of the dominant group (Van Dijk, 1993).
As a result, throughout the study, articulation of my standpoint within the
research and, in doing so, my position in regards to the disparity between Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples and their non-Indigenous counterparts is provided.
Through this lens, I cannot be neutral. As a female Aboriginal educator and
researcher, the research must contribute to the struggle for self-determination.
Reflexivity on my position within the research and throughout the study is also
necessary (Fairclough, 2001c). Smith (1999) indicates that, ”research is not an
innocent or distant academic exercise but an activity that has something at stake that
occurs in a set of political and social conditions” (p. 5). That is, research is
undertaken to improve a situation; for the greater good. My position within the
research, how it influences the research design and the interpretation of the data must
be made explicit (Smith, 1999).
Use of language – Euphemistic expression
As a study that investigates how language is used to position Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples in education, it is important that I am also aware of my
Chapter 5: The launch pad 191
own use of language. In Chapter 1, I stated that the term ‘coloniser’ would be used
in preference to the term ‘invader’ and so forth, as the latter term of reference can be
contentious and negatively position others. In other words, I am using euphemistic
expressions within my own research.
Consistency – Interconnections and linking of content and research
Throughout the study, consistent referencing and linking of the content and the
research is provided. For example: the study challenges the dominant discourses
and ideologies of the coloniser from a position of knowledge (Nakata, 2007a, 2007b;
Smith, 1999). The use of ICDA, building on the foundations of Fairclough’s CDA
(2001b, 2001c; 2015), privileges Indigenous voice presenting an alternative lens on
an issue that may not have been a focus previously. Therefore, the intention of this
study is to encourage reform and critical dialogue in policy making. The consistent
referencing and link from the content to the research and vice versa ensures that the
intent and ‘discussion’ with the reader is maintained.
Consideration of the methodological approach is also necessary. That is, due
to the adaptability and attributes of CDA and their application in ICDA, the
methodological approach contributes to and validates the means in which bias is
addressed in this study. CDA requires “true multidisciplinarity, and an account of
intricate relationships between text, talk, social cognition, power, society and
culture” (Van Dijk, 1993, p. 253). The importance of reflexivity is further
highlighted and encouraged. CDA, but also Indigenous research, necessitates
consistent reflexivity to ensure that bias and transparency is addressed.
192 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Data Collection Strategies
Policy documents
In this study, policy documents are the ‘participants’ and therefore, no human
participants were drawn on or selected. As Fossey, Harvey, McDermott, and
Davidson (2002) highlight, “qualitative sampling requires identification of
appropriate participants, being those who can best inform the study” (p. 726).
Therefore, the knowledges, beliefs and attitudes of producers of policy are to be
derived from policy discourses. Such an approach has been taken because a
qualitative approach that seeks to analyse policy discourses and how they position
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples would be best informed by the policies
that currently inform and guide schools and teachers approaches to address the
educational attainment of Indigenous students in primary and secondary schooling.
This study focuses on the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), the current
Australian bipartisan Indigenous education policy, that seeks to close the ‘gap’
between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. The Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) acts as an explanatory framework in which to analyse
the Strategy. The policies that inform and guide the production of the Strategy and
the Coolangatta Statement were also consulted to gain insight in the previous
strategies and approaches signalled by government to close the ‘gap’. The use of
policy documents provides a means to analyse policy discourses and therefore,
inform the data collection strategies.
Archival documents
Policy documents are also archival documents. According to Wharton (2006),
archival documents enable researchers to investigate various aspects of social life
including how social groups interact with each other. In regards to this study, it is
Chapter 5: The launch pad 193
understood that historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors influence
and shape discourse. Therefore, archival documents provide opportunity to
investigate the lived experiences of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples but
also, the observations of Indigenous peoples and their engagement in education
through the colonisers’ lens. Further to this, archival documents entail the reforms
and agendas of past policy and more currently, the shift in societal attitudes and
therefore, the means in which government are seeking to redress the institutional
racism, deficit discourses and inequitable opportunities in education for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Therefore, investigation of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) as well as the policies and international charters that informed their
production, such as the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Policy [AEP] (DEET, 1989) and the United Nations Declaration on the rights of
Indigenous peoples [UNDRIP] (United Nations General Assembly, 2008),
demonstrate the contribution and relevance of archival documents in this study.
Procedure and Timeline
The data collection processes are informed by seven separate but interrelated
stages. They are: 1) Identification of the social problem; 2) Preliminary analysis of
the literature; 3) Identification of the textual features; 4) Application of thematic
coding; 5) Identification of the social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation; 6) Utilisation of software to sort, organise and maintain data; and, 7)
Reflection on the findings of the data. Table 5.1 provides a definition of each of the
stages to further explicate the importance of the steps taken in the study. A brief
synopsis of each of the stages follows.
194 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Table 5.1 The stages of data collection
Stage of study Relevance in this study
ST
AG
E 1
Identification of the
social problem
Critical reading of literature pertaining to the educational attainment
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling; and,
Selection of relevant literature that foregrounded the social
conditions that both shape and are shaped by the historical, political,
cultural and social contextual factors when producing and
interpreting policy occurred.
ST
AG
E 2
Preliminary analysis
of the literature
Analysis of how policy is produced; and,
Identification of the incremental and intertextual properties of
Australian Indigenous education policy and global Human Rights
Charters were also considered.
ST
AG
E 3
Identification of the
textual features
Identification of the textual features of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) and the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006).
ST
AG
E 4
Application of
thematic coding
Application of thematic coding to the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement’s principles.
ST
AG
E 5
Identification of the
social conditions and
processes of
production and
interpretation
Fine-grained analysis of the Strategy’s discourses (Education
Council, 2015); and,
Identification of the social conditions and processes of production
and interpretation that shape and are shaped by discourse.
ST
AG
E 6
Utilisation of
software to organise,
sort and maintain
data
Cross comparisons of the textual features, using NVivo to organise,
sort and maintain the data (QSRInternational, n.d.).
ST
AG
E 7
Reflection on the
findings of the data
Reflection on the findings as well the contribution of the
methodological approach in this study.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 195
Stage 1 - Identification of the social problem
The initial stage of data collection takes place in the formative processes of
research design. That is, through the lens of the analytical framework for critical
discourse analysts provided by Fairclough (2001b), the identification of a social
problem that has a semiotic aspect guides the research design. As a female
Aboriginal educator and researcher, the disparity between Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander and non-Indigenous students’ primary and secondary educational
attainment was a key societal issue that also provided opportunity to contribute to the
struggle for self-determination. An extensive analysis of the literature pertaining to
the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that position,
marginalise, exclude as well as challenge Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students in education was analysed to develop and build my understanding of the
societal conditions and processes of policy production and interpretation. Literature
was sought from both an Indigenous and non-Indigenous perspective to gain an
understanding of how discourses position Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples.
Stage 2 - Preliminary analysis of the literature
As a result of the initial readings of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006), a preliminary analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) to
identify how the principles of the Coolangatta Statement are signified and
represented occurred. Further explication of how the principles and priority areas of
the Strategy address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students in primary and secondary schooling resulted.
196 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Stage 3 - Identification of the textual features
A fine-grained analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) to locate and describe the use of
the selected textual features proceeded. As a result, foregrounding of how social
conditions and processes of policy production and interpretation developed.
Stage 4 - Application of thematic coding
Building on the initial findings in Stage 2, application of the principles of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) to the Strategy’s policy
discourses (Education Council, 2015) were used to develop thematic coding to assist
in the analysis. Further to this, identification of the varying themes located at the
meso-level of ICDA such as Paper, and Performance in the Processes of production;
and, Ideologies, Assumptions and Representations in the Processes of interpretation
(see Figure 5.1) were applied to the Strategy’s discourses.
Stage 5 - Identification of the social conditions and processes of production
and interpretation
Following the thematic coding in Stage 4, further identification of the social
conditions and processes of production and interpretation occurred. Explication of
how they shape and are shaped by discourses were considered. Identification of
themes and the use of linguistic and grammatical features as well as visuals assisted
in sorting the data prior to using computer software.
Stage 6 - Utilisation of software
Computer software was used to further extrapolate word choice, euphemistic
expressions, relational and expressive modality. QSR International (n.d. ) states that,
NVivo is “designed to help you organize, analyse and find insights in
unstructured, or qualitative data” (p. para. 3 [original emphasis]). Within this
study, NVivo was used to elicit the textual features in the Strategy and the
Chapter 5: The launch pad 197
Coolangatta Statement as well as organise the data into the main themes. In turn, the
software compiled the data to assist in and provide evidence to make conclusions in
regards to how policy discourses position Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples, the very people it advocates for.
Stage 7 - Reflection on the data
At this stage, all data was collated. Reflection on the data, as a whole, assisted
in answering the research questions that guide this study. The contribution and
applicability of the proposed methodological approach to critically analyse policy
discourses was considered.
Ethics
Ethics is considered throughout the entirety of the study. From the formation
of the research design through to the reflections in the concluding chapters,
consideration of ethics is imperative (Fossey, et al., 2002). The proposed study was
discussed with the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) Faculty Research
Ethics Advisor (FREA) to consider any ethical issues that may need to be addressed
after Confirmation when ethical approval was sought.
This study has no human participants. Nor does the study use animals or
genetics. This is important to note as QUT advises researchers that do involve
human participation, animals or gene technology that there are ethical implications to
consider (Office of Research Ethics and Integrity, 2016). Instead, this study draws
on publically available web-based policy documents and other archival documents
and as a result, the QUT University Human Research Ethics Committee assessed this
research as meeting the conditions for exemption from HREC review and approval in
accordance with section 5.1.22 of the National Statement on Ethical Conduct in
198 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Human Research (National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian
Research Council, & Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee, 2015).
The ethical considerations of the methodological approach and data collection
also need to be addressed. As this study does not have interviews or observations but
moreover fine-grained policy analysis, general ethical issues offered by Patton
(2002), such as confidentiality and informed consent are not applicable. However, as
the study is qualitative in nature, Lincoln and Guba (2007), provide four main
criteria to consider. They are:
1. Credibility – “an analog to internal validity” (p. 18);
2. Transferability – “an analog to external validity” (p. 18);
3. Dependability – “an analog to reliability” (p. 18); and,
4. Confirmability – “an analog to objectivity” (p. 18).
Elaboration of how each of these criteria establishes trustworthiness follows.
Credibility
To establish Credibility, Shenton (2004) provides several provisions to
establish confidence in the findings and data about the phenomenon, including such
things as triangulation of data, frequent discussion with supervisors and peers, and
maintaining a reflective journal throughout the process. In regards to this study,
there is triangulation of data sources, being the Strategy (Education Council, 2015),
the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the other policies and
international human charters that have informed their production. Furthermore, other
documents that illustrate the social conditions and processes of policy production and
interpretation all further validate my interpretation of the data.
Regular scheduled meetings with supervisors and peers provide opportunities
for alternative perspectives to be discussed. Further to this, “the meetings also
Chapter 5: The launch pad 199
provide a sounding board for the investigator to test his or her developing ideas and
interpretations, and probing from others may help the researcher to recognise his or
her own biases and preferences” (Shenton, 2004, p. 67). This in turn, provides
opportunities to challenge the assumptions held by myself and help refine the study.
A reflective journal, in relation to this study, was essential to document the
implementation and enactment of ICDA as it is an innovative approach. Shenton
(2004) writes that, “the commentary can play a key role in what Guba and Lincoln
term “progressive subjectivity”, or the monitoring of the researcher’s own
developing constructions, which the writers consider critical in establishing
credibility” (p. 68). Here, Shenton makes the point that reflexivity is essential
throughout the study to establish trustworthiness.
Transferability
Transferability requires thick description of the context of the research design
so that other researchers can apply your approaches, findings and so forth in another
study (Shenton, 2004). As Lincoln and Guba (2007) assert, others should be able to
read about the study and make “judgements about the degree of fit or similarity
[should they] wish to apply all or part of the findings elsewhere” (p. 19). Here,
Lincoln and Guba highlight the need for description of both the phenomenon and the
context.
In regards to this study, the focus is also on the methodological approach and
its appropriateness to critically analyse policy documents and if it would be able to
be applied to other texts. Therefore, the use of the reflective journal, as mentioned
previously, documents the implementation of ICDA as a methodological approach
providing description of the applicability, challenges and limitations experienced in
200 Chapter 5: The launch pad
this study so that readers can make an informed decision if ICDA is transferable to
their study.
Dependability
The criterion of Dependability seeks to address the issue of reliability. Shenton
(2004) asserts that, “the processes within the study should be reported in detail,
thereby enabling a future researcher to repeat the work, if not necessarily to gain the
same results” (p. 71). Lincoln and Guba (2007) suggest that the criterion of
dependability is closely related to the criterion of credibility. That is, by establishing
the credibility of the study, the reliability of the data is ensured. To do this, the use
of an audit trail documents how the data collection strategies have been
operationalised. In regards to this study, the use of an audit trail provides
exemplification of how policy discourses have been broken down into textual,
grammatical and visual components. In doing so, the “minutiae of what was done in
the field” is provided to the reader (Shenton, 2004, p. 72).
Confirmability
The use of an audit trail is also important in addressing the criterion of
Confirmability. Shenton (2004) states that, “the concept of confirmability is the
qualitative investigator’s comparable concern to objectivity” (p. 72). However, as
Shenton highlights real objectivity within research is difficult to establish. In regards
to this study, the audit trail documents the processes of interpretation and analysis
that occurs with the intention of reporting the textual, grammatical and visual
components of policy discourses, “rather than the characteristics and preferences of
the researcher” (Shenton, 2004, p. 72). The interdependence of the criterions is
further demonstrated here, as triangulation of data sources act to reduce bias.
Chapter 5: The launch pad 201
Furthermore, the audit trail enables the reader to understand the various processes
that were undertaken to complete the study.
The ethical considerations further add procedures that need to be considered in
this study. As this section highlights, there are three activities that are necessary to
be included to establish trustworthiness in this study. They are:
1. Regular scheduled meetings with supervisors and peers;
2. Reflective journal; and’
3. Audit trail.
By implementing such parameters into the study timeline, the ethical standards and
rigor of the study is addressed.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, the semiotic properties of the ICDA framework were provided.
The development of ICDA as an innovative methodological approach was discussed.
Extrapolation of the interdependence of IRP, IST and CDT to inform ICDT occurred.
How bias is addressed in this study was considered. Articulation of the procedure
and timeline that informs and guides this study followed. The ethical considerations
of conducting a qualitative research project were presented.
In Chapter 6, the organisation of the data chapters is discussed. Textual
analysis of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) is provided to foreground the institutional and societal
constructs that inform their production. Insight into how paragraphing positions the
reader is explored.
202 Chapter 5: The launch pad
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 203
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
A bird’s eye view of the discoursal landscape highlights the undulating
mountains and valleys of policy discourse that seek to improve Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students’ educational attainment whilst shining a
light on the failures and lack of progress of the peoples; creating huge
chasms where the gap continues to grow. The constant inner monologue I
hold as I explore policy discourses to better understand contemporary
society and the dominant ideologies held of Indigenous Australia gives me
strength to continue; to resist; to challenge and to speak back to the deficit
discourses. Texts are social. Texts are political. Texts shape and are shaped
by the social conditions (Fairclough, 2003, 2015). My position and
standpoint is shaped by my understanding of the world; shaped by my lived
experiences which in turn shapes my interpretation and analysis of the texts.
Fairclough states that:
There is no such thing as an ‘objective’ analysis of a text, if by
that we mean an analysis which simply describes what is
‘there’ in the text without being ‘biased’ by the ‘subjectivity’
of the analyst (Fairclough, 2003, pp. 14-15).
If analysis cannot be objective; if my own biases cannot be removed; if the
text is subject to my position and standpoint – then it is my motivations to
question the ‘now’; to provide insight on how discourses continue to
marginalise Indigenous peoples; to not be silenced that addresses my bias
and subjectivity. I am using the power of discourse and language to
respond. The texts are my subject. I am countering the discourses to
204 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
encourage transformation of Indigenous education policy; to shine a light
on the hidden and unsaid; the continuing forms of colonisation.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 205
In this chapter, I begin the preliminary textual analysis of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) at
the micro-level. There are three sections in this chapter. In the first section, I
provide foregrounding to the data chapters and the logic behind their organisation.
Explanation of the processes undertaken to develop the themes guiding the analysis
of the texts is provided. In the second section, analysis of the generic structure and
layout of the texts is given. Fine grained analysis of the textual properties and
exploration of how the genre type positions the author/s and the reader/s occurs.
Finally, a semiotic analysis of the images used within the Strategy provides further
insight to how the textual and generic features of policy are reinforced and act to
influence the social conditions of policy interpretation and, in turn, maintain the
dominant ideologies and hegemonic positioning of the coloniser.
Organisation of the data chapters
The organisation of the data chapters provided further obstacles to consider.
Themes were necessary to provide structure and guidance to the analysis and the data
interpretation. I was comforted when I read how LeCompte and Schensul (2012)
saw analysis as a story about the data; that, “interpretation tells readers what that
story means and why or how it is important” (p. 12). While their research focuses on
ethnographical approaches, it ‘sat’ nicely with me to see the data as the foundation
for telling a story; in my circumstances, a story advocating for change.
A balanced approach was necessary as my positionality informs the means in
which the research and the interpretation of the data occur (Nakata, 2007b). The use
of an a priori (top-down) and inductive (bottom-up) approach provided a pragmatic
approach. Blair (2016) explains that a priori elements, or ‘codes’ as he refers to
them, are “drawn from research, reading or theory” (p. 19). The inductive approach
206 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
saw the themes being drawn from the data itself by recognising the key words used
throughout the production of the texts (Ryan & Bernard, 2003).
The thematic coding was not a linear process but a complex process. While
this initial component of the chapter may be linear, it is important to recognise that
the focus is placed on these processes to articulate the steps taken to develop and
define the themes. The ‘to-ing’ and ‘fro-ing’ between a priori and inductive codes to
refine the themes is omitted.
Developing the thematic coding
The analysis and coding of the data was cyclic in nature. While I begin here
with a focus on the inductive process, a priori themes had already formed and been
considered in the production of the research questions, the reading and re-reading of
the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) as well as in the process of developing the methodological approach,
ICDA. Repetition of key words in the texts acted as the base for the inductive
approach to codifying the data (Ryan & Bernard, 2003).
A word frequency query using NVivo, a qualitative data management software,
was employed to begin a corpus analysis of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). Corpus analysis assists
in showing “how messages are conveyed: not only explicitly, by words themselves,
but also implicitly, by lexical and syntactic patterning” (Stubbs, 1996, p. 3). In doing
so, it illustrates the links between the micro-, meso- and macro-levels.
The extensive and various stages that were undertaken to determine the themes
cannot be articulated in this study due to the complexities and nuances that
unconsciously occur during the process. However, some examples of the corpus
analysis using NVivo are provided in Appendixes D, E and F. Brief synopses of the
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 207
a priori and induction approaches follows to demonstrate the processes of thematic
coding that have informed the organisation of the data chapters.
Inductive approach: Word repetition
Using NVivo, I identified the most frequent words used within the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
that were more than five letters long. Figure 6.1 provides a word cloud of this initial
query. The size of the words indicates the prevalence of the word in the texts. For
example, the word ‘Indigenous’ in Figure 6.1 is the largest word being cited 176
times in total. This is in contrast to the term ‘practice’ which is much smaller in
representation as it was only used 7 times in both texts: 3 times in the Coolangatta
Statement and 4 times in the Strategy.
Fairclough (2015) states,
discourses and the texts which occur within them have histories, they belong
to historical series, and the interpretation of intertextual context is a matter of
deciding which series a text belongs to, and therefore what can be taken as
common ground for participants, or presupposed. […] Presuppositions are
not properties of texts, they are an aspect of text producers' interpretations of
intertextual context (p. 164).
In regards to this study, there was an assumption made by myself that reference to
Indigenous or Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander as well as education would be
high due to the titles of the texts and their subject. It made ‘common sense’ and
therefore, it was a taken for granted assumption that the subject of the text would be
extensively referred to throughout each of the policies. Reiteration of the principles
or synonyms and like-terms throughout was expected to emphasise their importance.
208 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Figure 6.1 A word cloud listing the most frequent words in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
The initial search for word frequency confirmed these assumptions with
‘Aboriginal’ being referenced a total 61 times in both texts (see Appendix B).
Furthermore, ‘education’ and its’ like terms were cited 152 times; demonstrating
their significance as the ‘topic’ of the texts (see Appendix C). As well as the textual
components of the titles and principles, there were overrepresentations of terms such
as ‘rights’, ‘actions’, ‘cultures’ and ‘languages’. These terms aligned with the
emerging a priori codes. There was a significant underrepresentation of such words
as ‘expectations’, ‘measures’ and ‘accountability’ noted; given the shift in the
Australian education paradigm on transparency and accountability (see, for example:
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 209
ACARA, 2015c; COAG, 2012; DEET, 1989; MCEETYA, 2008). Further
exploration of the repetition of words in the texts was necessary to further refine the
themes.
Figure 6.2 A revised word cloud of the most frequent words used in the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
Another search on word frequency was conducted that stopped the search
including such terms as ‘Aboriginal’, ‘Torres Strait Islander’ and ‘Indigenous’ as
well as ‘education’. This was to eliminate the title as well as the subject of the texts.
Figure 6.2 is the resulting word cloud of this query. Here, ‘peoples’, ‘rights’ and
‘cultures’ were evidenced to be cited regularly within both texts. Focus on word
210 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
repetition gave insight to the lexical prominence of specific words. However, despite
Ryan and Bernard (2003) highlighting “repetition [as] one of the easiest ways to
identify themes” (p. 89), my theoretical understandings of the production and
interpretation of Indigenous education policy was drawn on to further refine the
themes.
A priori elements inform thematic coding
The results of the word frequency search was then compared and contrasted to
the principles of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the
principles and priority areas of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) – the elements
informing a priori codes. The frequency of words was compared and contrasted to
the principles and priority areas to identify interconnections and repetitions. In other
words, the principles and priority areas guided the a priori approach to the thematic
coding.
Table 6.1 illustrates how the principles of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan,
et al., 1999, 2006) and the principles and priority areas of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015) are broken into two overarching themes being Indigenous self and
Indigenous education that inform and are informed by the rights of Indigenous
peoples. The first three principles refer to the notion of Indigenous ways of
knowing, being and doing (Martin & Mirraboopa, 2003). That is, they seek to
address the representations of Indigenous self, encompassing Culture and Identity.
The last two principles of the Coolangatta Statement are more specifically related to
education as a discipline and focus on education and pedagogical approaches as well
as values and actions. Elaboration of the themes follows.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 211
Table 6.1 A visual representation of the thematic coding for this study
Coolangatta
Statement
The Strategy
OVERARCHING
THEMES
UNDERLYING
THEMES
PRINCIPLES PRIORITY AREAS PRINCIPLES
RIG
HT
S O
F I
ND
IGE
NO
US
PE
OP
LE
S
IND
IGE
NO
US
SE
LF
PEOPLES
The right to be
Indigenous
Culture and
identity
Partnerships
Cultural
recognition
Relationships
Partnerships
Equity
IDENTITY
The right to self-
determination
CULTURE
The right to
practice and
maintain language
and culture
IND
IGE
NO
US
ED
UC
AT
ION
PEDAGOGY
Literacy and
Numeracy
School and
child readiness
Attendance
Quality
Achieve
potential
VALUES
The right to an
education that is
holistic and value
based
ACTIONS
The right to
control
Indigenous
education
Leadership,
quality teaching
and workforce
development
Transition
points including
pathways to
postschool
options
Local
approaches
Accountability
212 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
The data themes
The cyclic process of reviewing, reading and refining the themes provided me
opportunity to further define the themes that emerged. In this section, definition of
the overarching themes, Indigenous self and Indigenous education, occurs.
Explication of the interconnectivity between the sub-themes and rights is considered.
Further articulation of how the themes inform the analysis of the data is provided.
The notion of Indigenous self
Defining Indigenous self as a thematic code is difficult. Nonetheless, the term
‘sits well’ with me. Whilst using the word ‘self’ here, I use it not as the conventional
Western notion of individual but moreover, the Indigenous notion of relationality.
Yunkaporta explains, “in Aboriginal worldviews an entity cannot exist unless it is in
relation to something else” (2016, p. para 2). Therefore, the notion of Indigenous
self is holistic. Our relationality to Country, to community and family and our
agency to practice and maintain Indigenous histories, cultures, languages and values
together inform the notion of Indigenous self.
The recurring compartmentalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples within the coloniser’s vernacular contradicts the notion of Indigenous self.
Anderson (1996) explains, “our identity as human beings remains tied to our land, to
our cultural practices, our systems of authority and social control, our intellectual
traditions, our concepts of spirituality, and to our systems of resource ownership and
exchange” (p. 15 [emphasis added]). Here, Anderson highlights that the intricacies
of the notion of Indigenous self are not separate but connected and intertwined. The
use of the possessive pronoun, our, by Anderson is used purposefully to be inclusive
of and make explicit the tenets of Indigeneity. However, it is important to note that
the use of our is not inclusive of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as a
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 213
homogeneous group but moreover, as separate groups. We are not homogenous and
our individual members’ resources [MR] are informed by our own lived experiences
that inform who we are as individuals (Peters-Little, 2000).
That being said, there is also need to acknowledge the influence of the
coloniser in forming the Indigenous self (Smith, 1999). The historical, political,
cultural and social contextual factors of colonisation all influence the notion of
Indigenous self.
Therefore in this study, the term Indigenous self is understood to be the
relationality of the tenets of Indigeneity inclusive of Indigenous histories, cultures,
languages and values that inform and are informed by Indigenous ways of knowing,
being and doing (in)forming one’s notion of self. The notion of Indigenous self is
inclusive of the importance of maintaining the stories that retell and celebrate
Indigenous histories, cultures and languages. Our identities, as Indigenous peoples,
are formed and informed by our sense of belonging to Country and peoples. In turn,
who we are as peoples is also formed by our social interactions and the social
conditions maintained in the public sphere. As a result, as evidenced in Table 6.1,
the notion of Indigenous self is further broken down to Peoples, Culture and Identity.
My interpretation of the first three principles of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) speaks directly to the notion of Indigenous self. They
are explicitly aligned to the inherent rights and privileges of being Indigenous. As a
result, Rights has been placed as an overarching theme in Table 6.1 as the theme is
central to Indigenous education.
The knowledges, both implicit and explicit, held by Indigenous peoples, the
connection to Country encompassing land, water and air as well as the cultural and
languages which includes values and beliefs inform Indigenous self. Culture and
214 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
identity are also drawn upon to illustrate Indigenous self. Both culture and identity
are also referenced in the Coolangatta Statement’s principles (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) and the Strategy’s principles and priority areas (Education Council, 2015) (see
Table 6.1).
Indigenous education
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) are both focused on Indigenous education. The
Coolangatta Statement presents a collective Indigenous voice on the rights of
Indigenous peoples in education drawing on global human rights charters to justify
the principles put forward. In doing so, the Coolangatta Statement articulates the
tenets of education necessary in accordance to Indigenous peoples; making explicit
Indigenous voice. The Strategy, on the other hand, is an Australian governmental
approach to address the educational disparities between Australia’s Indigenous and
non-Indigenous students. The stakeholders’ roles and responsibilities within
Indigenous education are implicit and ambiguous illustrating the relations of power.
Within Indigenous education, the basic human right – the right to access
education – as well as the right to a holistic education are fundamental (United
Nations General Assembly, 2008). As with the notion of Indigenous self, rights of
Indigenous peoples is central to the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). To address these rights,
Pedagogy that incorporates and advocates Indigenous languages and cultures within
its teaching and learning is essential. As a result, pedagogy guides the analysis in
this study.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) calls for an education
system that provides a holistic, value-laden education that embeds Indigenous
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 215
histories, cultures and values requires an understanding and respect for the resilience
and strength of Indigenous peoples. Values are therefore prevalent and dependent on
the competencies, attitudes and beliefs held by stakeholders involved in Indigenous
education provision. As a result of the strengths or limitations on these values held,
actions become key. Therefore, values and actions guide the analysis of this study.
The guiding sub-themes
The guiding sub-themes are Peoples (for example, the representations of
peoples including education stakeholders); Culture and Identity; Pedagogy including
the right to access education; and, Actions and Values (for example, privileging
Indigenous voice and respect of Indigenous histories and cultures). The themes are
interrelated and therefore, are not to be seen as separate themes but blurring the
boundaries and interacting and informing each other; providing a broad overview of
how the discourses in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) address the rights of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander young peoples in primary and secondary
schooling. Figure 6.3 provides a visual representation of the themes that inform this
study illustrating the interconnectivity and synergies between each theme. The
themes inform the following data chapters (Chapters 7-8).
216 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Figure 6.3 A visual representation of the themes that inform this study
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 217
The texts: Generic structure and language features
Texts have specific characteristics including generic structure and language
features. In this section, focus is placed on the generic structure of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
This preliminary textual analysis foregrounds how discourse is a social practice; that
the genre itself is a social activity establishing social relations using communicative
technologies (Fairclough, 2003).
Van Leeuwen (1993) defines generic structure as,
the syntagmatic structure of discourse, its ‘beginning-middle-end’ structure,
which is also, and at the same time, the structure which realizes discourse as
social practice, or rather, as part of it, for social practices comprise both
discursive and non-discursive elements, both text and context (p. 194).
That is, generic structure plays an important role in contextualising the social
interaction; that texts are not just what is said and/or written but a network of social
practices.
Policies can be defined as genres of governance. “Genres of governance are
characterized by specific properties of recontextualization – the appropriation of
elements of one social practice within another, placing the former within the context
of the latter, and in transforming it in particular ways in the process” (Bernstein,
1990; Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999; Fairclough, 2003, p. 32). Here, Fairclough
identifies the intertextual properties of genres of governance; how policies draw on
previous policy to validate their position and maintain established institutional and
societal practices. Investigation of the generic structure of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) follows.
218 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Education
Within this thesis, I have cited two publications of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The initial publication in the Journal of American
Indian Education in 1999 was in draft form and at the time, was titled “The
Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Rights in Education” (Morgan, et al., 1999).
The 1999 ‘draft’ included contextual information about the authors and the purpose
of the policy that was not evident in the final release and therefore, both documents
are incorporated within this study.
Despite concerted effort, the online version of the 1999 publication as a HTML
page (Morgan, et al., 1999) was the only version available. I drew on this version as
it contains introductory sections introducing the members of the Task Force
commissioned by the World Indigenous Peoples’ Conference: Education [WIPC:E]
Organizing Committee. Further contextualisation that documented the processes
undertaken and considered in the production of the final product by the authors
including the principles and issues informing the forum discussions were proffered.
The processes provide insight to the contextual factors and the intertextual contexts
that influenced the production of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006).
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Rights in Education
The 1999 version of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999) consisted
of 13 pages. The text is divided into six sections:
Introduction
Some suggestions for special focus forum discussions
The Coolangatta Statement – Preamble
Indigenous education: A global overview
Rights in education
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 219
3.0 (sic) Conclusion.
This version of the Coolangatta Statement is prefaced by an Editor’s Note.
Introduction
The introduction provides contextualisation on the processes undertaken in the
production of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999) to that point of time.
It offers the names and roles of the members of the Task Force as well as introduces
the considerations needed to be addressed prior to its finalization. The 1999 version
documented how a previous instalment was presented to the participants of the 1993
WIPC:E gathering for consultation and clarification.
The members of the Task Force were charged by the WIPC:E National
Organising Committee to produce
a document that can be put to use by individuals, communities and Nations
throughout the world in their struggle to establish education systems which
reflect and embrace the cultural values, philosophies and ideologies that
have shaped and guided Indigenous peoples for thousands of years (Morgan,
et al., 1999, p. para. 4).
This, an example of a declarative statement, establishes the intentions held for the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999). Further to this, the sentence charges
the Coolangatta Statement to resist and challenge the dominant colonial ideologies
maintained in Western education.
Some suggestions for special focus forum discussion
In this section, strategies, principles and issues pertinent to be considered and
addressed in future consultations and iterations of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999) are presented. Focus is placed on the “fundamental principles
which are considered vital to achieving the reform and the transformation of
220 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Indigenous education” (para. 5). Here, the intentions of the authors and the purpose
of the Coolangatta Statement are made explicit. That is, there is need for change
within the education for Indigenous youth.
The Coolangatta Statement lists the issues and principles for consideration
indicating the concerns held in regard to the observed inconsistencies necessary to be
addressed in regards to Indigenous education. Example of such concerns includes:
Indigenous control of Indigenous education;
Indigenous education as a means of protecting, preserving and developing
Indigenous cultures;
The philosophy and principles of Indigenous education;
Quality and exemplary Indigenous education models;
Indigenous teacher education programs; [and]
The roles and responsibilities of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous
education (Morgan, et al., 1999, p. para. 5).
The matters raised here indicate some of the complexities prevalent in Indigenous
education that were to be addressed in the final iteration of the Coolangatta
Statement.
The following sections of the 1999 Coolangatta Statement publication
(Morgan, et al., 1999) reflects many of the affirmations and declarations of the final
version (Morgan, et al., 2006). The primary difference is the opening sentence of the
Preamble where it once again indicates it was written prior to the 1996 WIPC:E
gathering. The first sentence of the preamble states,
in preparing for the 1996 World Indigenous Peoples Conference in
Education (WIPC:E), members of the National Organizing Committee have
adopted as one of the key objectives for the conference, the final drafting of
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 221
an instrument on Indigenous education rights and freedoms (Morgan, et al.,
1999, p. para. 7).
Such a statement foregrounds the urgency of the 2006 version of the Coolangatta
Statement and makes further inference to its purpose. Analysis of the 2006
Coolangatta Statement follows.
The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Education
The final edition of the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples’ Rights
in Education (Morgan, et al., 2006) was published in Read, Meyers and Reece’s
edited book (2006), What good condition?: Reflections on an Australian Aboriginal
treaty 1986-2006. It consisted of eight pages and was the final ‘chapter’ of the book.
I have put the term ‘chapter’ in inverted commas as it was not essentially indicated as
a chapter or an appendix. The book was divided into three sections with the third
section providing “some reflections on regional aspirations and achievements. These
indeed may be the way forward” (Behrendt, 2006, p. xi). The book’s focus on
reconciliation and the need for a treaty is supported by the Coolangatta Statement, its
purpose and its explicit stance on Indigenous peoples’ sovereign rights to be
Indigenous and for self-determination.
The 2006 iteration of the Coolangatta Statement is divided into four sections
including:
Preamble;
I. Indigenous Education: a global overview;
II. Rights in Indigenous Education; and,
III. Conclusions (Morgan, et al., 2006).
The headings are in bold and use a slightly larger font size than the body of the text.
The heading font is AGaramond Pro-Semibold while the body of text is AGaramond
222 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Pro-Regular. The headings are numbered which further acts to sequence and
organise the policy.
Following a report format, the paragraphing within the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 2006) is also numbered in accordance to the title of each section.
The supporting evidence is then provided as subset statements to further justify the
topic sentence. For example, in the section titled II. Rights in Indigenous Education:
…building the story
The finite details of the discoursal landscape maps the intricacies of
the social conditions. I must familiarise myself with the very minute
details that act to position the reader and maintain the ‘common
knowledge’ and shared understandings. The generic structure is
the stage; it sets the ‘scene’. The font type, the generic layout, the
very elements of genres of governance ensure the reader ‘knows’
they are reading a policy. A genre of governance relies on the
historical context and the reader drawing on their past experiences
with policy to assist in its interpretation. The consistency of the
genres of governance format – headings, sub-headings, paragraph
organisation from the global to the narrow – builds the notion of
consensus. From this bird’s eye view, the focus on the intricate
details ‘maps out’ the future venture.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 223
2.3 Indigenous peoples have strong feelings and thoughts about landforms,
the very basis of their cultural identity. Land gives life to language and
culture.
2.3.1 Indigenous languages in all forms are legitimate and valid means of
communication for [I]ndigenous people (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235).
The organisation of the paragraphs is structured purposively to contextualise and
foreground the purpose and aims of the Coolangatta Statement. The first section is a
global overview of Indigenous education by aligning and drawing from relevant
international charters. The following section – II. Rights in Education, provides the
principles and rights of Indigenous peoples in education. The final section
summarizes and reiterates the key points of the document as a whole; asserting the
right to self-determination.
Italics are used within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006). Here,
despite formatting indicating a quote, italics indicate direct quotes from international
charters, human rights declarations and so forth. In doing so, the italics highlight the
intertextual properties of the Coolangatta Statement and how the Coolangatta
Statement is a genre of governance. Citations from the United Nations Declaration
of Human Rights (United Nations General Assembly, 1948) and the then draft
Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations General Assembly,
2008) are evident within the body of text connecting the Coolangatta Statement to
other global documents.
In summary, the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Rights in Education
(Morgan, et al., 1999) provided necessary contextualisation about its production.
The 1999 draft version articulated its purpose and reason for production and in turn,
specified areas of concern to consider as the conversation and consultation
224 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
progressed. A report format whereby each section was numbered was adapted. The
final version, the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education
(Morgan, et al., 2006), maintained the report format but was more concise with only
four sections as opposed to the original six sections. Italics were primarily used to
indicate a quote from one of the international human rights charters and conventions
(see, for example: United Nations General Assembly, 1948; United Nations General
Assembly, 2008). The italics clearly indicate the incremental and intertextual
properties of the Coolangatta Statement. In the following section, analysis of the
generic structure and language features of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
occurs.
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) was published and publicly released
online in late 2015. It consists of twelve pages and is divided into eight sections.
They are:
Preface
Vision
Context for development
Purpose
Principles
Priority Areas
Priorities for national collaboration
Strategy implementation and reporting.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 225
The headings are in uppercase and are a larger font size to the body of text. DIN-
Regular font is used for the headings and they are further distinguished through the
use of colour. The headings are red ochre in colour.
The text is further sectioned and organised through the use of sub-headings.
There are twelve sub-headings being:
Priority areas explained
1. Leadership, quality teaching and workforce development
2. Culture and Identity
3. Partnerships
4. Attendance
5. Transition points including pathways to post-school options
6. School and child readiness
7. Literacy and Numeracy
Transition points including pathways to post-school options
Early childhood transitions
Workforce
Australian curriculum.
The first sub-heading introduces the numbered sub-headings. The sub-headings are
again capitalised and in the same font colour as the headings. The sub-headings are a
smaller font size but slightly larger than the body of text which is in DINPro-Light
font.
The organization of the headings and sub headings guide the paragraphing in
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The Preface takes a letter genre form
addressed to the reader/s from “The Hon. Kate Jones MP Chair, Education Council”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 1). The Vision Statement is a discourse of imaginaries
226 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
establishing the intended outcome of the Strategy. The varying policies and
strategies informing the development of the Strategy are listed in the Context for
Development section. In the following section titled Purpose, three statements are
listed however, they refer more to “the commitment of education ministers to the
education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people” (p. 3)
rather than the purpose of the Strategy itself.
The next section lists eight principles needed to be considered when
implementing and recontextualising the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). These
principles are a recontextualisation of the principles agreed upon in the National
Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery (COAG, 2008) that have been
recontextualised to address the specificities of Indigenous education. The next
section (Priority Areas) introduces the priority areas central to addressing the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.
Section 7 of the Strategy “outlines actions that substantially benefit from or
require national collaboration” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6). It lists five key areas
in which government, at a national level, can:
1. collate and distribute national data on attendance and engagement;
2. promote and encourage “high quality career education and advice to equip
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students with the skills and
knowledge to make effective decisions about subject choice and post-
school destinations” (p. 7);
3. test, measure and report on the school readiness of pre-preparatory
students;
4. implement professional standards for pre- and current teachers around the
teaching and learning needs of Indigenous students as well as address and
encourage partnerships; and,
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 227
5. introduce Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures as a
cross-curriculum priority within the Australian Curriculum (ACARA,
2015a).
The final section further elaborates on the moderation and evaluation processes.
Reference is made to the annual national reports provided by the Department of
Prime Minister and Cabinet [DPM&C] about the progress on achieving the Closing
the Gap targets (see for example: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,
2015; Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2016) and the biannual reports
on overcoming Indigenous advantage by the Steering Committee for the Review of
Government Service Provision [SCRGSP] (see; for example:Steering Committee for
the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP), 2014). It states that
evaluation of the Strategy will occur in 2018 whereby “the effectiveness of the
strategy as a framework” will be considered (Education Council, 2015, p. 8).
Italics are rarely used in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The only
instances are:
When making reference to the National Indigenous Reform Agreement
[NIRA] when using its other term of reference - Closing the [G]ap (p. 2);
and,
When the priority areas are listed within the narrative under the sub-
heading, Priority Areas Explained.
Furthermore, the font is made bold on only two occasions throughout the Strategy.
That is, the title of the text found in the letter from Kate Jones on page 1 and where
each of the principles are in bold when listed on page 3.
The organisation of the paragraphing develops a collective understanding of
the current environment and past initiatives implemented in regards to addressing the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. ‘Building
228 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
on’, ‘collaboration’, ‘cooperative relationship between’ (Education Council, 2015, p.
2) are repeatedly used throughout the Strategy to encourage social cohesion and
understanding; establishing an ideological perspective that Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students are in need of assistance to excel in education (Foley, 2003).
Analysis of how visual imagery is used within the Strategy follows.
Visual imagery in the Strategy
Within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), images have been strategically
used. Exemplification of the analysis of the semiotics is provided in Appendix D.
An original artwork by Yorta Yorta woman, Karen Briggs is placed on the lower half
of the first page and is used explicitly and implicitly throughout the policy to ensure
cohesion. By implicit, I refer to how the image has been used as a watermark in the
background of several pages.
The artwork “represents the journey to develop the strategy and the
partnerships and relationships that are central to its success” (Education Council,
2015, p. i). The artwork, therefore, serves to illustrate the collaboration and
consultation that occurred in the production of the Strategy. While the colours in the
motif in the foreground remain constant, the background colours consistently change
dependent on the page colour itself. The changing colours of the background is
explicitly linked to the Closing the Gap: Prime Minister’s Report 2016 (Department
of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2016) which also used the same alternating
colours stating that the colour choices represented the Indigenous peoples of
Australia and the landscape.
Photographic images are also used throughout the policy. In particular, the
images are of readily recognisable Indigenous peoples that fulfill the stereotype of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as being brown skinned (Messing,
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 229
Jabon, & Plaut, 2016). These visual representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples perpetuates stereotypes and is not a representation of Indigenous
Australia today. The front page and page eleven utilise the compositional rules of
photography, the hero shot, to highlight the ‘object’ (the ‘subject’) of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015). Both ‘hero shots’ appear to be secondary students in
school uniform.
The teenage male on the front page is smiling and looking directly at the
camera. An assumption made is that given the type of material of the shirt and the
fact that he is wearing a cap, the student is wearing a sports uniform. Evans, Wilson,
Dalton, and Georgakis (2015) report how
participation in sport among Indigenous Australians has been proffered as a
‘panacea’ for many Indigenous problems; from promoting better health and
education outcomes, to encouraging community building, good citizenship
and entrepreneurship. Parallel to this has been a focus on documenting and
analysing sport participation among Indigenous Australians in elite sport
which often concludes that Indigenous Australians have an innate and
‘natural ability’ in sports (p. 53).
The compositional choice of placing the athletic Indigenous teenage male on the
front page perpetuates the stereotype.
The teenage female is in formal uniform and playing the flute. Her line of
vision is to the lower left hand corner of the page on assumably sheet music. Again,
the learning in which the teenage girl is engaged in is an extracurricula activity;
distant from the more academic subjects of English, Mathematics and Science.
Furthermore, due to the flute being a wind instrument, there is an implicit connection
230 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Disappearing data…
In the world today, we cannot go on a ‘trip’ without taking
photos. The picture assists in telling the story; it acts a
memento recalling the details. Much like ‘holiday photos’,
genres of governance use images to further ‘build’ the shared
understandings. Photos are mementos of history; reaffirming
stereotypes, ensuring the dominant ideologies are maintained.
I entered an ethical minefield analysing the photographic
imagery of the Strategy. I tried to convince myself that the fact
that the thesis is considered Unpublished, that the inclusion of
photos taken from the Strategy was okay. But there was
always this voice in the background asking “Is it ethical??”.
Today, I had to admit to self that it was not and so as a visual
artist in a previous life, I had to release and delete the images.
This was not an easy task. The phrase, “an image is worth a
thousand words” echoed in my head as I hit the delete button. I
am a visual learner and the inclusion made sense to me. I
considered doing an artist representation of the photos so that
a visual could be included but that is White man’s way of
finding a solution. Ethically, it could not be done and so while I
lament about the disappearing data, I can only pray that the
written descriptions suffice.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 231
to the traditional Aboriginal wind instrument, the didgeridoo, that continues to build
the stereotype of Australian Aboriginal peoples.
Another photograph located on page i of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) includes two primary school aged Indigenous female students joined by an
Indigenous female adult who could be assumed to be the teacher or teacher aide in a
classroom setting. Each of the individuals is smiling whilst being engaged in
learning. The photograph is placed at the top of the page before an
acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as “the [F]irst
Australians [followed by an overarching statement on how the Strategy] will guide
the education of all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people
from birth through to further education and employment pathways” (Education
Council, 2015, p. i). Here, semantic relations of purpose are emphasised through the
use of visual imagery. That is, the Indigenous youth are in school being supported
by an older Indigenous person who has attained employment.
Another image of two female primary aged students engaged in learning is
found at the bottom of page 2 of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The two
students, one being Indigenous and the other presumably non-Indigenous, are
positioned to the left of the overall image. To the far left is the non-Indigenous child
who is slightly out of focus and the Indigenous child is more to the centre and in
focus. Both of the girls are looking at something that is out of the field of vision
which one may assume is a book. Notably, once again, the girls are smiling; giving
the impression that they are happy and actively engaged in education. Once again
the image is used purposively to ‘build the picture’; to emphasise how the education
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students can ‘look like’ with the
implementation of the Strategy.
232 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Page 6 of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) includes a cropped image of
a young Indigenous boy in the lower right hand corner. The boy is again smiling and
looking directly at the reader. There is no contextualisation evident here to indicate a
school. The boy is noticably not wearing a recognisable school shirt as there is no
school logo visible but given his youth, an assumption that can be made is that he
may be a preschool child where uniforms are not compulsory. The inclusion of this
image somewhat helps to balance the ratio of gendered representation. In
comparison to the other images selected to be included within the Strategy, this
image seems out of place as there is no apparent link to school and/or education but
simply, that he is an Indigenous male child.
The final image in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is a visual
conceptual overview of the priority areas (see Figure 6.4). As I highlighted in
Chapter 5, where I provided the narrative for the conceptual overview of Indigenous
Critical Dicourse Analysis (ICDA), semiotic properties are open to interpretation.
What follows is my interpretation of the conceptual overview of the priority areas as
found in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
An analysis of the conceptual overview
The colours used in Figure 6.4 represent the Indigenous peoples of Australia.
Synonomous with Aboriginal ceremony, dance and art (Taçon, 2004), the darkest
ochre is placed at the bottom of the layers with the lighter ochres gradually rising to
white. The overriding superior position at the top of the white fans represents the
coloniser. As Moreton-Robinson (2015b) asserts, the institutional and societal
constructs within the ‘nation-state’ in colonial Australia shape and maintain the
hegemonic position assumed by the coloniser. In doing so, the ‘inferiority’ of
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 233
Figure 6.4 The conceptual overview of the priority areas of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
© Education Services Australia as the legal entity of the Council of Australian
Governments Education Council.
234 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as dispossessed peoples is established;
acting to diminish their sovereign rights. Therefore, the conceptual overview
illustrates social positioning through the use of colour; it is a visual representation of
the hierachial structure of race in Australian society.
The conceptual overview is a four tiered ‘cake’. The tiers are dependent on the
people who make the ‘cake’. That is, the tiers represent the relational properties and
value in education that cannot be measured. The ‘base cake’ is made up of
leadership, quality teaching and workforce development. Mixed together, these
‘ingredients’ form the discourses of imaginaries (Fairclough, 2001b). That is, these
elements provide the foundation for a strong and responsive education system. Here,
the qualities of school and systemic leadership that recognises the importance of
Indigenous values, beliefs, cultures and histories creates a whole school culture of
inclusiveness. Teachers appreciate the need to include Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander histories and cultures and they are supported by the increasing number of
Indigenous teachers and teacher aides as evidenced in the outcomes of the recent
More Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Teachers Initiative (MATSITI) Project
(Johnson, et al., 2016).
The second tier is muted through the inclusion of white to brown ochre. This
tier represents culture and identity. The use of white in this ‘cake’ acts to
demonstrate how Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures and identities have
been and still are shaped by the coloniser. The invisibility of Whiteness, the
representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the production
of knowledges through the lens of the coloniser emphasise power relations that
determine Indigenous identity (Moreton-Robinson, 2004). As Nakata (1995) states,
“making classroom practices respond sensitively to cultural differences does not
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 235
preclude discriminatory agendas extant in the mainstream” (p. 46). Here, Nakata
makes the point that recognition and acknowledgement of the ‘cultural differences’
does not necessarily counter the stereotypes maintained in Australian society nor
make the classroom a more inclusive space. In short, the identities and cultures of
Indigenous Australia is subject to engrained social practices; seen through a White
lens whereby cultures and identities are viewed as static and homogenous (Moreton-
Robinson, 2015b; Sonn & Green, 2006). As a result, it appears that the muted brown
ochre appropriately represents the contested space at the cultural interface (Nakata,
2007a, 2007b).
Furthermore, as Johnson, et al. (2016) highlight in their final report on the
MATSITI Project, Indigenous representation within schools or education systems in
leadership roles are limited. Therefore, opportunity to counter, challenge and
transform the views, beliefs and attitudes of the dominant White coloniser is subject
to the leadership, quality teaching and workforce development priority area being
successful. While the number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educators is
increasing, Whiteness still dominates and dictates how culture and identity are
addressed in the schooling environment, classroom, curriculum and pedagogical
approaches; emphasising the importance of partnerships.
The third ‘cake’ is Partnerships; yellow ochre in colour (Education Council,
2015). The use of a lighter ochre is appropriate symbolising reconciliatory
discourses that encourage engagement and participation of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples in education; in collaboration with the coloniser (Sonn &
Green, 2006). Hidden within these discourses is the failure to consider the
inequitable relations between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and the
coloniser. In their work, Sonn and Green explore the “blurring of the boundaries” (p.
236 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
340), the embracing of multicultural Australia giving the illusion of unity and
ignoring the hegemonic power relations evident. The ideology of partnerships
encourages engagement, collaboration and consultation. Here, partnerships in
education are bound within the parameters set by the coloniser and therefore,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples can be further marginalised, excluded
or encouraged to participate on the generosity of the White administrator. This being
said, leadership, quality teaching and workforce development as well as culture and
identity all play an important role in the development of and maintenance of
partnerships.
The final tier exemplifies discourses of imaginaries. Once again, the brown
ochre is used but in this instance, it specifically represents Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students. The ‘cake’ is embellished with text; a repetition of the
Vision Statement of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015): “All Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children and young people will achieve their full learning
potential, are empowered to shape their own futures and are supported to embrace
their culture and identity as Australia’s First Nation peoples” (Education Council,
2015, p. 4). Notably, the original Vision Statement has been changed with the
reference to Nation rather than Nations (p. 2) changing the referential and societal
meaning of the term of reference. The inclusion of the Vision Statement on the top
tier symbolises the ‘ideal’ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander student on a
pedestal; becoming the viable human capital that education seeks to achieve (Field,
et al., 2007).
Decorating the ‘cake’ are four white rectangular fans radiating out from the
bottom of the top tier. Each of these shapes are used to represent each of the
remaining priority areas including School and child readiness, Transition points
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 237
including pathways to post school options, Literacy and Numeracy, and Attendance
(Education Council, 2015). Notably, these priority areas have measurable outcomes
to assess the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.
These priority areas are set by Western standards and therefore, are dutifully
coloured white. Further explication of how Western standards position, marginalise
and exclude Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are provided in the
following chapters.
In summary, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is an example of a genre
of governance. It uses both headings and sub-headings to act as organisers for the
reader. The principles and priority areas for addressing the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students are provided. Photographic imagery
used perpetuates stereotypes. The conceptual overview, which provides a visual
representation of the principles, acts as a metaphor illustrating the power and control
the coloniser holds over Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
Chapter Summary
In this chapter, the organisational structure of the data chapters was provided.
Exemplification of how the themes drawn from the textual analysis data formed the
basis of the thematic data chapters to follow. An introductory decriptive textual
analysis of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) was given. A discussion of how visual imagery has been
used in the Strategy to create the impression of social cohesion. A ‘snapshot’ of the
generic structure and language features of the Coolangatta Statement and the
Strategy is provided in Table 6.2.
In Chapter 7, investigation of how the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
addresses basic human rights such as access to education through the lens of the
238 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is presented. Exploration of how
the right to be Indigenous is signified, represented and enacted in the Strategy results.
Textual elements provide the foundation to examine how the processes of production
and interpretation and the social conditions influence the production of the Strategy
and the Coolangatta Statement.
Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view 239
Table 6.2 A snapshot of the generic structure and language features of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
The Coolangatta
Statement on Indigenous
rights in Education
The Coolangatta
Statement on
Indigenous peoples’
rights in Education
The National
Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy
VERSION/
PUBLISHED DATE
Draft version published
1999
Final version Published
2006
Released 2015
GENERIC TYPE Report format
Report format
Genre of governance
Genre of governance
PAGINATION 13 pages 8 pages 12 pages
SECTIONS 6 sections 4 sections 8 sections
SUB-SECTIONS 12 sub-headings
Notes re. sections (if
applicable)
Preface: Editor’s Note
Sections 1-3 provides
more contextualisation on
processes of production
Sections 1-3 of 1999
version omitted
HEADINGS
(font, font size, etc)
N/A AGaramond
Pro-Semibold
Headings are
numbered
DIN-Regular
font
Headings in
uppercase and
red ochre font
SUB-HEADINGS
(font, font size, etc)
N/A
N/A DINPro-Light
font
Sub-headings
capitalised, red
240 Chapter 6: A bird’s eye view
ochre font but
smaller text
BODY OF TEXT
(font, font size, etc)
N/A AGaramond Pro-
Regular
USE OF ITALICS N/A Italics used for quotes Italics rarely used
Example 1: reference
to Closing the Gap
Example 2: listing of
priority areas
USE OF VISUAL
IMAGERY
N/A N/A Artwork incorporated
as logo as well as
watermark
Conceptual overview –
visual representation of
principles; acts as
metaphor indicating
positionality
USE OF
PHOTOGRAPHIC
IMAGERY
N/A N/A 6 Photographic
images of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait
Islander peoples
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 241
Chapter 7: Indigenous self
I am me but I am also an extension of my families and community. As an
emu chick, I reflect my lived experiences through the colour of my feathers.
I have black, brown and white stripes. My feathers and markings illustrate
the inner struggle throughout this voyage. Identity politics is consistently
threatening to swamp my boat.
I am able to be here – flying tethered to my boat in this ocean because of
the efforts and strength of those who came before me; who fought for the
rights that I have today. As I enter the realm of data analysis, I am drawing
on – seeing – the data through my members’ resources; through the ‘eyes’
of those who came before me. I am flying; in this realm all can fly. In this
realm, I am but a bird that is drawing on the very dominant and globally
accepted characteristics of a bird - the ability of flight.
I realise that I am privileged, that the waters have been made accessible
through the many struggles and activism of others. My only struggle in
entering higher degree research was convincing myself that I could succeed
which is another privilege I enjoy as the result of those who fought so hard.
However, I have to constantly reassess and redefine me and who I am and
what I value as I navigate this ocean. I cannot give up and I must continue –
land is in sight (even if I only see it when I am on the crest of the wave and
not in the troughs!). My position and establishing my location in the
research has become quintessential as I begin to map out my own voyage.
242 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 243
In this chapter, I explore the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples within policy discourses. Comparative analysis of the
representations of the coloniser, inclusive of government and its agencies and other
stakeholders in Indigenous education, is necessary. The positioning of Indigenous
peoples is informed by the positioning of other social actors; that is, the foundation
of the orders of discourse (Fairclough, 2015). The ambiguity of the terms of
reference to individuals and groups are examined. Recognition within the multiple
discourses of the connection, relationships and interdependencies of Indigenous
peoples to Country and yet, the blatant dismissal of the influence and effects of
colonial Australia’s historical, political and societal indifference to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples occurs.
My aim in this chapter is to examine how the principles of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are signified, represented and enacted in the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015). Example of the data analysis of both the
Coolangatta Statement and the Strategy are provided in Appendixes E and F,
respectively. I argue that the Strategy, as a genre of governance, maintains and
sustains social structures and social practices by illustrating relations of power
evident within its temporal discourses. I counter these representations by contrasting
the accounts of Indigenous peoples as documented within the Coolangatta Statement
where the right of being Indigenous; the right to self-determination; and, the right to
practice and maintain cultures and languages are made explicit. The Coolangatta
Statement’s principles make explicit how Indigenous self is a right. The notion of
Indigenous self therefore becomes a term of reference to the right to be Indigenous
and encompasses the right to self-determination. The notion of Indigenous self is the
244 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
privileging of our Indigeneity and Indigenous voice in Indigenous affairs and
matters.
In the following section, focus is placed on the representations of Indigenous
peoples and more specifically, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. My
approach to this section begins with a macro analysis of the rights of Indigenous
peoples providing an account of what it means to be Indigenous. Moving back and
forth between texts and interactions and, providing description, interpretation and
explanation of the representations of Indigenous peoples, I attempt to make explicit
how discourses maintain, sustain and/or challenge social structures and social
practices.
The evolving representations of Indigenous peoples’ rights
Rights act as an overarching theme. There is a need to contextualise the
evolving rights of Indigenous peoples to identify how, or if, the rights of Indigenous
peoples in education have been addressed in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
In doing so, the social conditions as well as the processes of policy production and
interpretation are made explicit. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) inadvertently provides a synopsis of the varying representations of Indigenous
peoples’ rights by drawing on specific Articles within international human rights
charters.
Analysis of the changing representational discourses in the international human
rights charters to foreground the contemporary context follows. Focus is placed on
the charters that have informed and been drawn on in the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) to foreground the social conditions and social practices
in which the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) has been produced.
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 245
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
The atrocities and great loss from World War II saw the United Nations
reaffirm their “faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the
human person and in the equal rights of men and women [by determining] to
promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom” (United
Nations General Assembly, 1948, p. para. 5). The reference to the human person
(para. 5) and men (para. 5) and women (para. 5) refer to humankind as a whole rather
than the rights of Indigenous peoples as articulated in the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). Nonetheless, it is important to note the shifting
attitudes in the public sphere which foregrounded the paradigmatic shift in the mid-
1960s when the civil and human rights movement gained momentum and education
began to integrate Indigenous peoples within the Western classroom setting
(Beresford, et al., 2012; Hickling‐Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003).
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) stresses how the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (United Nations Human Rights
Office of the High Commissioner, 1966) sought to address the rights of minorities (p.
229) in Article 27. It asserts,
in those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist,
persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in
community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own
culture, and to profess and practice their own religion, and to use their own
language (United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner,
1966; as cited in Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229 [emphasis added]).
246 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Here, there is identification of specific Indigenous tenets that inform and are
informed by the notion of Indigenous self – for example: relationality, culture,
spirituality and language – but there is no explicit reference to Indigenous peoples.
The reference to minorities implies those from another ethnic, religious or linguistic
backgrounds are lesser both in number and in comparison to the colonisers. In doing
so, it establishes a binary construct articulating the explicit differences to the
coloniser.
While the earlier human rights charters are commended for their endeavours to
address the inequalities and inequities prevalent within the global society and for
articulating the basic rights of all, the limitations of these charters were noted within
the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). That is, the Coolangatta
Statement highlights the lack of promotion within the human rights charters of the
explicit rights of Indigenous peoples.
The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
The international human rights charter that the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) draws on that speaks explicitly about Indigenous
peoples is the then draft of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of
Indigenous Peoples [UNDRIP] (United Nations General Assembly, 2008). It hones
in on Articles 3 and 4 of the UNDRIP that addresses some of the stated limitations of
the previous policy mentioned. As the Coolangatta Statement is explicitly concerned
with addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education, they also devote time
to Articles 14 and 15 that are explicitly related to education.
Article 4, in particular, makes reference to Indigenous peoples, but also
elaborates on Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 247
Nations General Assembly, 1948), focusing on the explicit rights of Indigenous
peoples. It states,
Indigenous peoples have the right to participate fully, if they wish, in the
political, economic, social and cultural life of the state, while maintaining
their distinct political, economical, social and cultural characteristics, as well
as their legal systems. (Article 4) (United Nations General Assembly, 2008;
as cited in Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 232).
Here, the explicit reference to Indigenous peoples is apparent. However, it is
important to note, provision of a universal global definition of Indigenous peoples
was heavily debated in the production of the UNDRIP (Gover, 2016). Indigenous
participants advocated against such an action favouring self-identification while
“some states sought the inclusion of a definition of ‘[I]ndigenous peoples’ in order to
clarify and limit their obligations (or to avoid them altogether)” (Gover, 2016, pp.
38-39). I make mention of the contention in the UNDRIP’s production regarding
terms of reference to further contextualise the social conditions ‘at play’ regarding
the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The following
section explores the representations of Indigenous peoples in the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015).
Representations of Indigenous peoples in the Strategy
The evolving discursive identification of Indigenous peoples in international
human rights charters provides insight into the transforming representations of
Indigenous peoples in Australian policy discourses. Quintessential to this study is
the positioning and representations of Indigenous peoples, youth and children in both
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and through the lens of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) illustrating the social conditions of Australia
248 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
that inform the production and interpretation of policy. Building on and reflecting on
the historically-bound social conditions as articulated in the Coolangatta Statement,
in the following section, I dissect and discuss the varying representations of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Strategy.
Acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
The first paragraph in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) acts as an
acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the Indigenous
peoples of Australia. Interestingly, it is the exact wording from the opening
paragraph of the Action Plan’s Preface (MCEECDYA, 2011b) with one minor but
discursively significant difference. Comprising of two declarative statements, it
states,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the first Australians with the
oldest continuing cultures in human history. Governments across Australia
affirm the right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to maintain
languages and cultures and acknowledge their deep cultural associations
with the land and water (Education Council, 2015, p. ii [emphasis added]).
In the Action Plan, the term first has a capital whereas in the Strategy, a lower case f
has been used, changing the referential and societal meaning of the term. The
significance of this change is discussed further in this section.
The acknowledgement, as I am terming the paragraph, is contrastingly different
to historical policy discourses. In Australia, past policies and reforms acted to
destroy or remove the connection of Indigenous peoples to Country through the
Aboriginal Protection Acts (see, for example: Parliament of Victoria, 1869) and the
Policy of Assimilation (Hasluck, 1961) that forced the removal of Aboriginal peoples
from Country and Aboriginal children from their parents. While the shift in the
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 249
rhetoric indicates affirmative change in the social conditions that inform and are
informed by the processes of policymaking regarding Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students’ educational attainment in primary and secondary schooling, there
is still need for further disruption of the engrained colonial ideologies still prevalent
globally (Alfred, 2017, October 13).
That is, rather than the overt racism of the past, language in policy discourses is
presented as neutral and passive when it is punitive. Policy discourses disguise
colonial values, with the issues of power and race relations hidden within the rhetoric
of equity and equality (Alfred, 2017, October 13; wa Thiong'o, 1986). The
institutional and societal dominance of the coloniser continues to be maintained
through the use of language. It is my aim within this study to make the colonising
power of language explicit and in turn, encourage critical conversations and
reflections on how social structures and social practices influence, maintain and/or
challenge the relations of power evident in policymaking for Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander primary and secondary-aged students.
Analysis of the acknowledgement illustrates the shift in the discursive with the
recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the first Australians.
However, the use of the lower case f in first is significant. Rather than the commonly
used euphemistic expression, First Australians, the lower case f indicates place and
order. Essentially, the distinction of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as
the Indigenous peoples of this land now known as Australia is ignored. Rather, the
order, within the hidden discourse, claims the coloniser as the second Australians
minimising the ancient binds that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have
with the land (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). Further analysis of the acknowledgment
occurs in the following section.
250 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
The importance of the ‘s’: People vs peoples
In the acknowledgement, the declarative statements refer to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander people (Education Council, 2015, p. ii). The focus here is on
the use of people rather than peoples which homogenises Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples; positioning them as a collective; one group. This is not so.
The distinct differences between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; for
example, the differing beliefs and cultural practices between specific Aboriginal
groups, has been well-documented within the corpus (see, for example: Berndt &
Berndt, 1988; Dudgeon, et al., 2010; Nakata, 2007b).
The denial of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples throughout the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is apparent. Exemplification of peoples (p. 1) is
seen in the Preface’s letter of commendation, from here on referred to as the letter,
provided by the Chair of the Education Council, the Honourable Kate Jones MP.
Here, as an elected member of Parliament and therefore, in a position of power but
also as a representative of the people who have elected her to such a position, Jones
asserts the urgency to address the educational “and life outcomes of Australia’s First
Nations peoples” (Education Council, 2015, p. 1 [emphasis added]). Further
exploration of the notion of the possessed found within the letter occurs later. Here,
Jones’ use of the plural collective noun, peoples, and its stray from the discursive
norm becomes an anomaly and contradicts the dominant term of reference within the
Strategy’s discourses.
The varying terms of reference for Indigenous peoples
Focusing on the euphemistic expression, First Nations peoples (p. 1), used by
Jones is also worthy of attention as it introduces the varying representations of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within the Strategy (Education Council,
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 251
2015). Unlike the consistent term of reference, Indigenous, in the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006); there are four different terms of reference to
Indigenous peoples in the Strategy, being: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander;
Indigenous; first Australians; and, Australia’s First Nations peoples. The phrase
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander is cited 60 times, with the euphemistic
expressions of Indigenous being used 7 times; first Australians once; and, Australia’s
First Nations peoples a total of 3 times.
The overuse of the phrase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander within the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) debases the value and recognition of the two
distinct groups of the Indigenous peoples of Australia. Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander is fused together where the five words act as a signifier forming “a whole
whose meaning is different from the sum of the parts”; illustrating a collocational
affinity or syntagmatic bond (Hodge, 2017, p. 67). That is, the referential meaning
distinguishing the distinct differences between Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait
Islander peoples is made invisible in preference to the societal meaning as a whole,
an alternative term of reference to Indigenous, which as previously discussed acts to
homogenise the peoples.
As previously eluded to in the citation regarding the letter by Jones, reference
is made to the Indigenous peoples of Australia as “Australia’s First Nations peoples”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 1). The term of reference, First Nations peoples (p. 1),
was cited two other times – in the Vision Statement and in the conceptual overview
as discussed in Chapter 6. The use of the possessive apostrophe acts to position
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as a possession of colonial Australia.
In turn, the use of the apostrophe marginalises Indigenous peoples’ right to self-
determination, the second principle in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
252 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
1999, 2006). The apostrophe illustrates the relations of power prevalent within wider
Australian society. It dehumanises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as a
possession and an object rather than a member of the human race.
Reference to Indigenous within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is
primarily used when citing the titles of incremental and intertextual policies; namely,
the National Indigenous Reform Agreement [NIRA] (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008 [emphasis added]) and the Steering Committee for the Review of
Government Service Provision’s [SCRGSP] bi-annual reports, Overcoming
Indigenous Disadvantage (see; for example: SCRGSP, 2016 [emphasis added]).
Other examples within the Strategy where Indigenous is used is in the construction of
a binary that compares and contrasts Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples
(Education Council, 2015).
In summary, the limited use of Indigenous within the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015), unlike the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) with
its consistent reference to Indigenous peoples globally, indicates an over-reliance on
the term, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. The power of words to maintain,
sustain and/or challenge dominant ideologies can be identified here. The resistant
discourses of the Coolangatta Statement use the term, Indigenous, purposefully, to
indicate whose rights are being advocated for. The intentional omission of reference
in the Coolangatta Statement to the dominant group, the coloniser, gives privilege to
Indigenous voice.
On the other hand, the saturation of the term, Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander, within the Strategy’s rhetoric acts to reaffirm and re-state the ‘subject’ of
the policy (Education Council, 2015). In turn, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples are framed in deficit discourses implying that Indigenous students, as a
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 253
whole, are not “reaching their full learning potential” (Education Council, 2015, p.
2). The achievements of individual students are silenced with the use of the all-
encompassing collective terms of reference: Indigenous, First Nations people, and
the syntagmatic bond, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.
Words are signs. They indicate the social conditions in which we interpret the
discourses within the social activity. In this section, my focus has been on words –
the varying representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples within
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) framed in the evolving representations of
Indigenous peoples proffered in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006). The varying references illustrate the complexities and tensions evident in
education. There is no ‘common’ language and therefore, no shared understanding
to provide a foundation to encourage a dialogical approach for change.
The Coolangatta Statement’s initial principles – the right to be Indigenous and
the right to self-determination, call for the acknowledgment and respect for
Indigenous peoples and their ways of knowing, being and doing as well as their
values in education (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The use of euphemistic expressions
and the syntagmatic bond that is occurring within the Strategy’s lexis are together
creating an environment of indifference in language; privileging non-Indigenous
values and voices (Education Council, 2015). The Indigeneity of Indigenous peoples
is ‘white washed’ maintaining colonial Australian values, biases and taken for
granted assumptions. The distinct differences between Aboriginal peoples and
Torres Strait Islander peoples are ignored and the peoples are homogenised through
the lens of the coloniser privileging the colonial narrative. The influence of these
social structures and practices are enacted by the various peoples involved in
policymaking and/or the recontextualisation of policy at school and system levels.
254 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Peoples: Stakeholder representations in the discourses
In this section, I investigate and contrast how other stakeholders in Indigenous
education are positioned and represented within the discourses. The hegemonic
position of non-Indigenous peoples and their oppressive control on the provision of
education for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students is explored. In turn, the
means in which social structures and social practices are maintained and sustained
are made explicit. Where possible, the resistance and challenging of these
institutionalised and societal constructs are brought forward to counter the
representations of Indigenous peoples in primary and secondary education.
The other stakeholders in Indigenous education include government and its
governmental bodies and agencies; educational systems; policymakers and policy
writers; as well as schools, principals, teachers and teacher aides (see Figure 4.2).
The stakeholders are also inclusive of philanthropic institutions and others who
engage in and with Indigenous education. In this section, I discuss the
representations of the other stakeholders within policy discourses and how they
assume a hegemonic position in relation to the educational attainment of Indigenous
peoples. In turn, I make explicit how non-Indigenous voices and values are
privileged in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education policymaking while
Indigenous voices and values are silenced and/or marginalised.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is firstly explored to
make explicit the Indigenous perspective of the role non-Indigenous peoples should
‘play’ in Indigenous education and how Indigenous peoples advocate Indigenous
education should be approached. The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and its
representations of the varying stakeholders is then investigated to demonstrate the
power relations evident within Australian Indigenous education social conditions.
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 255
Particular attention is given to the governmental bodies that dominate and control the
strategies to address Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educational outcomes that
further privilege the coloniser’s voices and values.
The role of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education is negotiable
The focus within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is on
Indigenous peoples and their rights in education. Reference to other stakeholders is
minimal as it argues, the decision making and control of Indigenous education must
be led by Indigenous peoples. The resistant discourses of the Coolangatta Statement
insist the degree of involvement of non-Indigenous peoples is to be determined by
Indigenous peoples. The assumption is that Indigenous peoples have the right to
choose the education system they allow their children to access and that the provision
of education within an Indigenous education system is possible and indeed, viable.
The arguments are founded in Article 14 of the UNDRIP which explicitly legitimises
the formation of Indigenous education systems (United Nations General Assembly,
2008).
Further to this, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
provides insight to the tensions within non-Indigenous education systems and their
provision of education for Indigenous peoples. It makes mention of the consistent
activism by Indigenous peoples seeking an education that supports and respects the
notion of Indigenous self – encompassing Indigenous languages, knowledges and
cultures as well as acknowledging the relationality of Indigenous peoples to Country
and extended family. The Coolangatta Statement reports,
over the last 30 years, Indigenous peoples throughout the world have argued
that they have been denied equity in non-Indigenous education systems
which has failed to provide educational services that nurture the whole
256 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Indigenous person inclusive of scholarship, culture and spirituality (Morgan,
et al., 2006, p. 229).
It is important to re-state that the Coolangatta Statement is produced by Indigenous
peoples from around the world; it is the collective voice of Indigenous peoples. As a
result, a hypotactic relation is used to privilege Indigenous voice and is
exemplification of resistant discourses used in the Coolangatta Statement.
The main clause, Indigenous peoples throughout the world have argued that
they have been denied equity in non-Indigenous education systems (p. 229) claims
and foregrounds the purpose for the production of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). In turn, it elaborates and justifies the previous sentence
legitimising the argument that the production of “such an instrument is self-evident”
(Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229). The subordinate clause, which has failed to provide
educational services that nurture the whole Indigenous person inclusive of
scholarship, culture and spirituality (p. 229), further validates the claim providing
exemplification of how non-Indigenous education systems fail.
Both Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian researchers and educators
build on these assertions. Kerwin and Van Issum (2013) note the plethora of
Australian reports that acknowledge the failure of non-Indigenous education systems
in their provision for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. They make
explicit how reports such as “The National report to Parliament in Indigenous
Education and Training 2008, […] argues that formal education systems are failing
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students” (Kerwin & Van Issum, 2013, p. 3).
Neische (2013) also writes about the failures of education systems in their provision
to Indigenous students in remote Indigenous schools. Krakouer (2016) contends that
the perceived disparities between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 257
non-Indigenous peoples educational outcomes are undoubtedly bound within
Australia’s colonial history. Focus is placed here on the failures of non-Indigenous
education systems. Analysis of the social conditions that reject or accept the failure
of non-Indigenous education systems follows.
The failure of non-Indigenous education systems contested
Dominant political and societal hegemonic rhetoric counters the Indigenous
perspective shared in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
whereby systems are at fault and provides different reasons to the ever present blame
of ‘failures’, such as low educational outcomes and attainment. Drawing on the
discursive shift in the discourses from self-determination to self-empowerment after
the election of the Liberal government in 1996, the discourses serve to further
disempower Indigenous peoples (Sanders, 2002).
Self-empowerment is the ‘lesser cousin’ of self-determination (Sanders, 2002).
It is discoursal trickery whereby the responsibilities of one’s own livelihood are the
result of their actions, choices and decisions. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006) illustrates how these deficit discourses ignore the detrimental effects
of past policy and reform. The use of the term self-empowerment fails to
acknowledge the exclusionary practices of the past that hindered Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples’ engagement in education. That is, self-empowerment
places the blame of the current societal conditions experienced by Indigenous
peoples on them; relieving the coloniser from any responsibility.
Illustration of the deficit discourses placing blame on Indigenous peoples is
found in the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth
Affairs (MCEETYA) Taskforce on Indigenous Education’s report (2000). The
authors argue that the incommensurable educational outcomes and the resultant
258 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
consequences reflect “the failure of many parents and caregivers to encourage their
Indigenous children to attend school regularly and to support them in achieving
competence in literacy and numeracy” (MCEETYA Taskforce on Indigenous
Education, 2000, p. 14). Here, the perceived failures of Indigenous peoples from the
hegemonic position of the coloniser are made explicit. It contends that Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander parents fail to encourage and support their children’s
education, placing blame of the low educational outcomes of Indigenous students on
parents. In turn, it illustrates the notion of self-empowerment whereby the blame is
placed on parents rather than the systems and government.
In response, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and its
resistant discourses contend that the perceived ‘failures’ are based on Western
measures that privilege Western ways of knowing, doing and being. It contends that
the perceived failures “exist not because Indigenous peoples are less intelligent, but
because educational theories and practices are developed and controlled by non-
Indigenous peoples” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231). The alternative lens that the
Coolangatta Statement provides becomes the lens in which I use when analysing the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) and the power relations evident within the
discourses.
The representations of Others in the Strategy
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) only refers to non-Indigenous
Australians twice. The limited number of references is not surprising as the ‘subject’
of the policy is explicitly the educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students. Nonetheless, the first reference to non-Indigenous peoples occurs
late in the Strategy where it stipulates that senior officials and the Education Council
are to produce a report comparing the attendance data of Indigenous and non-
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 259
Indigenous students by late 2016. The second time is when there is recognition of
the criteria being developed to assess Graduate Teachers’ capabilities and
competencies to address Standard 2.4 of the National Teachers Professional
Standards (AITSL, 2014b).
The alternative terms of reference, other Australians (p. 3) and non-Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander (p. 6), are cited once each. In regards to other Australians,
the Strategy elaborates on the equity principle contending that “Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children and young people are able to access the same
educational opportunities and achieve the same education outcomes as other
Australians” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3 [emphasis added]). While the
declarative statement seeks to explicate the right of Indigenous peoples to access
education, the polarization of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to other
Australians creates a binary construct of difference.
The alternative reference to non-Indigenous peoples as non-Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) further
illustrates how the term of reference, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, has
become a syntagmatic bond. The reference is cited when discussing the data
necessary to be collated to compare the attendance rates of Indigenous and non-
Indigenous students. It states that the report “will include recommendations for
future analysis of the reasons for authorised absences/non-attendance for Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students and non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6 [emphasis added]). The term of reference
appeared in the 2010 Annual Report on the implementation of the Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan [Action Plan] and has been consistently
used in Indigenous education policy rhetoric since (MCEECDYA, 2011a).
260 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
The use of the term, non-Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, is a ‘double-
edged sword’. It diminishes the uniqueness of First Nations peoples and appears to
attempt to align non-Indigenous peoples with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples. In turn, it attempts to make our Indigeneity a reflection of the coloniser.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) argues that such an action is
intentional to silence and devalue Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing as
well as the values that inform and form the notion of Indigenous self.
The contradictions and complexities at the cultural interface
The reference to non-Indigenous peoples as other Australians and non-
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
is discursively perplexing. Non-Indigenous peoples are the dominant workforce
population in Australian education systems (Johnson, et al., 2016). To illustrate the
disconcerting positioning of non-Indigenous peoples as other Australians and, in
turn, positioning Indigenous peoples as the target audience as well as the ‘subject’
for the Strategy, analysis of the teaching workforce is necessary.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are underrepresented in the
Australian education workforce. The MATSITI Final Report found that in 2015,
there were 3,100 teachers who identified as Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander
in Australian schools (Johnson, et al., 2016). Only 7 per cent of these Indigenous
teachers held the position of Deputy Principal and 3 per cent as Principal. To further
contextualise the limited number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander teachers in
the Australian education workforce, the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) reports
that in 2016, there was a total of 276, 329.8 full-time teachers in Australian schools
(Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2017). In other words, the Indigenous teaching
workforce is just over 1 per cent of the total Australian teaching population.
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 261
The lack of Indigenous representation at the local level and the
overrepresentation of other Australians, where the implementation and
recontextualisation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is enacted,
demonstrates the power relations and struggle evident in Indigenous education.
Where the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) asserts that non-
Indigenous peoples’ involvement is to be negotiated and controlled by Indigenous
peoples, in an Australian context, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are
underrepresented and therefore, opportunity to engage in the decision making and
recontextualisation of policy within schools is limited. As a result, the coloniser
maintains power and influence over the potential educational outcomes of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students simply because they are in positions of power and
clearly outnumber Indigenous peoples and therefore, can readily silence Indigenous
voices.
Over-representation of the coloniser in the Strategy
While the MATSITI project sought to increase the number of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander educators in schools to provide mentors and role models for
Indigenous students at the ‘coal face’ (Johnson, et al., 2016), the overrepresentation
of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education is further illustrated by the
number of references to governmental bodies in positions of power in the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015). The terms ‘COAG’, ‘Education Council’, ‘Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Education Advisory Group’, ‘AEEYSOC’, ‘senior
officials’ and ‘educators’ were referred to collectively a total of 40 times while
‘students’, ‘community’, ‘communities’ and ‘families’ were only referred to a total
of 24 times. The peoples in positions of power, dictating the decision making and
262 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
policymaking, are predominantly the coloniser. Investigation of the varying
governmental bodies follows.
Council of Australian Governments
As illustrated in Figure 4.2, the Council of Australian Governments [COAG]
sits as the overarching body in regards to Australian education. COAG is made up of
the Prime Minister and the Premiers of States and Territories of Australia as well as
the “President of the Australian Local Government Association” (COAG, 2017, p.
para. 2). COAG’s role and intentions in Indigenous education is made explicit in the
production of the National Indigenous Reform Agreement (NIRA) and its goals in
addressing the disparities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples’
livelihoods and potential futures (Council of Australian Governments, 2008). The
COAG targets articulated in the NIRA (Council of Australian Governments, 2008)
specifically focused on Indigenous education are brought to the forefront and built
upon in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
COAG, in a position of authority as the elected representatives of the
Australian peoples, oversees all governmental bodies and agencies (Brandt, 2015a).
As a governmental body under the jurisdiction of COAG, the Education Council and
the production of the Strategy “builds on past commitments in education policy and
strategic drivers including [the] Council of Australian Governments (COAG)
priorities of school attendance and post-school transitions as included in the
Education Council’s Terms of reference” (Education Council, 2015, p. 2). The
priorities set are addressed in the latter pages of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) and are two of the seven priority areas (see: Figure 6.10). Initially omitted
from the NIRA in 2008, concern about the attendance of Indigenous students at
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 263
schools saw its inclusion in the NIRA targets in May 2014 (Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet, 2016).
Education Council
The Education Ministers of States and Territories as well as the Minister of
Education – Australian Government and the New Zealand Minister of Education
form the Education Council and as a result, play an important role in the production
and implementation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The role of
Education Ministers is illustrated in the Purpose statement, from here on referred to
as the statement. It states,
PURPOSE
The strategy sets out the commitment of education ministers to the education
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people by:
»» utilising the strategy’s principles and priority areas to inform the
development and implementation of both local and systemic-level actions
»» identifying areas where collaborative action between or across
governments, in consultation with the non-government sector, is required to
complement local efforts.
»» This strategy is a living document. New national collaborative actions
may emerge as priorities evolve and work is completed (Education Council,
2015, p. 3).
The statement indicates very little about neither the types of relationships and
partnerships nor the role of local and/or systemic systems.
The initial paragraphs of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) suggest that it
“sets the principles and priorities that act as a framework to guide jurisdictions in
developing and implementing localised policies and actions to improve outcomes for
264 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people” (p. 2). However, the statement focuses
on the commitments of Education Ministers. The statements are contradictory as
they suggest that the Education Ministers utilise “the strategy’s principles and
priority areas to inform the development and implementation of both local and
systemic-level actions” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). The confusion is
exacerbated because constitutionally States and Territories are the ones who are
responsible for education (Harrington, 2011). As a result, the tensions and
complexities within education, as a whole, become evident.
The power struggle and funding
The tensions are best illustrated in the funding models or the Price tag section
highlighted in the processes of production in policy making (see Figure 2.3). There
are several Articles within the Constitution (Parliamentary Education Office and
Australian Government Solicitor, 2010) that provide a means for Federal
Government to assert their power in education. Section 96 of the Constitution
is the key power that has been used to legitimise Commonwealth
intervention in the field of education […] using this power, the
Commonwealth can tie the payment of grants to the states to implement
certain Commonwealth education policies” (as cited in Harrington, 2011, p.
2).
The power struggle between Federal government and State and Territory
governments is evident; funding can be withheld if Commonwealth policies are not
adopted.
Funding explicitly to assist in addressing the educational outcomes of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students was ceased in 2009 (Harrington,
2011). A review of the funding model was provided in 2011 (see: Gonski et al.,
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 265
2011) and a new funding model “based on a schooling resource standard that
provides recurrent funding to schools [which] allocates each school with a base
amount per student, plus additional funding (loadings) to meet additional needs”
(Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. 122) was implemented in 2014. The additional
funding loadings are inclusive of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, low
socio-economic students and English as Another Language/Dialect (EAL/D) students
– social determinants and categories that Indigenous peoples are readily represented.
It is important to note that while additional funding was introduced to aid in the
implementation of the Action Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) by Focus Schools –
schools mandated to implement the Action Plan, there is no additional funding
attached to the implementation of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). This is of
particular importance as it was noted that schools that accessed the additional
funding in the implementation of the Action Plan were more proactive and had
accelerated implementation as opposed to those that did not (Acil Allen Consulting,
2014).
The Strategy purports that it “will guide the education of all Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children and young people from birth through to further
education and employment pathways” (Education Council, 2015, p. ii). The use of
the all-encompassing pronoun, all, indicates the shift in the focus since the Action
Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b) and its limitations in implementation and the Strategy
and its direction. However, there has been very little to no communication regarding
the Strategy. The following section illustrates the lack of communication.
Lack of communication
Little to no communication of the release of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) can be found. No Media Release and/or communiques can be located on the
266 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Education Council webpage (Education Council, 2014). A Google News search with
the parameters set for “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy”
returned only one reference. The lone reference was a news article published 5
months after the release of the Strategy (Davis, 2016). The lack of communication
from COAG, Education Ministers and the Education Council potentially puts the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) at risk of being seen as ‘bolted on’; if at all. Yet,
the Strategy is purportedly to benefit all Indigenous students.
Concerns about Indigenous education being considered secondary to school
‘core business’ was shared in the Australian Directions in Indigenous Education
2005-2008 (MCEETYA, 2006) recommending that “Indigenous education and the
lessons learnt from strategic intervention programs are ‘built in’ to core business to
become everyone’s business: departmental staff, principals, teachers, school staff,
Indigenous students, parents/caregivers, families and communities” (p. 16). Such
sentiments have been repeated in various other reports (see, for example: David
Unaipon College of Indigenous Education and Research, 2009).
The political spin in recent years with the election of Turnbull and his position
as Chair of COAG has seen the shift in the discursive to government working with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and not doing things to them, as
discussed at the beginning of this chapter (Department of the Prime Minister and
Cabinet, 2017). Further exploration of the governmental bodies specifically involved
in the production and implementation of Indigenous education policy is necessary to
contextualise and illustrate the relations of power in Indigenous education. Further
to this, the investigation demonstrates the top-down approach of policy (see Figure
4.2) and how current institutional and societal constructs maintain power relations
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 267
and continue to marginalise Indigenous voice by denying our right to self-
determination.
Who are the authors?
The purported author of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is the
Education Council. While the majority of the members of the Education Council
remain nameless; the Chair is the only named individual in the Strategy. As
previously mentioned, her lone voice is heard in the letter (Preface). In doing so,
Jones establishes her position in relation to the other members by indicating her
position of power within the lexis. She is therefore positioned as an authoritative
voice and the use of identification promoting social cohesion is evident.
However, hidden within the processes and procedures of policymaking, the
‘true’ writers of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are nameless policy writers
who produce policy on behalf of Education Council (Brandt, 2015a). The processes
of production have policy writers recontextualise and reinterpret the ideologies and
beliefs held within the political agenda. As Brandt (2015b) states, “It is their job to
bring government to life through language. The resources they call upon to do it are
not limited to official rules, instructions, or precedents that may accompany a
governmental writing task” (p. 57). Therefore, the Education Council’s role is to
endorse the Strategy which Jones does in the letter on behalf of the other members.
Within the letter, Jones makes reference to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Advisory Group [ATSIEAG] and their role in the production of
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). Further investigation of this group is
paramount to illustrating the power relations and power of language to manipulate
and maintain control of Indigenous education. In the following section, I explicate
268 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Rogue wave: A reflective interlude
I was hit by a rogue wave last night. Pummelled by self-doubt, anxiety and just plain
uncertainty – I was blindsided by a massive wave. My feathers were matted. I had
become disoriented. I had lost focus. I was forced to return to the boat – to find
solace and shelter.
I reviewed my voyage thus far. I re-aligned my intentions. I revisited how I want to
promote Indigenous education and articulate the importance to address the
prevalent disparities in Indigenous education. I want my voyage in the ocean of
research to be proactive. The more I looked at the driftwood that I had collected
along the way; I found strength to continue.
The rogue wave was the fear of the pre-empted questions. The politics of identity
continue to plague me as I fight on. I stand here now calling out to those who are
also on the ocean. My song is one of resilience acknowledging the struggles and
absolute strength of those who have fought so valiantly before me who have
mapped the voyage. My song calls on my ancestors to provide me the strength and
to find my place and my space. The chorus chants:
“I am me. I am the emu. I am the storm bird. I am one with the
land, the waters and the air. I am connected to this land through
my bloodlines. I too have a right in this space. My story is just
one of the emerging narratives in Indigenous history. I claim my
space. I claim my place. I claim my Aboriginal identity”.
The changing sails found within the historical and political winds have re-directed
and changed the context. Now, we must acknowledge the new forms of colonisation
blowing in the winds.
Language is a silent tornado. It takes the guise of communication yet, controls all. It
positions us in wary waters. We must keep close watch as we continue sailing.
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 269
the reasons for placing ATSIEAG in the representations of other stakeholders in the
Strategy.
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Advisory Group
The term of reference, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Group (p. 1), is a discursive trick. The reference is made up of 8 words that
merge into one another. The use of the syntagmatic bond, Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander, assists in the compounding of the term. The resulting referential and
societal meaning is the assumption that the members of this group would be
predominantly Indigenous as the name suggests the notion of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander representation. However, this is not so. To contextualise this claim, I
provide insight into the discursive trickery ‘at play’.
In the letter, Jones thanks ATSIEAG and their contributions to the production
of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). She reflects on how
the [S]trategy is the result of robust discussion, reflection, debate and
cooperation and [how] its development has been championed by the
Education Council’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Group established by the Australian Education, Early Childhood
Development and Youth Affairs Senior Officials Committee to provide
advice on national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander policy initiatives
and directions (Education Council, 2015, p. 1).
The declarative statement that precedes this acknowledgement provides the identity
of one of the members of ATSIEAG. Again, much like the Education Council, the
other members remain nameless. An extensive investigation to identify the members
of ATSIEAG could only produce the name of one individual.
270 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Lack of Indigenous representation in ATSIEAG
The lone reference within the Strategy and the only name located within the
investigation is Mr Tony Harrison who was, at the time, “the Chief Executive of the
South Australian Department for Education and Child Development” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 1), from here on referred to as SA-DECD. He was the Chair of
ATSIEAG and a member of the formally named Australian Education, Early
Childhood Development and Youth Affairs Senior Officials Committee [AEEYSOC]
(Institute of Public Administration Australia - South Australian Division Inc, 2016).
Harrison was appointed to the position of Chief Executive of SA-DECD in 2013.
Prior to this appointment, he had been the Police Assistant Commissioner for South
Australian Police (SAPOL) and prior to that, had held other high level management
positions. He has since taken up the position of leading the Department for
Communities and Social Inclusion and was replaced by Rick Persse (Novak, 2016).
Harrison’s lack of experience within the education sector is noted but
unfortunately, it is not a pre-requisite for stakeholders in education as a whole. What
is of importance is the fact that Harrison is a non-Indigenous White male who was
positioned as Chair of a committee that emphasises the notion of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples’ representation. In fact, according to one of the few
sources available on ATSIEAG,
membership of the group consists of senior officials with responsibility for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education and/or early childhood
policy from each jurisdiction; a senior official of the National Catholic
Education Commission; a senior official of the Independent Schools Council
of Australia; and two senior representatives of Indigenous Education
Consultative Bodies (Department of Finance, 2017, p. para. 2).
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 271
The lack of transparency and the de-identification of individuals apart from their
roles within other organisations on this Advisory Panel has me question if the
representatives are indeed Indigenous as the name suggests or dominated by the
coloniser.
Apart from the explicit reference of the two senior representatives of
Indigenous Education Consultative Bodies (p. 1), investigation of the newly named
Australian Education Senior Officials Committee (AESOC), the senior officials
alluded to by the Department of Finance (Education Council, 2016), are non-
Indigenous. The senior officials of Independent Schools Council of Australia and the
National Catholic Education Commission are also non-Indigenous peoples (see:
Independent Schools Council of Australia, 2016; National Catholic Education
Commission, 2016). Therefore, an assumption is made that the only Indigenous
representation are the two senior representatives from the now federally defunded;
and in some States and Territories – defunct, Indigenous Education Consultative
Bodies (Reconciliation Australia, 2015). Such findings illustrate the discursive
trickery of the naming of this group as ATSIEAG. Indigenous voice is limited in this
group and therefore, ATSIEAG must be viewed as one of the other stakeholders
rather than an Indigenous organisation. Exploration of the role of senior officials
follows.
Senior officials
The interdependencies and synergies between governmental bodies and
agencies, as illustrated in Figure 4.2, becomes more explicit as representations of the
coloniser in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are explored. Senior officials are
frequently referred to in the Strategy in the Priorities for national collaboration
section. Notably, definition of who are the senior officials is not provided. The
272 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
assumption would be that ‘senior officials’ is an abbreviated term of reference to the
members of AESOC. However, explicit reference to the then named AEEYSOC is
evident in the initial pages of the Strategy. As a result, the ambiguity of the term
ensures the anonymity of the individuals which reduces the accountability and
transparency of the reporting and monitoring process of the policy cycle (see, for
example: Hardee, et al., 2004; UNESCO, 2013).
Accountability is one of the principles guiding the implementation of the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The role of senior officials, as alluded to in the
Strategy, is to analyse and collate reports for and with the Education Council and
other governmental bodies to inform the progress or areas needing attention within
Indigenous education. For example: in regards to attendance and engagement of
Indigenous peoples in education, the Strategy states that
senior officials will analyse available reports to consider the impact of
jurisdictional attendance strategies and provide advice to Council on factors
affecting success. This analysis will consider best practice identified by geo-
location. The initial report will be delivered mid-2016 (Education Council,
2015, p. 6).
The use of the modal verb will indicates both epistemic and deontic modality. Will
(p. 6) indicates both predictability and obligation. Here, the senior officials are
positioned as being obligated as well as instructed to complete a report on attendance
strategies for Education Council. The authoritative position of Education Council is
established but also, the responsibilities of the senior officials stipulated.
The interconnectivity of governmental bodies
The disproportionate weighting of the representations of other stakeholders in
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) illustrates the interconnectivity and synergies
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 273
between governmental agencies, the marginalisation of Indigenous voice and the
hegemonic positioning of the coloniser. Exemplification of these interdependencies
occurs when the Strategy reports,
the Education Council will request that the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Advisory Group facilitates:
»» by the end of 2016, sharing of possible ways to implement the Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures cross-curriculum priority,
including providing advice to senior officials on ways to support future
development of ACARA’s illustrations of practice (Education Council,
2015, p. 7)
The use of the modal verb will indicates both obligation and predictability of future
action. Here, reference is made to Education Council, ATSIEAG, senior officials
and the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA).
Four separate and yet interrelated agencies all responsible in some capacity to
producing guidance on how systems and schools can embed Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander histories and cultures into the curriculum.
The Education Council, from a position of power and authority, makes the
request and directs both ATSIEAG and senior officials to provide options and
strategies to support future development of ACARA’s illustrations of practice (p. 7).
While ACARA is not explicitly active in this action, the production of the Australian
Curriculum and the resources to assist in its implementation are the responsibilities
of ACARA and they benefit from this directive (ACARA, 2015b). Systems and
schools also benefit from these actions through the production of resources to guide
their approaches in implementing and addressing the three-dimensional Australian
Curriculum (ACARA, 2015b). Introduction to the importance of culture being
274 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
considered when addressing the educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students occurs. In the following section, I investigate how
Indigenous cultures are represented and considered in the discourses of Indigenous
education.
Culture: The representations of histories, cultures and languages in the
discourses
In this section, focus is placed on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
and how Indigenous histories, cultures and languages inform the notion of
Indigenous self. Culture is broad and its’ definition is predominantly presented
through a Western lens (Jacob, Cheng, & Porter, 2015). Porter (2015) highlights the
influential properties of culture on the notion of Indigenous self when she asserts
that, “culture is about making meaning and making sense of the world; having a
coherent, strong cultural foundation makes a difference. It is at once complex and
contentious and, in essence, simple and everyday” (p. 247). Here, Porter implicitly
brings to the forefront the differing worldviews of Indigenous peoples in contrast to
the coloniser. In the following section, the complexities and tensions of the cultural
interface and the conflict between Indigenous and Western knowledges when
defining culture are considered which leads to me asking how these intricacies and
differences influence and are influenced by institutional and societal constructs.
The dichotomy of Indigenous and Western knowledges
Prior to defining culture and how it is illustrated and represented within policy
discourses, an investigation of the dichotomy of Indigenous and Western knowledges
are necessary. The intention here is to make explicit the contentious nature of
policymaking and how the lack of representation of Indigenous voice in
policymaking, as discussed in the previous section, enables the values of the
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 275
coloniser to influence and maintain social structures and social practices. In turn, the
relations of power and the tensions at the cultural interface are made explicit.
The notion of Indigenous self encompasses Indigenous ways of knowing based
within Indigenous ontological and epistemological frameworks and founded within
an Indigenous notion of truth and knowledge production. Nakata (2007b) made
explicit the tensions and complexities of the notion of Indigenous self when seen
through both a Western and an Indigenous lens when he investigated the documented
historical evidence, testimonials and reports collated about Torres Strait Islanders.
He argues that while the cultural practices and traditions of Indigenous peoples can
be described, observed and interpreted by the coloniser; the lived experiences and
members’ resources of the collective and the individual disrupts the dominant
Western worldviews. I argue that it is here where the notion of Indigenous self
becomes a resistant discursive practice challenging the hegemonic position of the
coloniser as the knower (Venkateswar & Hughes, 2011).
Privileging Indigenous knowledges
Exemplification of the tensions and complexities at the cultural interface where
Indigenous and Western knowledges intersect, intertwine and interact can be found
when comparing and contrasting the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). Privileging Indigenous voice and
exemplifying its’ resistant discourses, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
2006) claims that,
almost all Indigenous peoples, and in particular, those who have suffered the
impact and effects of colonization, have struggled to access education that
acknowledges, respects and promotes the right of Indigenous peoples to be
276 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
indigenous – a right that embraces Indigenous peoples’ language, culture,
traditions, and spirituality (p. 229).
Passive voice is evident in this declarative statement. The use of the adverbial
phrase, almost all, and the relative clause, those who have suffered the impact and
effects of colonization (p. 229), provides elaborative legitimisation for the claim that
access to education has been minimised for Indigenous peoples while the subject is
omitted. That is, the persons or peoples who have not provided an education that
acknowledges, respects and promotes the right of Indigenous peoples to be
indigenous – a right that embraces Indigenous peoples’ language, culture, traditions,
and spirituality (p. 229) remain unnamed but are implicitly referred to through the
use of the term, colonization.
Furthermore, expressive modality, and in particular, epistemic modality and
validity, is used to establish the legitimacy of the declarative statement. That is, the
Indigenous worldview of colonisation and the notion of truth in the claims made are
validated by the assertive declarations delivered. In regards to this declarative
statement, the Coolangatta Statement asserts that the majority of Indigenous peoples
have suffered the impact and effects of colonization and have struggled to access
education (p. 229). No evidence is provided to endorse the statements made.
Instead, the authors are further positioned as authorities “with respect to the truth or
probability of a representation of reality” (Fairclough, 2015, p. 142) through the
Indigenous knowledges and worldviews including understandings and knowledges
formed and informed by their lived experiences (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
The statement about how Indigenous peoples have struggled to access
education implicitly challenges previous policy and makes explicit the failures of the
past in regards to the basic human rights for Indigenous peoples (United Nations
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 277
General Assembly, 2008). For example: the United Nations Declaration of Human
Rights’ Article 26 states that access to education is a right for all (United Nations
General Assembly, 1948). Reaffirmation of the right to education is found in the
UNDRIP (United Nations General Assembly, 2008). The resistant discourses
evident in the declarative statement defy the actions or lack of action by colonisers to
address and enact policies and highlights the discrepancies on what is said and what
is done.
Contrasting Western knowledges
The dominant position of Western knowledges is made explicit in the
Coolangatta Statement when it states that the predominant beliefs held within
Western society assumes “that the core of Indigenous cultural values, standards and
wisdom is abandoned or withering in the wilderness of Indigenous societies”
(Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231). Here, the Coolangatta Statement highlights the
hegemonic position of the coloniser. Battiste (2002) illustrates the assumed position
of the coloniser through an Indigenous lens when she states that, “Eurocentric
thought asserts that Europeans can progress and that Indigenous peoples are frozen in
time, guided by knowledge systems that reinforce the past and do not look towards
the future” (p. 4). The contesting worldviews place Indigenous knowledges and
Western knowledges in opposition to each other reinforcing and illustrating the
dichotomy when considering the interpretations of culture.
Defining the right to be Indigenous
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006) has positioned and defined
the right to be Indigenous as “the freedom of Indigenous peoples themselves to
determine who is Indigenous; what it means to be Indigenous; and, how education
relates to Indigenous cultures” (p. 231). Quite often within the corpus, Indigeneity is
278 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
positioned as a binary construct. That is, different to the coloniser, exotic and
romanticised and on the other hand, seen through the lens of the coloniser and
aligned within Western concepts where Indigenous peoples are seen as Other. The
concept of Other was originally introduced by Said and his theory of Orientalism
whereby Western constructions of the Orient differentiated the coloniser from the
peoples of the Orient; the process of othering (Said, 2003). In this study, the notion
of Other is used to articulate the Western constructions of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples as different to the coloniser.
In response, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
emphasises that Indigeneity cannot be a reflection of the coloniser; creating its own
binary construct. Nakata (2007b) asserts that the differences are based within the
dichotomy of the notion of Indigenous self and the Western notion of self and their
assumptions of Indigenous peoples as native and uncivilised. The dichotomy of self
as individual and part of the collective as opposed to individual only; the notion of
spirituality as opposed to religious; the notion of a holistic worldview as opposed to a
structured and rigid worldview based within the sciences, further explicate the
dichotomous binary that occurs.
The dichotomy of race and power ‘plays out’ in the binary construct that
differentiates Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples. While a binary divides
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non-Indigenous peoples into an
‘us’ and ‘them’ situation, a binary construct also allows for a shift in power
(Fairclough, 2015). Through language and making explicit the uniqueness of
Indigeneity, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are able to exert power.
There are only certain avenues where space is available for such an assertion of
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 279
power by Indigenous peoples. Taking this all in consideration, the establishment of a
binary construct is warranted (Nakata, 2007b).
Human rights or Cultural rights?
By basing the foundational arguments for the production of the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) within international charters and conventions,
the authors use the Western worldviews as justification to validate their Indigenous
position. In doing so, it becomes an exemplification of the cultural interface.
Notably, the policies listed to inform and validate the Coolangatta Statement refer
primarily to cultural rights. There is argument from researchers such as Engle (2011)
that international charters and conventions on human rights focus on the human right
to culture. She contends “that the UNDRIP signifies both the possible expansion and
continued limitation of human rights and the perpetuation of certain biases, including
the suggestion that cultural rights – particularly in their collective form – are outside
the domain of human rights” (p. 142). The human rights charters and conventions
are celebrated for their endeavours to address the inequalities prevalent within the
global society and articulating the basic rights of all.
The interpretation of these documents and their implementation are informed
by and inform the recontextualisation by governments in their own policies. Based
within the collective voice, the Coolangatta Statement and its authors in conjunction
with the participants of the 1999 WIPCE advocate that access to education, the right
to choice in regards to education systems, the consensus to practice culture and use
language are fraught with barriers. They are reliant on a paradigmatic shift in the
coloniser.
280 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Stories and languages, ceremonies and dance, values and structures:
Defining culture
In the previous section, the Western worldview that Indigenous cultures are
non-existent in the modern world was discussed. In this section, I investigate the
definition of culture in a broad sense from an Indigenous lens and articulate its
importance in informing and forming the notion of Indigenous self. The
interdependencies of spirituality, stories and languages, ceremonies and dance,
values and structures in articulating the Indigenous linkages and belonging to
Country, one another and one’s culture are explored.
Defining culture
Defining culture, much like the notion of Indigenous self, depends on the lens
in which it is viewed. My interpretation of culture derives from my interactions and
understandings of both Indigenous and Western definitions of the word. Connection
to Country is an essential component of the right to be Indigenous (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) but also has influence on our health and wellbeing as well as our cultural
understanding and the notion of Indigenous self (Anderson, 1996). Poroch et al.
(2009) highlights the connections between spirituality, Country and how a sense of
belonging supports and builds resilience for Indigenous peoples in the contemporary
context. Garnett and Sithole (2009) state that, “Indigenous [E]lders talk about
achieving a balance and acting to maintain that balance through continuous, active
and spiritual interaction with [C]ountry” (p. 1). Western definitions of the term,
culture, are founded within racial discourses that further establish the binary between
Indigenous peoples and the coloniser (Malik, 1996).
Therefore, in this study, culture is understood to be inclusive of Indigenous
stories and languages, ceremonies and dance, values and structures that inform and
form the epistemological, ontological and axiological frameworks and
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 281
understandings (Poroch, et al., 2009). It encompasses a sense of belonging and the
relationality Indigenous peoples have to one another and Country (Moreton-
Robinson, 2015a). It exemplifies the resistance and challenges to the ideologies,
beliefs and values of dominant Western cultures. It recognises the colonisation of
the colonised and yet, acknowledges the embedded Indigenous knowledges and
understandings held by Indigenous peoples and individuals (Nakata, 2007b; Smith,
1999).
The representations of culture in the Coolangatta Statement
In this section, the representations of culture within the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are explored. Emphasis is placed on the recurring
themes and collocations evident within the Coolangatta Statement that occurs when
making reference to the right to be Indigenous and the right to self-determination.
That is, the Coolangatta Statement implicitly defines the right to be Indigenous as “a
right that embraces Indigenous peoples’ language, culture, traditions and
spirituality” (p. 229 [emphasis added]). Further explication occurs when the
Coolangatta Statement explains the relationality between Indigenous peoples,
language and Country by making explicit how
land gives life to language and culture[; how language, being a social
construct,] is a blueprint for thought, behavior, social and cultural
interaction and self-expression[; and, finally, how language] is the medium
for transmitting culture from the past to the present and into the future”
(Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235 [emphasis added]).
Here, the explicit connection between Country (land), language and culture is
provided. As a result, the importance of language in forming the notion of
Indigenous self, its’ interrelationships with culture and identity are made explicit.
282 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
The interdependencies of language and culture
Calma (2009) emphasises the challenges in the contemporary context for
maintaining, preserving and revitalising of Indigenous languages as a result of past
policy and reform. He highlights how languages are and continue to be ‘dying out’.
Crump (2017) illustrates the lack of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages
thriving in Australia. He indicates that only three Indigenous languages are thriving
and used on a regular basis as a means of daily communication and interaction.
In regards to the interdependencies of language and culture, Calma (2009)
asserts,
cultural knowledge and concepts are carried through languages. […]
Language and culture are interdependent. It has long been understood that
language is the verbal expression of culture. It is the medium through which
culture is carried and transferred (pp. 58-60).
Language therefore is a quintessential component of culture and informs and forms
the notion of Indigenous self. However, as highlighted, the use of language is
fraught with barriers (Crump, 2017).
The emerging notions of culture
The resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is illustrated in
the transforming notions of culture. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
2006) asserts that,
one of the greatest challenges confronting Indigenous peoples in the final
year of the twentieth century is how to promote, protect and nurture
Indigenous cultures in an ever-changing modern society (p. 231).
In regards to Australia, the practice of making Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
practices relevant in contemporary Australian society is contentious. The coloniser
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 283
regularly contests the emerging notions of culture. Exemplification of the
contestations is found within Welcome to Country. In 2010, O’Brien and Hall
suggested that the Welcome to Country performed in the mid-1970s by Dingo and
Walley was actually initiated by New Zealand and Cook Island dance troupes who
refused to perform without being officially welcomed to Country and that prior to
this occasion, the tradition did not exist (O'Brien & Hall, March 17, 2010). The
assumed hegemonic position of O’Brien and Hall as knowers of Aboriginal customs
to comment on the modernisation of Indigenous practices illustrates the contention
and complexities at the cultural interface. Their position also indicates the need for
such a statement in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) to
promote but more importantly, to protect Indigenous cultures.
Both relational and expressive modalities are evident in the declarative
statement. In particular, deontic modality is used to illustrate the resilience of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Here, Indigenous peoples are
obligated, as well as given permission, to promote, protect and nurture Indigenous
cultures (p. 231). Desirability is also emphasised as the promotion, protection and
nurturing of Indigenous cultures are seen as one of the greatest challenges
confronting Indigenous peoples (p. 231). However, this component of the
declarative statement is also example of the position of the authors as authorities of
truth and confidence in the statement. In particular, the assertive nature of the
beginning of the declarative statement, one of the greatest challenges (p. 231),
validates and legitimises the authority of the authors through the rationalisation of
their collective lived experiences.
The need to promote, protect and nurture (p. 231) Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander cultures in modern Australia becomes more difficult when considering the
284 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors. The removal of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander children from their parents and families, and the removal
of Indigenous peoples from Country, displacing and separating Indigenous families,
hiding Aboriginal peoples Indigeneity; all these factors act as barriers. The
Coolangatta Statement acknowledged these barriers asserting how the promotion,
protection and nurturing of Indigenous cultures is “of particular concern for
Indigenous peoples who are forced into cities and away from their homelands”
(Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231).
Maintaining Indigenous cultures
The influence of past policy and reform on the promotion, protection and
nurturing of Indigenous cultures in an Australian context had the potential to remove
and annihilate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages, histories, cultures and
languages. However, the resilience and strength of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples has ensured the traditions and cultures as well as languages are
passed on from generation to generation despite the horrific consequences. The role
of both Indigenous Elders and youth in maintaining Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander cultures are explicated in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006).
In Chapter 2, the role of Elders as teachers was explored. Discussion about
how Elders were knowledge keepers and their specific roles within the community
occurred. The Coolangatta Statement further emphasises the role of Elders. It states,
“Elders must be recognized and respected as teachers of the young people” (Morgan,
et al., 2006, p. 232). Battiste (2002) asserts that Elders should be considered as
“living educational treasures” (p. 21). Here, the importance and value of Elders
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 285
within Indigenous communities and their role to pass on these knowledges to
Indigenous youth is presented.
The Coolangatta Statement reports that at the World Indigenous Youth
Conference in Darwin in 1993, participants called on Elders “to open the way for us
to learn about our heritages – to help us reclaim our past, so that we may claim our
future” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 233). The call for action by Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander youth to learn about Indigenous histories, cultures, and languages
further illustrates the resilience and activism of Indigenous peoples to promote,
protect and nurture (p. 231) Indigenous cultures and is central to ensure the
sustainability of the notion of Indigenous self.
The maintaining of Indigenous cultures is dependent on the intergenerational
transmission of knowledges. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 2006)
explicates that,
youth and the young have a special place and responsibility in the struggle to
nurture and protect Indigenous cultures. It is to them that truth and wisdom
is bequeathed. When Indigenous youth and the young are separated from
their cultural base and communities, Indigenous cultures and peoples are
threatened with cultural extinction (p. 233).
With the emerging notions of culture, the sharing of Indigenous knowledges from
Elders as knowledge keepers to Indigenous youth today are also transforming.
Again, the Coolangatta Statement implicitly highlights the detrimental effects of past
policy and reform and how the historical, political, cultural and social contextual
factors continue to influence the maintaining of Indigenous cultures. It refers to
these practices as a means of “cultural genocide” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 233). The
notion of cultural genocide used here is discursively confronting and seeks to address
286 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
power relations and the hegemonic positioning of the coloniser. The countering
discourses of reaffirming Indigenous cultures is explored in the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015).
Representations of culture in the Strategy
In this section, I explore how culture is represented in the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015). The intricacies and synergies of Indigenous cultures discussed within
the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) are simplified within the
Strategy. That is, the explicit recognition of Indigenous epistemologies, ontologies
and axiologies are omitted within the discourse. Terms of reference to culture within
the Strategy are abstract and lack substance; falling prey to syntagmatic bonds
(Hodge, 2017) and listing, further removing the referential meaning and depreciating
the epistemological, ontological and axiological frameworks that inform the notion
of Indigenous self.
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) refers to ‘culture’ or ‘cultures’ a total
of 11 times. In most instances, culture is syntagmatically bound to ‘histories’ or
‘identity’; or listing: “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s histories, values,
languages and cultures” (p. 3, p. 5). The interconnectivity between culture and
history emulates the governmental body, ACARA’s cross-curriculum priority within
the Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2015b). The reference to culture and identity
eludes to the notion of Indigenous self but is superficial in nature.
The only singular reference to ‘cultures’ is found within the acknowledgement;
the first paragraph of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). It states,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are the first Australians with the
oldest continuing cultures in human history (p. ii).
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 287
As mentioned previously, the implicit historical and political discourses within this
declarative statement counters the racist dominant ideologies maintained in colonial
Australia where cultural genocide was encouraged (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
Instead, the lack of the capital F when referring to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples as First Australians but moreover, the use of the little f representing
place and order allows for all Australians to inclusively share in the accolades
afforded to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
The use of expressive modality is evident. This is illustrated through several
discoursal elements of this declarative statement. Firstly, no definition of culture is
provided. The authors assume that there is already a shared understanding of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures by the reader; that the understanding of
the oldest continuing cultures in human history (p. ii) is common knowledge. Such
discursive practices position the authors as ‘knowers’ establishing power and
authority. In turn, the declarative statement establishes the validity and
trustworthiness of the authors’ claims.
Furthermore, there is a lack of a citation verifying this claim further illustrating
the taken for granted assumption as well as the assumed position of superiority by
Education Council. Embedded within the Strategy’s principles is the principle of
Quality in which it states, “policies, practices, programs and partnerships are
inclusive of the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, young people
and their families, and are informed by knowledge, evidence and research”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 3 [emphasis added]). The irony of how the Strategy
calls for policies to be informed by evidence but in practice that evidence is not
provided presents a notion of arrogance. In other words, do as we say, not as we do.
288 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
The political agenda becomes the precursor when evaluating and making
policy rather than evidence. Banks (2009) explains, “policy decisions will typically
be influenced by much more than objective evidence, or rational analysis. Values,
interests, personalities, timing, circumstance and happenstance — in short,
democracy — determine what actually happens” (p. 4). While Banks is specifically
referring to the Performance component of the policy cycle (see Figure 2.3), where
evaluation and moderation of policy occurs, there is opportunity for those values,
interests, personalities, timing, circumstance and happenstance to influence policy
production, interpretation, recontextualisation and implementation as well due to the
People (human) factor. For societal transformation that positions the educational
attainment of Indigenous students as a top priority, the motivations, knowledge and
understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, identities, histories,
cultures and languages of non-Indigenous peoples needs to be addressed. The
following section explores the complexities and tensions when translating and
recontextualising policy. Focus is placed on the priority area, Culture and Identity.
Culture and identity
Essentially, our cultures inform and are formed by our identities as Indigenous
peoples and are components of the notion of Indigenous self. The means in which
both of these elements inform the other also assists in forming a collocational affinity
or syntagmatic bond (Hodge, 2017). Further to this, Culture and Identity is one of
the priority areas of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). In this section,
exploration of the collocation of culture and identity and how it addresses political
agendas is considered. Explication of the hidden discourses where assumptions are
made about current societal conditions as well as the knowledge and understanding
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, histories and cultures held by the
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 289
RAINY DAYS
Rainy days where the skies are grey and bleak
Draw the strength out of you; They make you weak
Blinded by a haze of fog, I find myself wanting - I seek
A space – a space for me to speak.
As I sail this research ocean, I find myself wondering,
Thinking, contemplating and considering
These societal labels used to categorise,
To put people in boxes; feeding them lies.
Giving the illusion that it’s not about race,
That it’s not about maintaining power; Saving face!
You can’t simply define what makes me – me,
It is my culture, my family,
My lived experiences form just part of my identity.
It’s not set in stone, it changes consistently.
The more I read, the further I grow
The more I learn, the more I know
My perception of me differs to yours
Hidden behind the external mask, you do not see the inner wars
The times I wish to return to the safety of the shores
To fight against the current. Where are those oars?
But I always, always continue to fight
Not dwelling too long on my plight
Always finding something to ignite
My need to continue; a reason to write,
A reason to question; to bring this adventure to a wrap.
As I sail this ocean, I contemplate the map
And I become even more aware of the gap,
And always find myself in this identity trap.
Do I need to define myself to you?
Does it really matter if I do?
Your opinions, your assumptions are already made
Whatever I say is inconsequential, I am afraid.
But I continue this route to make you think
In the belief that one day, we will be in sync.
290 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
non-Indigenous populous that blindly disregards the historical, political, cultural and
social contextual factors occurs.
The Vision Statement of the Strategy and its discourses of imaginaries
envisage a future where “all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young
people […] are supported to embrace their culture and identity as Australia’s First
Nations peoples” (Education Council, 2015, p. 2). Not stated but hidden within the
discourses is the implicit denial of Indigenous self-determination. That is, while
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ cultural rights are encouraged; their
rights to self-determination, through the use of the phrase are supported, are
diminished. The assumption that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are in
need of support from non-Indigenous peoples to embrace their culture and identity
(p. 2) is condescending in nature and once again, maintains the hegemonic position
of the coloniser.
The tone of the statement further minimises the Indigeneity of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students. While the statement is a discourse of imaginaries
and speaks of a utopian future whereby the notion of Indigenous peoples acquiring
equitable outcomes in Australian society is fulfilled, it denies the past reforms and
policies that sought to ‘breed out’ Indigenous peoples; to remove connection to
Country and to assimilate youth into Western society. Instead, it positions
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as victims of oppression from an
unnamed oppressor and whose Indigeneity needs promotion and motivation by the
coloniser to be enacted.
As stated previously, Culture and Identity has also been identified as a priority
area within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The priority area aligns with the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures cross-curriculum priority
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 291
(ACARA, 2015b) and Focus Areas 1.4 and 2.4 of the National Professional
Standards for Teachers (AITSL, 2014b). In doing so, it illustrates the intertextuality
and incremental properties of policies but also highlights the political agenda and
how they are seeking to address international human rights charters such as Article
11 of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples [UNDRIP]
(United Nations General Assembly, 2008).
However, as Malezer (2013) reports, government agencies state that “the
International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination
and the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (and therefore the rights of
Indigenous peoples) are aspirational, and have no legal effect in Australia” (p. 77).
As a result, an assumption would be that such rhetoric is simply that – political
rhetoric – with no to little motivation to encourage change. Fairclough (2001c) and
his framework for Critical Discourse Analysis [CDA] warns analysts to consider and
identify whether those advantaged by current societal conditions would indeed like to
see change.
The Culture and Identity priority area is contextualised and foregrounded
within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) stating,
through the delivery of the Australian Curriculum, education sectors
acknowledge, respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and cultures
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
All Australian children and young people have the opportunity to learn about
the histories and cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (p.
5).
The interconnections with the Australian Curriculum are made explicit here
(ACARA, 2015b). However, the overriding assumptions that education sectors are
292 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
able to acknowledge, respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and cultures
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people[s] (p. 5) is further affirmation of the
‘blinders’ that policymakers wear. Policymakers ignore the detrimental effects of the
past on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and assume that non-
Indigenous educators know and understand Indigenous histories and cultures despite
the blatant absence of Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing in the education
system prior to the late 1960s and the privileging of Western knowledges (Beresford,
et al., 2012; Cadzow, 2007; Hickling‐Hudson & Ahlquist, 2003).
For educators and education systems to aptly engage with Indigenous
knowledges, histories, values, languages and cultures, there is need for a dramatic
transformation within the dominant psyche and social conditions. The Australian
Directions in Indigenous Education (MCEETYA, 2006) stated that,
most non-Indigenous educators have limited understanding of, and
qualifications in, Indigenous education. Similarly, […] many in the
Indigenous community have limited understanding of [W]estern educational
systems of schooling and restricted views of their own Indigenous
educational process and the linguistic code-switching required to move
successfully between the two educational genres. Deeper understanding of
both cultures requires specialised exposure to informal and structured
articulated and accredited training (p. 21).
MCEETYA calls for a two-way exchange of knowledge and understanding. That is,
Indigenous peoples need to learn about the benefits and changes that have occurred
in education in contemporary Australia and non-Indigenous educators and
stakeholders need to gain an understanding and ability to competently embed
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 293
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures within the teaching and
learning but also, consider Indigenous learners in their pedagogical approaches.
While universities and their initial teacher education programmes begin to
incorporate Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives, histories and cultures
within their degrees, the knowledge and understanding as well as the professional
development offerings for teachers and educators already in the field is not
monitored, assessed or considered (Universities Australia, 2017). As Banks (2009)
states,
without evidence, policy makers must fall back on intuition, ideology, or
conventional wisdom — or, at best, theory alone. And many policy decisions
have indeed been made in those ways. But the resulting policies can go
seriously astray, given the complexities and interdependencies in our society
and economy, and the unpredictability of people’s reactions to change (p. 4).
Here, the importance of ‘common knowledge’ and a shared understanding is made
explicit. The need to convey the intentions, purpose and benefits of the policy and
why addressing the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples is necessary with all involved in the education of primary and secondary
Indigenous students to reduce the resistance to change. However, it is also important
to note that Indigenous knowledges, ways of knowing, being and doing are not learnt
through osmosis but require concerted effort by policymakers and those who
implement policy.
Within the contextualisation of Culture and Identity, a syntagmatic bond is
evident. The collocational affinity of histories, values, languages and cultures (p.5)
is also evident in the Cultural Recognition principle, whereby it states,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s histories, values,
294 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
languages and cultures are acknowledged and respected (Education
Council, 2015, p. 3 [emphasis added]).
The syntagmatic bond aligns with the notion of Indigenous self. However, the listing
removes the referential meaning. In turn, it omits the nuances of the notion of
Indigenous self – the right to be Indigenous, the connection to Country, the right to
self-determination as articulated in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006). The finite differences and intricacies of Indigenous epistemologies,
ontologies and axiologies are simplified. Further exploration of this syntagmatic
bond occurs in Chapter 8 when focusing on pedagogy. While the synergy of culture
and identity has been identified within this section; in the following section, focus is
placed specifically on identity and the perseverance of Indigenous peoples to ensure
the survival of our Indigeneity despite past policy and reform.
Identity: Encompassing the notion of Indigenous self
In this section, analysis of identity as it is represented in the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
occurs. It is important to note that due to the syntagmatic bonds discussed in the
Culture section, in this section, focus is placed on identity explicitly. The importance
of ‘common’ knowledge and shared understanding to counter and address
stereotypes, biases and taken for granted assumptions is discussed. Further
exemplification of how identity is not a separate entity for Indigenous peoples but
moreover, from a holistic perspective, encompasses cultures, languages, spirituality,
connection to Country and kinship occurs.
The omitted: defining identity
Neither the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) nor the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015) defines identity. Within the Coolangatta
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 295
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), reference is made to cultural identity as
opposed to identity. While the Coolangatta Statement provides further
contextualisation by articulating the interconnectivity of the various tenets that
holistically informs the notion of Indigenous self, the Strategy (Education Council,
2015) merely refers to identity as the syntagmatic bond – Culture and Identity,
minimising the importance of identity.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) only refers to identity
explicitly, once. Identity constitutes the third principle whereby “Indigenous peoples
have strong feelings and thoughts about landforms, the very basis of their cultural
identity. Land gives life to language and culture” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235
[emphasis added]). Strongly aligned with the right to be Indigenous and the right to
self-determination, the third principle provides insight to the importance of language,
connection to Country, connection to community and kinship, spirituality and self-
determination in forming and informing identity.
The linkages between identity and language are made explicit. The
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) highlights how the
dissemination of culture is through language. The authors conclude that,
“Indigenous education, as a medium for both personal development and intellectual
empowerment, is critical for the continuance and celebration of Indigenous cultures”
(Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 236). In other words, self-determination and education are
essential for the transmission of Indigenous knowledges, cultures and values.
Education provides opportunity to transform social structures and practices and
redistribute relations of power is questioned. However, education is not posited to
encourage social change or to address social inequities but instead, to maintain
296 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
existing social structures (Mills & Gale, 2010; Taylor, Knight, Henry, & Lingard,
2006).
A metaphor is evident. The second declarative sentence where land gives life
to language and culture (p. 235) insinuates the land is a mother to Indigenous
peoples and the tenets of Indigeneity. The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
2006) uses repetition to further explicate the parent-child metaphor stating,
the sense of connectedness and belonging to Mother Earth is similar to the
special bonds that unite parent and child. As a child’s hopes and securities,
aspirations and comforts are fundamental to its relationships with its parents,
so too are Indigenous peoples’ hopes and securities, aspirations and comforts
fundamental in their relationship to Mother Earth (p. 234)
Here, the authors of the Coolangatta Statement assert that to achieve self-
determination, the right to be Indigenous needs to be recognised and acknowledged.
Furthermore, the connection to Country, a sense of belonging and the notion of
identity, is informed by and informs the right to self-determination.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) emphasises the
importance of the parent-child relationship between Indigenous peoples and land in
forming and informing identity. It states,
non-Indigenous peoples and their representative governments must accept
this parent relationship with Mother Earth that characterizes Indigenous
cultures. This relationship enables Indigenous peoples to negotiate, use and
maintain the land, and to build and rebuild the social structures needed for
cultural survival (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 234).
Here, the urgency for recognition; for the coloniser to acknowledge the ‘dark past’
where Indigeneity and connection to Country was denied, is explicit.
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 297
I
Don’t
Ever
Need
To
Identify
To
You
Is it the arrogance of the colonised? Or is it the pride of the Indigenous?
The Indigenous means of introductions is to locate myself, to identify my
people and where I belong. The coloniser’s sense of identity is in name only.
At the beginning of this study, I shared an intimate and personal story to
position myself within the research. I acknowledged my people, my Country,
those who have supported me throughout this study. At the very front of the
thesis is my name. The thesis, the study – has become a reflection of me.
When I interact with non-Indigenous peoples, I make a conscious decision
each time I engage as to whether I identify as an Aboriginal woman. I
analyse my relationship with the people involved and ask: Is it a culturally
safe space? Will I have to justify my Indigeneity? Will my identity be
298 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
Furthermore, relational modality is evident. Not only is the relationship of
Indigenous peoples and Mother Earth (p. 234) illustrated but the contentious
relationship between the coloniser and Indigenous peoples is proffered. The notion
where non-Indigenous peoples and their representative governments must accept this
parent relationship (p. 234) exemplifies a deontic obligation. The use of the modal
verb must further acts to epistemically validate the obligation but also, the confidence
of the authors in how the action of accepting the relationship will enable Indigenous
peoples to negotiate, use and maintain the land, and to build and rebuild the social
structures needed for cultural survival (p. 234).
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) identifies how
Indigenous identities and cultural survival (p. 234) was threatened by the actions of
the coloniser in past policies and reforms. In particular, the authors focus on the
practice of removing Indigenous children from their families (see, for example:
Hasluck, 1950; Hasluck, 1961) and the intergenerational trauma experienced today
as a result (Atkinson, 2013). The effects of historical, political, cultural and social
contexts on the contemporary formations of the notion of Indigenous self become
apparent.
The Strategy refers to identity five times. Reference to the priority area,
Culture and Identity, totals three times and are titles only. The other two references
to identity are where the syntagmatic bond of culture and identity is used. These
examples were discussed in the previous section.
As a result, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is somewhat contradictory
in nature. Its’ Purpose statement asserts that,
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 299
the [S]trategy sets out the commitment of education ministers to the
education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people
by:
»» utilising the [S]trategy’s principles and priority areas to inform the
development and implementation of both local and systemic-level actions
(Education Council, 2015, p. 3).
However, the failure to provide a definition reduces the ability for educators to have
a shared language and provides opportunity for stereotypes, biases and taken for
granted assumptions about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and in
particular, students to be maintained. Furthermore, interpretation and
recontextualisation is dependent on the individual rather than a shared ideology.
Deontic modality is evident. Within this statement, the desirability of
education ministers to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students is illustrated through the use of modal verb phrase, sets out
the commitment (p. 3). However, with the inconvenience of providing adequate
contextualisation, the opportunity to utilise the strategy’s principles and priority
areas to inform the development and implementation of both local and systemic-level
actions (p. 3) is reliant on the commitment of other stakeholders involved in the
education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. There is an assumption
that the Strategy and education ministers have established a common understanding
with educators and education systems. In turn, the privileging of the colonisers’
voices and values as opposed to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is
apparent.
As a result, the complexities of identity are ignored. Identities are not stagnant
and change in accordance to social activities, practices and interactions (Fairclough,
300 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
2003, 2015). Identities are informed by social orders and social structures formed
and informed by our perceived positionalities and identities and is defined by others.
Therefore, identities are abstract. They cannot be reduced to social identities; they
also involve the personal and the cultural. They can be individual or a collective
(Turner, Oakes, Haslam, & McGarty, 7-10 May, 1992).
The problem of identity in education
As discussed in the Peoples section of this Chapter, Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander representation in schools and executive administration levels is
limited. Governmental consultation with Indigenous peoples in policy making
processes is minimal. Therefore, the notion of identity or cultural identity is subject
to non-Indigenous peoples determining what it means to be Indigenous. Teachers,
administrators and education systems may all have different interpretations of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander identities based on stereotypes, biases and
taken for granted assumptions.
As Fairclough (2003) states, people are
pre-positioned in how they participate in social events and texts, they are
also social agents who do things, create things, change things […] But it is
also problematic because it fails to recognize the importance of our
embodied, practical engagement with the world, which begins before
children even learn languages (p. 160).
Here, Fairclough highlights how the embodied further establishes our identity. As a
result, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ identity is racialized through
the colour of their skin (Ladson-Billings, 1998). In other words, we “are born into
and initially have no choice about – peasantry or gentry, working-class or middle-
class, male or female”, Indigenous or non-Indigenous – the binaries used to illustrate
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 301
difference, establish power relations and determine positioning in society
(Fairclough, 2003, p. 160). However, while these attributes of self are pre-
determined, “there is no definitive way to specify “who we are” (Handler, 1994, p.
30).
McLennan and Khavarpour (2004) assert that, “the relationships within the
community and the sense of belonging to the community [act as] the basis of
Aboriginal identity”. Despite the loss of Indigenous languages (Walsh, 1993),
Indigenous peoples have “maintain[ed] their distinct identity using the language of
their oppressors” (Crowley, 1993, p. 67). Resistance through the enactment and
continuous practice of traditional ways such as Welcome to Country ceremonies,
publishing of Dreaming stories, artistic avenues such as painting and music ensures
the survival of our cultural identity (Poroch, et al., 2009).
However, the practice of making Indigenous practices relevant in
contemporary Australian society is contentious. There have been numerous debates
and opinions shared within media discourses in regards to contemporary adaptations
of traditional Indigenous practices including the questioning of the validity of those
practices. O’Brien and Hall (March 17, 2010), non-Indigenous journalists, argued
that Ernie Dingo performed the first Welcome to Country in the mid-1970s. Bolt
(April 22, 2016), another non-Indigenous journalist, questions the notion of Smoking
ceremonies scoffing at Elders’ remuneration rates.
The rejection by non-Indigenous peoples of Indigenous cultural practices
further exemplifies the lack of understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
ways of knowing, being and doing. The challenging of Indigenous cultural practices
denies our Indigeneity but also acts to define our cultural identity. Much like the
302 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
histories of Indigenous peoples being told through the lens of the coloniser, examples
of our Indigeneity being defined by the coloniser occurs (Smith, 1999).
As Alfred (2017, October 13) states, “we are still living in a relationship
framed in colonial terms; the language we use today has changed over the years, but
the perspective is still straight out of the seventeenth century” (p. para. 3). Here, the
hegemonic position assumed by the coloniser and the perceived inferiority of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, knowledges and cultures is identified.
The illustration of power relations and the tensions at the cultural interface becomes
apparent. Through the exploration of identity, explication of the denial of self-
determination manifests.
Countering these hegemonic discourses, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 2006) highlights the limitations of the international human rights charters arguing
how they omit “the most fundamental human right of Indigenous peoples – the right
to be Indigenous” (p. 234). The authors argue it is not just the ability to determine
who is Indigenous but also, encompasses the ability to determine what it means to be
Indigenous. Determining our identities – as a collective, individually, socially or
culturally, is our right – whatever that may be.
Chapter Summary
In conclusion, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) focuses
on the importance of Indigenous self through the reclamation, revitalisation and
survival of the tenets of Indigeneity. It highlights the intricacies and
interconnectivities of Indigenous knowledges, values, cultures, languages,
spirituality, customs and traditions. The Coolangatta Statement places responsibility
for the survival of Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing through education
Chapter 7: Indigenous self 303
championing the right to be Indigenous and the right to self-determination as found
within international human rights charters.
In contrast, the Strategy’s production marginalises Indigenous voices and
homogenises Indigenous peoples (Education Council, 2015). The historical,
political, cultural and social contextual factors of colonial Australia continue to
influence the values, biases and taken for granted assumptions held and maintained
by the coloniser. Rather than focusing on human rights, the Strategy addresses the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and
secondary students by centring on cultural rights diminishing the right to self-
determination and privileging Western values and standards (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006).
The dominance of the coloniser within policy production and policy
recontextualisation and implementation in the Western education systems for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students ensures that
Western values, biases and taken for granted assumptions are maintained and
privileged when addressing the notion of Indigenous self. The tenets of Indigeneity
inclusive of culture and identity are also subject to the interpretation of the dominant
coloniser with a lack of definitions provided. In turn, Indigenous agency is
diminished.
Discursive trickery within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is utilised to
give the illusion that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are included
within its production. Furthermore, expressive and relational modality is utilised to
establish trustworthiness or authority further establishing the hegemonic position of
the coloniser in contrast to Indigenous peoples. Hidden within the rhetoric, the
coloniser is positioned as passive but yet, is dominant in all facets of Indigenous
304 Chapter 7: Indigenous self
education policymaking. Unlike the Coolangatta Statement that seeks self-
determination and the privileging of Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing in
all aspects of education for Indigenous students, the Strategy minimises and ignores
the detrimental effects of past policies and reforms. Instead, the discourses of
imaginaries silence the social conditions of policy production and interpretation
minimising the relations of power and tensions at the cultural interface.
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 305
Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The waves are breaking around me. The shore is within reach and
yet, I recognise that this is the most dangerous part of the voyage. I
want to return to the safety of the continuous roll out on the open
oceans. I know that space, I know what to do. Here, is where I
recognise that I am almost finished. Here, is where I really struggle
with the inner demons.
While being on the ocean of research, I have felt safe and sheltered
against the lens of others. I have become cocooned in my own space.
While snippets of my findings, my thought processes and my analysis
of the conditions have been shared – soon, I must present and share
with all the finite details of this voyage with others. All my fears of
inadequacies are returning as I look onto the beach ahead.
I must draw on all that I have learnt. I must look to the skies and
draw on the knowledge of my ancestors. I must read and re-read the
letters of encouragement from my family and friends to find the
motivation to finish.
I look beyond the sandy shores and see where I want to be. I am
longing for the feel of the dirt between my toes. To run across the
dusty plains knowing I have come full circle. And yet, I still must get
to shore.
306 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 307
In this chapter, focus is placed on the provision of education to and for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students. The values,
both implicit and explicit, within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) and the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are explored. The action or
inaction of government to address the rights of Indigenous peoples is investigated. I
explore how the Strategy guides schools and education systems by encouraging the
formation of shared values and understandings about current educational attainments
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.
Values
In the previous chapter, exploration of the positioning and representation of
stakeholders involved in the production and interpretation of the Strategy occurred
(Education Council, 2015). The dominant position of the coloniser was made
explicit to demonstrate the discontinuities of Indigenous agency. In turn, the
marginalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice to encourage the
inclusion of Indigenous knowledges, values, beliefs and attitudes within the
education provision for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling was brought to the forefront (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
To investigate the axiologies or values maintained within texts, there is a need
for processes similar to backward mapping. Within this section, the explicit use of
the term, values, in both the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) and
the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are explored. This is to provide
foregrounding to the implicit values shared in the texts to create a ‘common’
understanding and shared ideology with targeted audiences. Backward referencing
to the role and position of peoples involved in the education of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander primary and secondary school-aged students, the values and attitudes
308 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
prevalent in regards to culture and identity occurs. The findings in the previous
chapter therefore act as the foundational basis when investigating the values,
ideologies, beliefs and attitudes evident in the Strategy through the lens of the
Coolangatta Statement.
Values in the Coolangatta Statement
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) refers to values eight
times in total. It does not delay in positioning readers and making explicit the
axiological properties that inform its production. The second paragraph’s initial
sentence asserts that “the need for such an instrument is self-evident” (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 229). The purposive causal relations are made explicit with the use of the
assertive adjectival phrase, self-evident. Epistemic modality further validates the
need for such an instrument. The declarative statement legitimises its position within
a moral evaluation of the historical, political, cultural and social context.
The legitimation is affirmed with the use of the verb, is, illustrating epistemic
modality (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229). That is, the authors assert their confidence
in the truth of the statement (Lillian, 2008). As a result, the audience is instantly
positioned to reflect on the ‘why’? How is the need self-evident? A taken for
granted assumption is evident. The assumption is that the reader is already
positioned and knowledgeable about the history of Indigenous peoples and the
narrative of colonisation (Smith, 1999). That is, the reader is an ally. On the other
hand, if the reader was resistant, such a statement would require reflexivity to
ascertain their positioning.
The audience is required to draw on their members’ resources; the
interdiscursive processes whereby the lived experiences, ideologies, values, beliefs,
attitudes and knowledges form and inform our interpretation and recontextualisation
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 309
of social activities, practices and interactions (Fairclough, 2001b). Key here is the
means in which values and therefore, shared ideologies, act to inform our actions. As
Gee (2011) states “when speakers speak they assume that listeners share enough
knowledge, beliefs, values, and experiences with them to be able to situate the
meanings of their words” (p. 41). Therefore, values are hidden within discourses.
Values inform and form the social activities. They act as the basis on which social
actors form their biases, stereotypes and taken for granted assumptions.
Values and the right to access in education
Within Western education systems and colonial Australia, as a whole, colonial
values position Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as inferior (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006). As Yunkaporta and Shillingsworth (2016) assert, “the core business
of the academy remains hegemonic knowledge and practice” (p. para. 4). Indigenous
values privilege Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing. That is, the
complexities, intricacies and interconnectivity between Indigenous ways of knowing,
being and doing are formed and informed by implicit Indigenous axiologies, or ways
of valuing.
The first reference to values in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) can be found within the global overview. Ironically, it is about the
privileging of non-Indigenous values within Indigenous education. It states,
historically, Indigenous peoples have insisted upon the right of access to
education. Invariably the nature, and consequently the outcome, of this
education has been constructed through and measured by non-Indigenous
standards, values and philosophies. Ultimately the purpose of this education
has been to assimilate Indigenous peoples into non-Indigenous cultures and
societies (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231).
310 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The historically-embedded assimilatory properties of education that Morgan, et al.,
refers to illustrate the hegemonic position of the coloniser. The provision of
education within the Western education system privileges Western standards, values
and philosophies. Hidden within the discourses is the apparent de-valuing of
Indigenous knowledges, values and philosophies within the Eurocentric system.
Deontic modality is evident. While the relational modality is not traditionally
the relationship between physical bodies, it is metaphorically indicative of the
relationship between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous education systems that
represent the hegemonic position assumed by the coloniser. The Coolangatta
Statement authors argue that the right of access to education (p. 231) that Indigenous
peoples have fought to gain is “often interpreted to read that Indigenous peoples only
want access to non-Indigenous education” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231). Here, the
authors highlight how discourses of human rights are often misinterpreted and
recontextualised to ‘fit’ a political agenda; one that denies Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples’ right to self-determination.
As the Coolangatta Statement’s authors purport, the dominant position
assumed by the coloniser is legitimised through the belief maintained that “the core
of Indigenous cultural values, standards and wisdom is abandoned or withering in the
wilderness of Indigenous societies” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231). Through this
interpretation, Indigenous cultural values, standards and wisdom (p. 231) is
considered to be ‘dying out’; much like the social Darwinism ideologies held in
colonial Australia about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Attwood &
Markus, 1999, 2007; Francis, 1996; Reynolds, 1989, 1996, 2006). Further to this,
the declarative statement illustrates the assumption that Indigenous students would
abandon their cultural heritage for the coloniser’s way of life (Dodson, 1996).
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 311
Therefore, the Coolangatta Statement identifies how within Eurocentric education
systems, Western values are privileged and Indigenous axiologies are de-valued.
An adjectival phrase is evident. Here, Indigenous and cultural describe the
values, standards and wisdom being discussed (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231).
Repetition is also identified. Reference to Indigenous cultural values is made twice
in the sub-division, 1.3.2 in Indigenous Education: a global overview. The
duplication of Indigenous cultural values (p. 231) is used to provoke an emotional
response from the target audience.
The authors of the Coolangatta Statement assert that Indigenous peoples’ right
to self-determination provides opportunity “to establish schools and other learning
facilities that recognize, respect and promote Indigenous values, philosophies and
ideologies” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 234). Through this interpretation, enactment of
self-determination in education is exemplified. The omission of cultural (p. 231)
within the adjectival phrase here positions Indigenous values as holistic as alluded to
in Table 6.1.
Values in the Strategy
Alternatively, the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) only refers to values
twice. The initial reference is found within the Cultural Recognition principle. The
second reference is located within the Culture and Identity priority area where a
syntagmatic bond becomes apparent. As discussed in Chapter 7, a syntagmatic bond
is evident whereby the grouping of histories, values, languages and cultures occurs
(Hodge, 2017).
Cultural recognition and values
The Cultural recognition principle, the fourth principle of the Strategy, focuses
on acknowledging and respecting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander histories,
312 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
values, languages and cultures (Education Council, 2015). The repetition of the
syntagmatic bond is evident in the Culture and Identity priority area. It states that
through the delivery of the Australian Curriculum, education sectors
acknowledge, respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and
cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (Education Council,
2015, p. 5 [emphasis added]).
Here, the incremental and intertextual properties of policy are made evident. The
link between the Strategy and the Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2015b) is made
explicit. An elaboration of the cross-curriculum priority, Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander histories and cultures (ACARA, 2015a), is provided whereby
Indigenous values and languages are also included within the syntagmatic bond.
While Culture and Identity is a priority area in the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015), it was not a domain, as priority areas were referred to in the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 [Action
Plan] (MCEECDYA, 2011b). However, it was implicit that the inclusion of culture
and identity was necessary within Indigenous education through the engagement
with parents and community. The evaluation of the Action Plan found that “while a
strong acknowledgment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures is critical to
creating a welcoming school environment that encourages students to attend and
engage, the influence of the Action Plan in explicitly promoting cultural recognition
was limited” (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. viii). The inclusion of Culture and
Identity within the Strategy makes explicit the importance being placed on the notion
of Indigenous self and therefore, illustrates a shift of the values informing the policy.
Values, much like culture and identity, is abstract. The values shared and
illustrated within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are implicit and act to form
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 313
shared understandings and ideologies. The acknowledgement, discussed in Chapter
7, establishes the uniqueness of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The
Vision Statement provides the discourses of imaginaries and the potential futures for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students in education.
The principles and priority areas outline the means in which the educational
attainment of Indigenous students is to be addressed. Together, the very elements
and sections of the Strategy indicate the commitments and therefore, the values
shared by the authors to improving and actively closing the ‘gap’ between Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students and their non-Indigenous counterparts.
Relationships: Value as a verb
The use of value as a verb has been used in the Strategy once (Education
Council, 2015). In doing so, it illustrates the importance of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander values being represented and respected within education. The use of
the term, value, is present in the Relationships principle, the fifth principle in the
Strategy (Education Council, 2015), which complements the Cultural Recognition
principle. It states that “meaningful relationships value community cultural
knowledge, wisdom and expertise, and demonstrate trust and respect” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 3).
Epistemic modality is evident. Here, the authors are making a prediction;
indicating that if meaningful relationships (p. 3) are created and maintained that trust
and respect (p. 3) will be an outcome. Further to this, the assertion expresses the
authors “confidence in the truth of the proposition” (Lillian, 2008, p. 3).
Relational modality has also been used. Due to Education Council’s position
of authority, the desirability of meaningful relationships (p. 3) being created and
maintained is stated by the authors (Education Council, 2015). The mediated quasi-
314 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
interactional properties of the Strategy distances the authors and the targeted
audience which further establishes a notion of permission being granted to readers to
act as well as a notion of obligation to act (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999). In
other words, the commitments established within the Relationships principle, to
value community cultural knowledge, wisdom and expertise, and demonstrate trust
and respect (p. 3) becomes an instruction rather than a guide.
Implicit values
The assumed superior position of Education Council is further established
when the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) asserts,
Education ministers agree that the following principles should underpin the
approach taken by all education systems and providers to achieve the
[S]trategy’s vision (p. 3).
The principles within the Strategy implicitly indicate the shared ideological
approaches necessary to achieve the [S]trategy’s vision (p. 3). The purposive causal
relation of each declarative statement articulates the potential contributions of each
principle if they are built into the recontextualisation of policy.
A euphemistic expression has been used to further establish the position of
authority. Rather than referring to Education Council as the institutional
organisation, the authors have referred to education ministers (p. 3) which although
still a collective anonymous group, humanises the entity (Education Council, 2015).
As discussed in Chapter 7, Education Council comprises of the National, State and
Territory Education Ministers of Australia as well as the New Zealand Education
Minister.
The humanising of Education Council illustrates the use of relational modality;
to establish the hegemonic position of education ministers in relation to all education
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 315
systems and providers (p. 3). In turn, the deontic modalities of permission,
obligation and desirability are evident. The relationship between discourse and
society becomes apparent.
The deontic modality of permission and obligation is illustrated whereby all
education systems and providers are informed that education ministers agree that the
following principles should underpin the approach (p. 3). The use of the modal verb
should (p. 3) exemplifies the obligation of the reader. Should is not as assertive as
‘must’ and therefore, indicates suggestion or recommendation which also indicates
desirability and the permission for the readers to act on the proposition. However,
the hegemonic position of education ministers and their decision regarding what is
necessary to achieve the [S]trategy’s vision (p. 3) has already been determined in this
mediated quasi-interaction and therefore, silences all education systems and
providers.
The collective reference to education ministers as the people who have
determined what should underpin the approach (p. 3) also indicates the silencing and
marginalisation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ voices and values
in addressing the educational attainment of Indigenous students in primary and
secondary education. As discussed in Chapter 7, the only education minister named
in the Strategy is Kate Jones who is a White female (Education Council, 2015).
Further investigation of the other Education ministers in both Australia and New
Zealand brings to the forefront that they are all non-Indigenous (see, for example:
Department of Education and Training, 2016; EDUCATION.govt.nz, 2017;
Parliament of Australia, 2017). As argued in the previous section regarding the
Coolangatta Statement, the coloniser is afforded a position of power that ensures the
316 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
privileging of non-Indigenous “standards, values and philosophies” (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 231).
Values in the principles: the social conditions of production and
interpretation
The eight principles are all represented as a sub-heading with an elaboration; a
declarative statement explaining the desired outcome of how each principle can be
actioned. The fourth and fifth principles, Cultural recognition and Relationships
have been discussed in the previous section. In this section, focus is placed on the
other six principles: Achieve potential; Equity; Accountability; Partnerships; Local
Approaches; and, Quality.
Achieve potential
The first principle, Achieve potential, aligns with the Vision Statement
(Education Council, 2015). It states,
»» Achieve potential: High expectations are held for, and by, Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander children and young people (Education Council,
2015, p. 3).
The Strategy’s Vision statement asserts that “all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
children and young people achieve their full learning potential, …” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 2). Repetition and recontextualisation of the terms ‘achieve’ and
‘potential’ seeks to build the shared ideology and values that Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students are not currently achieving their full potential. The deficit
discourses ensure that Indigenous students’ educational attainment is in need of
assistance. Much like the sentiments shared in Chapter 2 where individual
educational achievements of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students were
dismissed (Brooks & Kohen, 1991; as cited in Cadzow, 2007; Price, 2012a), the
historically-embedded ideologies and colonial discourses of inferiority are
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 317
maintained through the homogenisation of Indigenous students’ educational
attainment as a deficit (Smith, 1999).
Emphasis is placed on the prepositional phrase: for, and by (p. 3). The
unnamed peoples who are to hold high expectations for Indigenous students in the
declarative statement removes responsibility of non-Indigenous peoples for current
social conditions that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary
students experience. Countering the colonial discourses, the Coolangatta Statement
highlights the assumption held by the coloniser that Indigenous students, parents and
community value Western education and therefore, wish to excel in Western
education systems (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). That is, the coloniser assumes high
expectations are [to be] held […] by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children
and young people (p. 3). Links to the ideological notion of self-empowerment are
evident (Sanders, 2002). The notion of self-empowerment rejects assertions made in
the Coolangatta Statement that the ‘failures’ perceived are the rejection of Western
systems, standards and ideologies by Indigenous peoples.
Equity
The second principle, Equity, in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) aligns
with the right to access education discussed in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006). It states,
»» Equity: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people
are able to access the same educational opportunities and achieve the same
education outcomes as other Australians (Education Council, 2015, p. 3)
Here, Western education systems, standards, values and ideologies are privileged.
The discourses of imaginaries envisage a future where Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children and young people are able to access the same educational
318 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
opportunities […] as other Australians (p. 3). Assertions made in the Coolangatta
Statement that Indigenous peoples “have been denied equity in non-Indigenous
education systems” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229) are therefore validated.
Again, the minimisation of past policy and reforms on current social conditions
by omission of non-Indigenous peoples within the declarative statement removes the
colonisers’ role and responsibility. As discussed in Chapter 7, reference to the
coloniser as other Australians (p. 3) develops a binary construct differentiating
Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples whilst being inclusive of other minority
groups. The binary construct which isolates Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples from other Australians further establishes power relations evident in
Australia.
The elaboration of the Equity principle also brings to the forefront how non-
Indigenous peoples are positioned as Other within its discourses (Education Council,
2015). As highlighted in Chapter 7, the MATSITI project (AEEYSOC, National
Teaching Workforce Dataset, & MATSITI, 2014) demonstrates how the teaching
workforce in Australia is predominantly non-Indigenous and yet, in the Strategy,
they are referred to as other Australians. Furthermore, the MATSITI Final report
identifies the lack of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander educators in positions of
authority within schools to be actively involved in the recontextualisation and
implementation of policy (Johnson, et al., 2016). The purpose of positioning non-
Indigenous as Other seems redundant as the power to act as an agent of change is
predominantly occupied by the coloniser.
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 319
Accountability
The third principle, Accountability, in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
aligns with the Performance element of the policy cycle as indicated in Figure 2.3
(Hardee, et al., 2004). It states,
»» Accountability: Education systems and educators are accountable,
transparent and responsive (Education Council, 2015, p. 3).
The reporting, monitoring and evaluation processes within the policy cycle are to
ensure schools and systems are accountable and transparent. As discussed in
Chapter 2, the moderation and evaluation process is predominantly aimed at
determining how schools and systems have used funding and to assist in influencing
future funding models (Hardee, et al., 2004).
The interconnectivity and complexities of moderation, evaluation and funding
with outcomes and targets becomes apparent when considering the Federal financial
framework (Rorris et al., 2011). Introduced in 2008 and ratified by COAG, its
intention was to “enhance accountability through a stronger focus on the outcomes
and targets to be achieved, monitored through regular performance reporting”
(Rorris, et al., 2011, p. 26). However, Rorris, et al., warn that the increase in the base
amount for each individual student was flawed as a model as there would be no
accountability for allocating funding specifically for disadvantaged students and that
“transparency may be compromised” (Rorris, et al., 2011, p. 5). Through this
interpretation, the discourses of imaginaries shared in the Equity principle where
education systems and educators are accountable, transparent and responsive (p. 3)
speak more to target setting, much like the goals set within the National Indigenous
Reform Agreement (Council of Australian Governments, 2008), and funding rather
320 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
than strategies or initiatives to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students.
Partnerships
While the interrelationships between the Partnerships principle and the
Partnerships priority area of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) are apparent; in
this section, focus is placed on the principle only. Analysis of the priority areas are
provided in the Pedagogy section. Closely affiliated with the fourth principle,
Cultural recognition and the fifth principle, Relationships; the sixth principle of the
Strategy, Partnerships, further contextualises the imagined roles of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples in education. The Partnerships principle seeks
Indigenous peoples being “engaged in decision making, planning, delivery and
evaluation of early childhood, schooling and higher education services at local,
sector and national levels” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). That is, there is an
expectation that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are involved in
schools, education systems and within governmental policymaking processes.
As discussed in Chapter 7, the representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples in decision making processes at a national level is minimal. Both
the Redfern Statement (National Congress of Australia's First Peoples, 2016) and the
Uluru Statement (Referendum Council, 2017) call for the inclusion of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples in Indigenous education decision making (p. 3) and
policymaking. The Redfern Statement specifically highlights the lack of Indigenous
representation in education at the national level. The Uluru Statement advocates for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voice and “constitutional reforms to empower
our people [to] take a rightful place in our country [, emphasising that] when we
have power over our destiny our children will flourish” (Referendum Council, 2017,
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 321
p. 1). Advocating for the right to self-determination, both texts propose means in
which Indigenous voice can be privileged at a national level.
However, the recent rejection of the Uluru Statement challenges the
commitment of government to engage Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
in decision making, planning, delivery and evaluation […] at […] national levels (p.
3) (Conifer, Brennan, Higgins, Crothers, & Wellington, 2017; Turnbull, 2017).
Despite the extensive consultation process and the collective voice of Indigenous
peoples found in the production of the Uluru Statement (Referendum Council, 2017),
their voices have been silenced by government. Rather, the privileging of political
agendas and Western values occurs.
Despite the lack of role modelling at a national level, the Partnership principle
encourages those at a local level or in other words, schools, to engage with
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The data regarding the teaching
workforce compiled by the MATSITI project (AEEYSOC, et al., 2014) illustrates
the underrepresentation of Indigenous principals and/or deputy principals as well as
educators positioned to engage in the decision making, planning, delivery and
evaluation (p. 3) of the education provision for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
primary and secondary school-aged students. There is an extreme ‘gap’ evident
between current social conditions and the imagined futures proffered in the
Partnerships principle.
There is also evidence of the assumption held by the coloniser that Indigenous
peoples value and wish to engage in Western educational systems, standards and
ideologies. Furthermore, there is a presupposition that, “individuals, families and
organisations of a community have the capacity and inclination to seek solutions to
problems, take advantage of opportunities and enter into effective partnerships with
322 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
governments [, systems and schools]. However, not all Indigenous communities
have that capacity” (Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Affairs, 2001, p. 53). In other words, in addition to addressing the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and secondary students,
there is a need to build capacity when building partnerships and relationships with
Indigenous parents and community. The rejection by government of the Uluru
Statement that had been supported by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
sets up a precedence whereby consultation is encouraged but those voices can be
silenced, suggestions ignored and people dismissed (Turnbull, 2017).
Local Approaches
Building on the Partnerships principle, the seventh principle – Local
approaches asserts that, “educational outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander children and young people are accelerated through local approaches for
unique and diverse communities” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). Here, focus is
placed at the local level with the acknowledgement of the differences within and
between each individual context. That is, schools have been given autonomy to
tailor their approaches when addressing the educational attainment of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students.
Despite the valuing of the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples, knowledges and cultures being evident in the discourses of imaginaries, the
final evaluation of the Action Plan found that “many schools identified that local
actions often required additional time and expertise [, were] resource intensive, [and]
requir[ing] deep collaboration between classroom teachers, students and their
parents/communities” (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. 31). The findings, whereby
the process engaging with community is considered labour-intensive by educators
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 323
where adjectives like additional and intensive are used to describe their experiences,
further illustrates how Indigenous education is still considered ‘bolted on’ rather than
‘built in’ the core business of schools (MCEETYA, 2006).
Quality
The eighth and final principle, Quality, elaborates on the principle of
Accountability. That is,
policies, practices, programs and partnerships are inclusive of the needs of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, young people and their
families, and are informed by knowledge, evidence and research (Education
Council, 2015, p. 3).
Yet, the Strategy provides no references to any evidence or research informing its
production. Therefore, an assumption is made that the hegemonic position assumed
by Education Council as the authority and ‘knower’ on addressing the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling removes their responsibility of demonstrating how their policies
are informed by knowledge, evidence and research (p. 3).
There is also alignment to the seventh principle, Partnerships, whereby
policies, practices, programs and partnerships are [to be] inclusive of the needs of
(p. 3) Indigenous peoples. As discussed in Chapter 7 and in the social conditions of
production and interpretation of the Partnerships principle, Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander voices are silenced. That is, the lack of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples in positions to influence decision making, planning, delivery and
evaluation causes barriers that must be addressed to ensure that the needs of
Indigenous students, parents and communities are included in the production of
policies, practices, programs and partnerships. The discourses of imaginaries and
324 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
the interconnectivities between the principles illustrate how each of the principles
needs to be addressed simultaneously “to achieve the [S]trategy’s vision” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 3). In other words, the potential futures of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students are dependent on the actions of governments, systems and
schools. Exploration of Actions follows.
Actions
In the previous section, the complexities and tensions at the cultural interface
were explored. The conflicting perceptions of social structures and social practices
of the coloniser’s assumed superiority is maintained through the denial of the
historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors that impact and influence
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ educational attainment. The
privileging of Indigenous axiologies and ways of knowing, being and doing within
Indigenous education found in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006) challenged the legitimization of Western standards, values and philosophies
within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). In turn, the relations of power and
the influence of the hidden colonial discourses maintain a deficit lens on the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander primary and
secondary students. The stark contrasts in values further illustrate the privileging of
non-Indigenous voices in the Strategy.
In this section, the actions that are deemed necessary to be implemented to
address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander are
examined. The implicit actions within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) are explored. As a result, the axiological properties of actions are
considered. Within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015), focus is placed on the
national collaborative actions outlined to further support the implementation and
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 325
At a standstill
It has been two weeks since there has been a breeze. My motivations are
at an all-time low and the knowledge winds have all but dropped to a
random gust. The overwhelming pattern of the motion of the ocean of
research has almost lulled me to sleep. I needed to refocus - to find some
inspiration.
A welcomed ‘stop over’ within a Higher Degree Research student
conference; surrounding myself with the knowledge winds of others;
feeding off their energy and motivations, acknowledging that I am not
alone on this ocean worked to revitalise my soul.
As I enter this last leg of the adventure, a new wind has come along.
Knowing that land is in sight and with a renewed air of confidence, I am
watching the horizon and seeing the end of this initial romp on the ocean
of research. The urgency to continue and to reach my end point has
revived my motivations.
326 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
recontextualisation of the principles and priority areas at a local level. The relations
of power and control Federal government is assuming in Indigenous education is
discussed.
The need for action
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) speaks back to the
deficit discourses within the corpus countering the hegemonic position assumed by
the coloniser in Indigenous education. It provides statements with elaborations
necessary to transform the dominant ideologies held and maintained by the
colonisers. In doing so, it brings to the forefront the inaction of the coloniser to
appropriately address international human rights charters in regards to the rights of
Indigenous peoples in education.
The initial reference to action, or more appropriately inaction, in the
Coolangatta Statement is in regards to Western education systems and their failure to
“provide educational services that nurture the whole Indigenous person inclusive of
scholarship, culture and spirituality” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 229). Here, the
collective Indigenous voice in the Coolangatta Statement accuses the coloniser of
failing to provide adequate education for Indigenous students. The resistant
discourses seek a holistic approach to the educational provision for Indigenous
students. In turn, the actions of past policy and reform where Indigenous peoples
were denied access to education are brought to the forefront.
The arrogance of the coloniser withholding and ignoring Indigenous peoples’
human rights is further explicated within the Coolangatta Statement highlighting
their inaction (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). Building on the previous example, the
authors argue that “the freedom to enjoy and indeed celebrate [human] rights has
been, and continues to be, denied and obstructed for Indigenous peoples throughout
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 327
the world” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 230). That is, while the articulation of human
rights has been well-documented within international human rights charters and
conventions (see, for example: United Nations General Assembly, 1948, 2008;
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, 1966), the
influential properties of the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors
on sustaining dominant ideologies, stereotypes and taken for granted assumptions
about Indigenous peoples maintains a deficit view. The barriers enabled by societal
and institutional constructs, reproduced through discourses, are used to maintain the
hegemonic position of the coloniser over the colonised; all of these act to deny and
obstruct Indigenous peoples from the freedom to enjoy and indeed celebrate these
rights (p. 230).
Speaking back to deficit discourses
The sentiments of Indigenous peoples speaking back to the deficit discourses,
recognising and voicing their discontentment of how Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples and knowledges are marginalised and silenced by Western
educational systems further illustrates the collective Indigenous voice in the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The defunding of Aboriginal
Student Support and Parent Awareness [ASSPA] in 2004 (Kerwin & Van Issum,
2013) and the Indigenous Education Consultative Bodies [IECBs] in late 2014
(Reconciliation Australia, 2015) and as discussed, the recent rejection of the Uluru
Statement at a national level (Turnbull, 2017), act to marginalise Indigenous voice
within education. As Kerwin and Van Issum (2013) state, these actions devalue
community initiatives and voice while policy rhetoric calls for engagement and
participation. The contradictions and conflicting messages further alienate
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples from the schooling environment but
328 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
also, places questions on the value of the contributions of Indigenous peoples by the
coloniser. In turn, the social structures and social practices are maintained with
government control.
Incremental actions in the Strategy
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) refers explicitly to actions 20 times.
The initial reference is found within the letter from Jones, where she states,
Ministers are keen for the strategy to build on the actions underway in
pursuing COAG’s Closing the Gap targets and the evaluation of the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014
(Education Council, 2015, p. 1 [emphasis added]).
Here, the incremental and intertextual properties of the Strategy are made apparent.
That is, the Strategy build[s] on the actions of the NIRA (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008) and the report on the implementation of the Action Plan (Acil
Allen Consulting, 2014). While the focus in this section is on actions, the cognitive
agility of readers to comprehend the intricacies within the Strategy is investigated to
provide exemplification of the shared understandings necessary to recontextualise
and implement the actions prescribed.
The declarative sentence has many assumptions evident. Firstly, the authors
have made a presupposition that readers are aware of the intertextuality and the texts
mentioned. Secondly, the readers know about the actions underway in pursuing […]
the […] targets (p. 1). That is, the actions are not listed and there is an assumption
that readers know the targets of the NIRA. Finally, there is an assumption that
readers are aware of the recommendations and findings of the Final Evaluation
Report regarding the implementation of the Action Plan (Acil Allen Consulting,
2014).
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 329
The varying textual elements used within this declarative statement requires
readers to have an understanding of not only the texts but the institutional constructs
and how they interact and inform one another. The use of the term, Ministers (p. 1),
as a collective noun, de-personifies and removes individual responsibility. Lack of
reference to the type of ministers, which is being referred to, leaves readers to make
their own assumptions.
The use of a possessive apostrophe indicates that the Closing the Gap targets
belong to COAG (p. 1). In turn, this removes responsibility of the Closing the Gap
targets from the Education Council but also, indicates that the Strategy is
complementing its initiatives (Education Council, 2015). Again, the use of COAG
de-personifies and as an abbreviation of the Council of Australian Governments,
further removes the ‘human’ element replacing it with an institutional reference. It is
also important to note that the euphemistic expression, Closing the Gap, is used
when referring to the targets set within NIRA.
With the minimal representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples in education, the socio-cognitive knowledges necessary further minimise the
ability of Indigenous peoples to be actively engaged in “decision making, planning,
delivery and evaluation” (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). Given the historical,
political, cultural and social contexts discussed in previous sections and chapters, the
required knowledges and understandings of institutional and societal constructs
active in Indigenous education minimises the number of Indigenous peoples who are
capable to interpret the actions and/or strategies being proposed. That is, the lack of
engagement, either due to past reforms and policies that excluded Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples from the education environment and more recently
330 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
within the corpus, the resistant discourses against the assimilatory practices of
Western education systems, limitations of Indigenous voice becomes apparent.
Collaborative actions or government control?
The complexities and tensions within education, as a whole, are made explicit
within this section. As discussed in Chapter 2, the growing power of Federal
government in education as opposed to States is contentious. One component of the
Purpose statement asserts that, education ministers are committed to
»» identifying areas where collaborative action between or across
governments, in consultation with the non-government sector, is required to
complement local efforts (Education Council, 2015, p. 3).
In this section, focus is placed on the collaborative actions developed to complement
local efforts. The omission of State and Territories, the education systems, is
noteworthy.
Further to this, the relations of power are made evident through the select
national actions, explicated in the following section, which are supported through
specific Federal funding models (Australian Government, 2016). The ‘strangle-hold’
Federal government is assuming within Indigenous education is further explicated
when they affirm that,
systems that receive additional funding for disadvantage in areas such
as Indigenous, low English proficiency, disability and low SES will be
required to show how this money will be used to improve outcomes for the
targeted group of students.[…] We will require states and territories to
meet attendance targets, including specific targets for Indigenous
students to ensure students attend school to benefit from teaching and
learning (Australian Government, 2016, p. 12 [original emphasis]).
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 331
The intertextuality of policy, the funding models, accountability and transparency, all
act to control the measures and actions that are implemented in Indigenous
education. The use of the modality verb, will, partnered with the verb, require,
indicates obligation. Relations of power are evident whereby schools are held
accountable to show how this money will be used (p. 12). Therefore, the actions
implemented to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students in primary and secondary schooling illustrate the policy cycle (see
Figure 2.3) but omitted from the cycle is the accountability of all to government; the
hidden discourses of government control.
Discursive elements of actions
The values and actions articulated in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015),
focused on government initiatives, are used to establish power, authority and
trustworthiness. Within this section, Priorities for National Collaboration and the
final section of the Strategy, Strategy implementation and reporting, the
responsibilities at a national level are made explicit. In particular, the varying reports
necessary to inform future actions to be produced by senior officials in collaboration
with other governmental bodies are listed and elaborated on.
The Priorities for National Collaboration and the Strategy implementation and
reporting sections consume 3 of the 12 pages of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015). This is of particular importance as the percentage of focus on national actions
in comparison to the focus and guidance provided to schools and systems to address
the educational outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students is
disproportionate and illustrates the top-down approach of the Strategy. Further to
this, the fixation on governmental actions and responsibilities and lack of focus on
providing schools and systems with elaborations and guidance on how to address the
332 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
priority areas illustrates some of the weaknesses within the Strategy as a policy that
maintains Indigenous education as ‘bolted on’ rather than ‘built in’ (MCEETYA,
2006).
Table 8.1 illustrates how the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) is broken
down and how little information is provided to schools and systems. The Final
Evaluation of the Action Plan reported that, the 55 actions documented were
considered
to be overly prescriptive, serving to direct activity to areas that may not have
been most needed, with little regard for local circumstances. Some school
sectors considered that universally imposed requirements only achieved
responses for the sake of compliance rather than to meet a genuine local
need (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. 25).
In the Strategy, rather than actions, only elaborations of the Principles and Priority
Areas are given to legitimise its purpose. The lack of any actions necessitated for
schools and systems to implement in the Strategy is vexing as no shared
understanding is established.
There is an assumption that action will occur despite consistent reports and
reviews indicating implementation of strategies and processes in Indigenous
education is often plagued with tokenistic or minimal application (see, for example:
Acil Allen Consulting, 2014; David Unaipon College of Indigenous Education and
Research, 2009; MCEETYA, 2006). Also, the notion that Indigenous education is
seen as additional to the ‘common practice’ of educators, schools and systems limits
action; despite the Review of Australian Directions in Indigenous Education 2005-
2008 calling for “Indigenous education [to be] ‘built in’ to core business, so that
responsibility for improving outcomes is shared
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 333
Table 8.1 The textual components of the Strategy: Section titles, descriptions and audience
Page no. Section title Description of content Purpose of content Specific intended
audience
Page i Cover page/Title of policy
Page ii Acknowledgement of
Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples
Contextualisation and foregrounding of
Indigenous education and policy to establish
purpose of Strategy
Page 1 Preface Letter from Kate Jones
Page 2 Vision / Context
for development
Synopsis of Indigenous
education policy
Page 3 Purpose /
Principles
Articulation of purpose
for the production of
Strategy and principles
that underpin actions
Page 4-5 Priority areas +
elaborations
Introduction of priority
areas and elaborations of
terms
Priority areas to inform
schooling and systems
approaches to address
Indigenous students
educational outcomes
Local and systemic
level
Page 6-7 Priorities for
National
Collaboration
Elaborations of
responsibilities of
national government
bodies
Processes of policy
evaluation and
monitoring of
implementation –
Governmental bodies
National level
Page 8 Strategy
implementation
and reporting
Evaluation and reporting
Page 9 Image of Indigenous student
Page 10 Back page
334 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
by all stakeholders” (David Unaipon College of Indigenous Education and Research,
2009, p. 19). Accountability in Indigenous education is subject to funding provided
by government; priorities are controlled by government.
The National Collaborative Actions
The Strategy identifies five collaborative actions “to help engage children and
young people, raise standards and ensure meaningful pathways beyond school for
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6). The
national collaborative actions are inclusive of Attendance and Engagement,
Transition points including pathways to post-school options, Early Childhood
transitions, Workforce and Australian Curriculum. Two of these actions are aligned
to the NIRA targets, being - Attendance and Engagement, and Transition points
including pathways to post-school options, “as requested by the Council of
Australian Governments [COAG]” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6). The use of the
phrase, as requested by, indicates the hegemonic position of COAG in relation to
Education Council. It also illustrates the power that COAG has in the production of
the Strategy; Education Council is obligated to include these two actions.
The National Collaborative Actions outline the varying governmental bodies
(People), their responsibilities and positioning to one another (see Figure 4.2), and
the reporting and evaluation required (Process and Performance) (Hardee, et al.,
2004). Exemplification of the processes of policy production is found throughout the
Priorities for National Collaboration section of the Strategy (Education Council,
2015). Focus is placed on Attendance and Engagement due to it being the textually
largest collaborative action and its interconnectivity to other Indigenous policy
already referred to throughout this study. Furthermore, as the authors assert,
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 335
“engaging with learning is critical to students achieving their individual potential”
(Education Council, 2015, p. 6).
It is interesting to note the assertion that engaging with learning is critical to
students achieving their individual potential (p. 6). In the predecessor to the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015), the Action Plan stated that, “attending school and
engaging with learning is fundamentally important in helping young Australians to
acquire the skills they need for life” (MCEECDYA, 2011b, p. 16). The omission of
attending school and simply, engaging with learning, sees a shift in rhetoric.
Instead, as evident in the following declarative statements, focus is placed on
attendance data sets to evaluate engagement. That is,
the Education Council will work collaboratively through senior officials to
further the work on school attendance already agreed through COAG.
In particular:
»» analyse new attendance data available in late 2015 disaggregated by
Indigenous and non-Indigenous status
»» provide advice by end 2016, building on previous initiatives including
work on transience and mobility (Education Council, 2015, p. 6).
As engagement is difficult to measure (SCRGSP, 2016), attendance data is
prioritised illustrating the privileging of Western standards and measures (Morgan, et
al., 1999, 2006). The complexity in measuring engagement is further explicated by
the 2016 Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage report whereby, “merely being
present did not mean that a student was engaged in school, and conversely,
absenteeism did not mean that a student was not engaged” (SCRGSP, 2016, p. 7.10).
Both relational and expressive modality becomes evident. The hierarchical
relationship between COAG, Education Council, and senior officials is explicated
336 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
within the discourse (Education Council, 2015). That is, Education Council and
senior officials are obligated to further the work on school attendance (p. 6) targets
set by COAG. The hegemonic position of Education Council in relation to senior
officials is less explicit. The use of the modality verb, will, indicates both the
commitment of Education Council to work collaboratively through senior officials
but also, the desirability and permission for senior officials; as discussed in Chapter
7, it is assumed senior officials is a euphemistic expression for AESOC, to analyse
new attendance data [and] provide advice within a specified time. That is, the
actions being prescribed, the production of reports on attendance and initiatives
including work on transience and mobility, were to be completed by end 2016. The
reports were then to be presented to Education Council to “further inform and refine
policy responses” (Education Council, 2015, p. 6).
The other four national collaborative actions elaborated on in the Strategy are
similar in format (Education Council, 2015). Early Childhood transitions and
Australian Curriculum have a brief elaboration justifying the purpose or reason for
the action. All four actions are populated with the reporting required by varying
government bodies such as senior officials, AITSL and ACARA to Education
Council.
Relations of power, the privileging of Western “standards, values and
philosophies” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231) and the increasing control of Federal
government within education including Indigenous education are illustrated through
the explicit and implicit actions provided in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015).
The collaborative actions focus on the activities of governmental bodies producing
further reports and reviews from datasets to inform future policy. The extensive
pagination afforded to governmental actions within the Strategy further illustrates the
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 337
assumed hegemonic position of government as ‘knowers’ further silencing
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education. Exploration of the
continuing control of government in Indigenous education through pedagogy and
curriculum follows.
Pedagogy
Pedagogy determines how teachers think and act. Pedagogy affects
students’ lives and expectations. Pedagogy is the framework for discussions
about teaching and the process by which we do our jobs as teachers.
Pedagogy is a body of knowledge that defines us as professionals. Pedagogy
is a belief that all children can learn and that it is the duty of the adult to
participate in that growth and development. Pedagogy is a definition of
culture and a means to transmit that culture to the next generation
(Anderson, 2005, p. 53).
Anderson highlights that pedagogy, much like the numerous themes used within this
study, is complex and difficult to define. The fourth principle of the Coolangatta
Statement begins by providing a definition of pedagogy (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
It states, “pedagogy is the interrelationship between learning styles and teaching
methods” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235). Legitimation and elaboration is offered to
contextualise the simplistic definition. Within Indigenous education, the authors
explain, there is a need for a holistic approach where teachers are facilitators of
learning. The role and relationship between the teacher and student is considered.
In this section, the intricacies of pedagogy are investigated. Interconnectivity
between each of the principles and pedagogy is made explicit. The ambiguity of
policy discourses and the importance of a shared understanding considered. The
338 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
intertextuality and incremental properties of policy are presented. Exploration of
Indigenous pedagogical principles follows.
Indigenous pedagogical approaches
The Coolangatta Statement bases its production within international human
rights charters and conventions advocating for education for Indigenous peoples;
founded in their rights to access and to determine the types of education systems and
provision accessed by their children (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The privileging of
Indigenous rights in education extends to the inclusion of Indigenous pedagogical
approaches being embedded within the teaching and learning. That is, the education
being provided reflects the values, beliefs and knowledges of Indigenous peoples.
The homogenisation of Indigenous peoples by the coloniser is addressed in the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). It states that, while “there are
pedagogical principles shared by all Indigenous peoples, […] there are also those that
are characteristic to the specific cultures, languages, environment and circumstances
of Indigenous peoples across the world” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235). Here, the
complexities, diversity and uniqueness of Indigenous peoples as well as recognition
of the shared Indigenous tenets are made explicit. Teachers, whether Indigenous or
non-Indigenous, need to be aware of these differences; to look to transform the
means in which they present knowledge and decolonise classrooms (Battiste, 2002).
Epistemic modality is evident. The use of the assertion, there are (p. 235),
indicates confidence in the proposition that there are some shared pedagogical
practices and others that are specific to individual groups (Morgan, et al., 1999,
2006). The diversity highlights the importance for educators, systems and
governments to become aware of the finite intricacies of the notion of Indigenous
self when providing Indigenous education.
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 339
Elaborations of Indigenous pedagogical approaches are provided. The
Coolangatta Statement states that,
Indigenous pedagogical principles are holistic, connected, valid, cultural,
valuebased, thematic and experiential. They promote and reward cooperative
learning and the unified co-operation of learner and teacher in a single
educational enterprise. They describe who teaches, as well as, how and when
teaching occurs (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 235).
Here, learning as a collaborative approach whereby the teacher is a facilitator of
learning becomes evident. As discussed in Chapter 2, the teaching and learning is
dependent on the skills, knowledge, and so forth being identified within learners
prior to progressing in learning (Price, 2012b).
However, as indicated in previous sections, the education being provided to
Indigenous peoples within Western systems is immersed in Western knowledges and
measured by Western standards (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). Illustration of the
privileging of Western knowledges within education is provided by Battiste (2002)
when she asserts,
Western or modern education focuses on a cultural construction of
knowledge built on Eurocentric origins and concrete science. Educational
philosophy in contemporary education has focused on information to the
masses, leading to standardised tests that draw out this information and those
who can extract information are called educated and intelligent (p. 16).
As discussed in Chapter 7, Battiste highlights the tensions between Indigenous and
Western knowledges. The contrasting Western notion of teaching and learning is
discussed later when focusing on the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The role
340 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education is further contentious when
considering their dominant role in all aspects of education.
The role of non-Indigenous in Indigenous education
Aligning to the pedagogical approaches being articulated within the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) is the final principle which
further articulates the right to self-determination. It states,
Indigenous peoples at the local level must determine how and to what degree
non- Indigenous peoples are involved in Indigenous education. Once this
role is determined it is the responsibility of non-Indigenous peoples to
respect and adhere to the wishes of the local community (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 235).
The modal verb, must, implies obligation but also, validity in the declarative
statement. That is, that within the rights of Indigenous peoples in education is their
right to self-determination; to be the active voice in Indigenous issues and affairs and
that the role of non-Indigenous peoples is to be determined by Indigenous peoples.
However, as discussed in Chapter 7, the representation of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples in positions of authority in the Australian educational context
is limited ensuring that Western voices and values are privileged. Therefore, in an
Australian context, policies and international human rights charters and conventions,
are reliant on the interactions and interpretations of the coloniser.
Recognition and reflection by the coloniser on their attitudes, beliefs and
understandings of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, histories, cultures,
knowledges and languages is necessary. As Battiste (2002) warns, “if Indigenous
knowledge and pedagogy are to be integrated effectively into the […] curricula,
educators must be made aware of the existing interpretative monopoly of Eurocentric
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 341
education and learn how the fundamental political processes of [the coloniser] have
been laced with racism” (p. 10). Therefore, non-Indigenous educators and
stakeholders in Indigenous education need to recognise the dominant ideologies
maintained within social structures and social practices and acknowledge the
prevalence of colonial discourses still evident in today’s societal context; essentially
becoming aware of their Whiteness and the privilege they hold from birth. They
need to accept their positioning and reconcile their assumptions prior to and when
embedding Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy.
The affirmative discourses within the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006) privilege the rights of Indigenous peoples in education to speak back to
the dominance of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education. The act of
speaking back is made evident when the authors state it is the responsibility of non-
Indigenous peoples to respect and adhere to the wishes of the local community (p.
235). The assertive use of the verbs, respect and adhere, in conjunction with the
phrase, it is the responsibility of non-Indigenous peoples, acts to remove the
dominance of the coloniser. The relations of power are usurped by the collective
voice of the Coolangatta Statement asserting Indigenous peoples in a position of
power and authority supported and encapsulated in the notion of self-determination
found within international human rights charters and conventions.
Elaboration further legitimising the advocacy for Indigenous peoples [being
able to] determine how and to what degree non-Indigenous peoples are involved in
Indigenous education (p. 235), is provided by building the binary. The authors assert
that, “non-Indigenous peoples come from a different cultural background” and
therefore, their role in Indigenous education should be minimised (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 236). The discourses of imaginaries become apparent when considering the
342 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
realities of minimising the role of non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education.
As discussed in the Actions section, governmental control and the silencing of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Indigenous education requires an
increase in capacity as well as representation for the increased role of Indigenous
peoples in Indigenous education to be populated and achieved.
The accountability of non-Indigenous peoples to respect and adhere to the
wishes of the local community (p. 235) is further legitimised in the elaborations of the
fifth principle in the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). Implicit
within the discourses is the rights of Indigenous peoples in education as explicated
within the international human rights charters and conventions. As a result, the
authors of the Coolangatta Statement assert that, “the various levels of government
and bureaucracy have an over-riding responsibility to accept and uphold the
educational rights of Indigenous peoples and to know that these rights and freedoms
are non-negotiable” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 236). The use of the phrase,
government and bureaucracy have an over-riding responsibility, indicates both
deontic and epistemic modality. The validity in the declarative statement is
established through the affirmation that these rights and freedoms are non-
negotiable. The obligation of government and bureaucracy is made explicit.
The Coolangatta Statement concludes by acknowledging the strength and
resilience of Indigenous peoples stating that, “perhaps more than any other feat,
survival is the greatest of all Indigenous peoples’ achievements” (Morgan, et al.,
2006, p. 236). Recognition of the tenacity of Indigenous peoples to maintain and
practice languages, cultures and knowledges despite the detrimental effects of past
policies and reforms and to continue to fight for the right to self-determination is
offered. That is, through the actioning of Indigenous knowledges, cultures and
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 343
Pedagogical approaches
In my past life, I was a teacher. Teaching has been my life. I have never left
school since entering in 1980. I have been in a classroom since I was 5
years of age.
I have observed and experienced the shifts and changes in education over
almost 3 decades.
The power of the classroom teacher, the means in which they conveyed
teaching and learning, the scaffolding, the curriculum, the support and the
strategies to encourage engagement. Mr Smith was that teacher who drew
in all the students. He was innovative and creative, and as I became a
classroom teacher, he was what I wanted to be.
He taught me that it was more than what you taught. It was more than
how you presented the teaching and learning. Teaching was a craft; it was
a vocation. You needed passion and have a love of learning. You needed to
be willing to take risks and review and reflect when it didn’t work. Be
humble and admit when you didn’t have the answer and yet, celebrate the
wins.
All children can achieve. You need to transform your thinking; disregard the
stereotypes and be the role model of how learning is a lifelong process.
344 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
languages; by highlighting the lived experiences of Indigenous peoples in the public
sphere within Indigenous education; the notion of Indigenous self should inform
Indigenous education. In the following section, exploration of the pedagogical
approaches to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander primary and secondary students in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
occurs.
The priority areas and pedagogy
In this section, the pedagogical approaches described in the Strategy are
investigated. Focus is placed on the priority areas and their elaborations. That is,
drawing on Anderson’s definitions of pedagogy (2005), the interconnectivity and
synergies of the priority areas to address the educational attainment of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary schooling are explored.
The intertextual and incremental properties of policy are considered. The implicit
barriers and challenges faced by education stakeholders are discussed.
Initiatives and Outcomes
The priority areas are divided into two distinct categories: Initiatives and
Outcomes. Visual representation of these categories is provided in Table 8.2. The
first three priority areas are Leadership, Quality teaching and Workforce
development; Culture and Identity; and, Partnerships. These priority areas are seen
to “assist in advancing outcomes in the [other] four priority areas” (Education
Council, 2015, p. 4) – School and Child Readiness; Literacy and Numeracy;
Attendance; and, Transition points including pathways to postschool options. All
seven priority areas inform and form schools’ and systems’ pedagogical approaches
when addressing the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
primary and secondary students. Analysis of the Strategy’s priority areas begins with
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 345
an investigation of the first priority area, Leadership Quality teaching and Workforce
development.
Table 8.2 The categorisation of the Strategy’s priority areas
Initiatives Outcomes
Leadership, Quality teaching and
Workforce development
Culture and Identity
Partnerships
School and Child readiness
Literacy and Numeracy
Attendance
Transition points including
pathways to postschool options
Leadership, Quality Teaching and Workforce Development
The first priority area in the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) focuses on the
role of Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples in Indigenous education. It states,
action is taken to ensure children and young people are taught by skilled
educators who are culturally competent in the local context. Providers,
including principals, set high expectations for learning that incorporates
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives (Education Council, 2015,
p. 5).
The lack of reference to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young
people specifically within this priority area removes the subject of the Strategy from
the context. Instead, the focus is placed on skilled educators who are culturally
competent in the local context. Given the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors discussed in Chapter 2, the capacity of educators to be culturally
competent in the local context is indeed an example of discourses of imaginaries.
346 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The discussions in previous sections and chapters whereby the disengagement, and
more pointedly, the marginalisation and lack of representation of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples within education; the historical indifference towards
Indigenous peoples, knowledges, cultures, histories and languages; the embedded
racism within dominant ideologies and the continuance of colonial discourses, social
structures and social practices; all counter the possibilities of educators becoming
culturally competent in the local context.
Pedagogically, the principle states that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
perspectives (p. 5) are to be embedded within the teaching and learning. The
reference to perspectives rather than histories and cultures specifically is discursively
interesting. The term perspectives is abstract. The Department of Education and
Training (2011) purports that, “it is important for us to acknowledge and respect each
others’ perspectives – our ways of seeing the world – and to find that place where we
can all meet, grow and learn” (p. 9). Here, the tensions and complexities at the
cultural interface are illustrated. Drawing on the notion of perspectives being our
ways of seeing the world, the differences between Western and Indigenous
knowledges and the minimal representation of Indigenous peoples in education
discussed in Chapter 7, the possibility of learning that incorporates Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander perspectives is limited. Indication of the discourses of
imaginaries within the priority areas becomes apparent.
While the previous declarative statement focuses on Leadership and Quality
teaching, the second component of the priority area centres on Workforce
Development. It states,
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 347
further support for the engagement of children, young people and their
families is provided by building a well-qualified Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander education workforce (Education Council, 2015, p. 5).
The omission of a term of reference when referring to the engagement of children,
young people and their families removes the ‘subject’ of the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015).
There is a presupposition that schools can attract and retain Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander staff. That is, there is a stated intention to build a well-
qualified Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education workforce (p. 5).
However, as the Final Evaluation report of the Action Plan found, “many schools
faced difficulties attracting and retaining appropriately qualified staff, including
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people” (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. ix).
The report indicates that the notion to increase the Indigenous workforce is also
hindered by school practices.
The employment cycle within education is not conducive of building a well-
qualified Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education workforce nor skilled
educators who are culturally competent in the local context (p. 5). That is, the
school employment cycle presents a major challenge for this priority area to be
achieved. The report on the Action Plan highlights,
one of the major challenges, particularly in remote schools was the repeat
cycle of teacher turnover every two-to-three years. Inexperienced teachers
often stayed at the school for this period, before seeking to work in different
locations. This limited the potential for teachers to connect with community
members and impacted by the consistency of tuition provided. It also
necessitated repeat involvement by the school in professional development
348 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
of teachers. These challenges were further exacerbated where school
leadership changed (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014, p. 102).
Here, the barriers evident to achieve the intentions of this priority area are brought to
the forefront. Systemic change is therefore necessary.
Culture and Identity
While the priority area, Culture and Identity, was explored in Chapter 7, in this
section, focus is placed on the pedagogical approaches identified within the text. The
second priority area, Culture and Identity, states that,
through the delivery of the Australian Curriculum, education sectors
acknowledge, respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and cultures
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (Education Council, 2015, p.
5).
Pedagogically, the introduction of the Australian Curriculum within Australian
education systems ensured consistency throughout the nation (ACARA, 2015b). The
Australian Curriculum also recognises the importance of embedding Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander histories and cultures within the teaching and learning of all
Australian classrooms with its inclusion as a Cross-Curriculum priority (ACARA,
2015b).
Epistemic modality is evident. The declarative statement asserts the authors’
confidence in the proposition (Education Council, 2015). The authoritative position
of Education Council aligned with the incremental and intertextuality of the
Australian Curriculum to the Strategy further establishes the validity in the
statement. In turn, deontic modality is made apparent. Educators are to
acknowledge, respect and reflect the histories, values, languages and cultures of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (p. 5). In other words, the desirability
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 349
of Education Council for education systems to embed Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander histories and cultures within the curriculum, and the subsequent permission
and obligation to act, is located within this statement.
The second component of the Culture and Identity priority area further
elaborates on Education Council’s desire to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander histories and cultures are incorporated within pedagogical approaches. It
states,
all Australian children and young people have the opportunity to learn about
the histories and cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people
(Education Council, 2015, p. 5).
Legitimation through moral evaluation is evident (Fairclough, 2003). That is, the
holistic approach of ensuring that all Australian children and young people […]
learn about the histories and cultures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people promotes the notion of reconciliation and acts to redress the dominant
ideologies maintained within society.
However, as discussed in Chapter 7, the minimal representation of Indigenous
peoples in education provides a schooling environment whereby the colonisers’
interpretations, understandings, and moreover; assumptions, stereotypes and beliefs
of Indigenous self, histories, values, languages and cultures (p. 5) are privileged.
The coloniser is positioned as the ‘knower’ providing their interpretations of “who is
Indigenous; what it means to be Indigenous; and, how education relates to
Indigenous cultures” (Morgan, et al., 2006, p. 231). In turn, the values and voices of
the coloniser are privileged and therefore, social structures and social practices are
also maintained.
350 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
Partnerships
The third priority area, Partnerships, aligns with the principle of the same name
within the Strategy (Education Council, 2015). The authors assert that,
quality partnerships are encouraged between education sectors and local
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and other stakeholders.
These partnerships are characterised by listening and responding, strong
accountability and active engagement, collaborative information sharing and
informed decision making (Education Council, 2015, p. 5).
However, as discussed in Leadership, Quality teaching and Workforce development,
school practices hinder the partnerships and engagement schools and Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander communities are encouraged to form.
Previously referred to as the domain, Engagement and Connections, in the
Action Plan; schools were to “work in partnership with families and communities
[to] better support the education of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children”,
the priority area now implies that partnerships are obligatory (MCEECDYA, 2011b,
p. 12). That is, quality partnerships are encouraged (p. 5). The use of the term,
quality, rather than ‘genuine’ when describing the expected partnerships is
discursively interesting. Previous policy such as Australian Directions in Indigenous
Education 2005-2008 refers to “genuine partnerships” (MCEETYA, 2006, p. 21) and
so, the reference to quality partnerships is new to the rhetoric. A definition of what
is meant by quality partnerships is not offered; it is the reader’s responsibility to
determine what a quality partnership is.
The intertextual and incremental properties of policy articulate the importance
of partnerships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and education
providers. The Melbourne Declaration articulates how the educational attainment of
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 351
all students is the responsibility of all stakeholders (MCEETYA, 2008). It argues
that, partnerships encourage student engagement and in turn, encourage better
educational outcomes. In regards to Indigenous students’ educational attainment
specifically, the Melbourne Declaration states that, “the development of partnerships
between schools and Indigenous communities, based on cross-cultural respect, is the
main way of achieving highly effective schooling for Indigenous students”
(MCEETYA, 2008, p. 10). Building on the recommendations of the Australian
Directions in Indigenous Education 2005-2008 (MCEETYA, 2006), formalised
partnerships were encouraged in the Action Plan (MCEECDYA, 2011b). However,
as previously discussed, a limited number of schools actively participated in the
implementation of the Action Plan and as a result, few schools produced School-
Community Partnership Agreements (Acil Allen Consulting, 2014).
The second component of the Partnerships priority area provides elaboration
and contextualisation of what these partnerships involve. That is, partnerships
should be inclusive of listening and responding, strong accountability and active
engagement, collaborative information sharing and informed decision making (p. 5).
The sentiments shared are aligned with the recommendations in the Australian
Directions of Indigenous Education 2005-2008 where it states that, partnerships
should include:
arrangements relating to community participation in school governance,
expectations of student attendance and performance, and curriculum focus.
In negotiating these agreements, decisions will be made on how to
incorporate local knowledge, languages, aspirations and job opportunities
into the curriculum; how to improve explicit linkages from school to VET,
352 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
higher education and employment; and what strategies are needed to engage
parents/caregivers and family members (MCEETYA, 2006, p. 21).
Listening and responding can be located within the participation of community in
schools whereby the negotiation of knowledges, languages, histories and cultures
occurs. In doing so, active engagement is necessitated to ensure an environment
where collaborative information sharing is possible. Strong accountability would be
illustrated through informed decision making - an expected outcome of the actions.
Noteworthy, the discourses of imaginaries shared in 2006 are still prevalent in policy
discourses a decade later indicating the lack of progression in addressing the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary
and secondary education.
The assumed interdependencies and synergies between education sectors and
local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and other stakeholders (p.
5) ignores the historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors. The priority
area does not take into consideration the need for change in colonial Australian
values, bias and taken for granted assumptions maintained in dominant ideologies,
social structures and social practices. For partnerships to be effective, the
engagement and representation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in
education needs to be dramatically increased to counter White Privilege and the
positioning of the coloniser as the ‘knower’. The complexities and tensions at the
cultural interface are made explicit. The limited understanding of Indigenous
education by the coloniser and the failures of Western education to explicate the
benefits to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples act as barriers for
partnerships to be formed (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006).
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 353
Attendance
Increased attendance is an expected outcome if the previous initiatives are or
were to be addressed. However, the focus within the priority area, Attendance, is
placed on engagement. The Strategy asserts,
engaging with learning is fundamental in helping all children acquire the
skills they need for life. Schools and services work with families and
communities on strategies to address barriers to school attendance
(Education Council, 2015, p. 5).
The use of the collective pronoun, all, takes the focus from Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander students, the ‘subject’ of the Strategy. Instead, the first declarative
statement is a holistic assertion about the importance of Australian students, as a
whole, engaging with learning but fails to name who is providing the learning.
Notably, attendance is not mentioned in the first declarative statement
(Education Council, 2015). Instead, emphasis is placed on students’ engagement
with learning (p. 5). The notion of engagement versus attendance is contentious. In
the 2011 Evaluation report on the implementation of the Action Plan, the IECBs
argued that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students attendance rates are
relatively high and that, “engagement, rather than attendance, is the crucial factor to
improving student outcomes in school” (SCSEEC, 2012, p. 65). The evaluation
provided by the IECBs was then countered by the then Standing Council on
Education and Early Childhood who argued that, the Action Plan “adapted a multi-
pronged approach” that was inclusive of curriculum, increasing Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander representations within schools, and encouraging teachers to
participate in professional development to address their cultural competencies
(SCSEEC, 2012, p. 66). Again, an explicit reference to attendance was omitted.
354 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The interconnectivity between educational attainment and potential futures are
made explicit. That is, education enables students to acquire the skills they need for
life (p. 5). Alignment to one of the components of Goal 2 of the Melbourne
Declaration where “all young Australians become […] active and informed citizens”
(MCEETYA, 2008, p. 7) is identified. In turn, the incremental properties of policy
are exemplified.
Deontic modality is evident within the second declarative statement. Schools
and services (p. 5) are given permission and obligated to work with families and
communities. The use of the preposition, with, reinforces the recent political rhetoric
adopted since Professor Chris Sarra (2015) implored government to, “do things with
us, not to us” (p. para. 11). However, as discussed in previous sections, the notion of
working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is not readily identified in
governmental actions but moreover, the latter, doing things to us.
Predictability is also evident. The declarative statement builds on the notion of
the Partnerships priority area being enacted so that together; schools, services,
families and communities, identify and develop strategies to address barriers to
school attendance (p. 5). As discussed in the previous section, Federal government
are usurping power within education. The 2016 Closing the Gap report referred to
the support and funding mechanisms introduced by government to assist education
providers at a local level to “identify and address barriers to school attendance
through the Remote School Attendance Strategy, resulting in more children regularly
attending school in remote Indigenous communities” (Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet, 2016, p. 6). The strategies put in motion to support schools
and providers locate government in an authoritative position but also, validate the
possibility of the proposition transpiring.
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 355
According to the 2017 Closing the Gap report, schools and government are
making progress in attendance. The irony is that the data used to illustrate the
‘improvement’ blatantly ignores the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors regarding Indigenous education. The report states,
longer term trends demonstrate that significant progress is being made to
boost the participation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in
school. In 1976 over half of all Indigenous men aged 20-64 had either never
attended school or left school at 14 or younger. By 2011, only 14 per cent of
all Indigenous men had either never attended school or left school at Year 8
or below (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2017, p. 35).
As discussed in Chapter 2, up until the mid-1970s, Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students could be excluded from Western classrooms by the coloniser and so
therefore, the narrative that there has been a significant increase in Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander male attendance is deceptive (Beresford, 2012; Zubrick &
Silburn, 2006). The focus on attendance has linkages to the priority area, Transition
points including pathways to post-school options, focusing on supporting Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students to complete Year 12 and transitioning into further
studies or the workforce. Discussion of Transition points including pathways to
post-school options follows.
Transition points including pathways to post-school options
Supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to gain Year 12
certification or its equivalent is of vital importance to government (MCEETYA,
2006). The Transition points including pathways to post-school options priority area,
from here on referred to as Transition points, seeks to ensure
356 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and young people are
supported at critical stages of their education to improve engagement,
retention and attainment and develop the skills to participate fully in
schooling, society and work (Education Council, 2015, p. 5).
Much like attendance, Transition points builds on one of the targets of NIRA,
namely, the target on “halving the gap for Indigenous people aged 20-24 in Year 12
attainment or equivalent attainment rates by 2020” (Council of Australian
Governments, 2008, p. 8), highlighting the incremental and intertextual properties of
policy.
The critical stages of […] education (p. 5) are not specified within the Strategy
except for post-school options. The explicit reference to Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students’ post-school options implicitly refers to the notion of human capital
and how education provides opportunity to address issues of equity and the barriers
faced by Indigenous students. That is, the potential futures of Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples necessitate “a complex range of activities and measures to
support youth through pathways from compulsory to post-compulsory secondary
education, school to work, school to further or higher education, unemployment to
further education and work, and from within the juvenile justice system”
(MCEETYA, 2006, p. 27). In other words, educators are to support students as they
transition from Year 10 to Year 12 to work or further study. Education’s role is to
create “successful learners, confident and creative individuals, and active and
informed citizens” (MCEETYA, 2008, p. 8), essential for the prosperity of
Australia’s future.
Deontic modality is evident. The readers are given permission to support
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to improve engagement, retention and
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 357
attainment (p. 5). The desirability of the authors is also made explicit within this
statement – to improve. As a result, epistemic modality – predictability – is also
evident. That is, by providing support to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students, their engagement, retention and attainment [will improve] and [therefore,
they will] develop the skills to participate […] in schooling, society and work. The
assumed hegemonic position of the authors as ‘knowers’ is not validated however, as
there is no reference list provided, no citations to indicate how this statement is
informed by evidence. In other words, the authoritative position is based on the
power of government.
To illustrate the progress of previous policy and reform to validate the position
of government, the recent Closing the Gap report indicates that in 2015, the apparent
retention rate of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students to Year 12 was almost
60 per cent (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2017). Legitimisation
was included to further establish the ‘progress’. In particular, the report states that,
the data set is significant improvement to the late 1990s data set where only 33 per
cent of Indigenous students gained a Year 12 or equivalent certification. Prior to the
1989 release of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy [AEP]
(DEET, 1989), the lack of data was made explicit. Furthermore, the data fails to
recognise current trends, as highlighted by the ABS Census data, whereby factors
such as “changes in people’s propensity to identify as being of Aboriginal and/or
Torres Strait Islander origin” have skewed their data (Australian Bureau of Statistics,
2013, p. para. 5). As a result, the narratives omit the historical, political, cultural and
social contextual factors that continue to influence the engagement of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students in education.
358 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
In this priority area, the explicit reference to engagement links to attendance
(Education Council, 2015, p. 5). As discussed previously, there is an assumption that
increased attendance will encourage engagement (SCSEEC, 2012). However, the
inherent valuing of Western education systems is not readily adopted by Indigenous
peoples (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The inclusion of retention in this phrase, acts
to emphasise the obligations of education stakeholders to provide an environment
where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students remain in school and gain Year
12 certification.
The emphasis on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples developing the
skills to participate fully in schooling, society and work (p. 5) continues to pursue the
notion of equity (Field, et al., 2007). However, the inclusion of schooling, society
and work speaks past the scope of education within the classroom setting and
moreover, into life itself; therefore, illustrating governmental control on our
livelihoods.
School and Child readiness
School and Child readiness builds on Transition points addressing the
transition of students from early childhood learning to schools. This priority area is
addressed within the COAG targets whereby the development of early childhood
centres in Indigenous communities was advocated for and implemented to enable
access (Council of Australian Governments, 2008). However, as the focus in this
priority area is on early childhood, it falls beyond the scope of this study and no
further analysis is provided (Education Council, 2015).
Literacy and Numeracy
While the final priority area, Literacy and Numeracy, illustrates the
pedagogical approaches that the Coolangatta Statement’s (Morgan, et al., 1999,
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 359
2006) definition of pedagogy advocates for, its focus is moreover about standards
and addressing the notion of human capital and Indigenous peoples’ potential futures
(Education Council, 2015). It states,
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children’s English literacy and
numeracy proficiencies are developed by applying proven, culturally
inclusive, responsive and personalised approaches to learning, such as
English as an additional language or dialect (EAL/D) in order to improve
their educational attainment, life choices and options (Education Council,
2015, p. 5).
Notably, within this declarative statement there is the reference to Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander children specifically. In the previous priority area statements,
where reference has been made to Indigenous students, there has been specific
reference to “children and young people” (Education Council, 2015, p. 5). The
omission of young people suggests that Literacy and Numeracy issues are only
prevalent in the primary years, which is not the case.
The Literacy and Numeracy priority area is also aligned to one of the targets
set within the NIRA; being, “halving the gap for Indigenous students in reading,
writing and numeracy within a decade” (Council of Australian Governments, 2008,
p. 8). As a result, the Australian government introduced the National Assessment
Program – Literacy and Numeracy [NAPLAN] (ACARA, 2013). This enabled data
sets to be compiled to determine how, or if, the educational attainment of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary schooling is improving
through the application of proven, culturally inclusive, responsive and personalised
approaches to learning (p. 5) with a particular focus on Literacy and Numeracy.
360 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The synergy and interconnectivity between the priority areas becomes
apparent. For proven, culturally inclusive, responsive and personalised approaches
to learning (p. 5) to be achieved, education stakeholders need to be aware of their
position in the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students. In doing so, stakeholders acknowledge their White Privilege (McIntosh,
1998; Moreton-Robinson, 2004, 2015b) and counter this by becoming aware of
Indigenous knowledges, cultures, histories and languages hence enabling educators
to provide learning that is culturally inclusive (Nakata, 2007b).
For learning to be responsive, the inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander voices in the decision making and planning of teaching and learning is
necessitated but also, imperative for personalised approaches (p. 5) to be developed
(Education Council, 2015). The NAPLAN results also inform the personalised
approaches and occur bi-annually (ACARA, 2013). Educators need to maintain
their understandings and teaching practices by participating in professional
development and therefore, they draw on and share practices that have worked for
them, hence, using evidence to inform and form their teaching practices (AITSL,
2014b).
NAPLAN data and the hidden discourses
The Productivity Commission (2016) reports that the focus being placed on
testing by Australian governments was the result of the goals set within the
Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008). The shift in “focus on ‘test-based
accountability’, transparency and reporting against national standards” has driven
competition with improved educational attainment as an expected outcome
(DEEWR, 2010, p. 3 as cited in Productivity Commission, 2016, p. 30). In
particular, NAPLAN is playing a major role in creating the competitive environment.
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 361
Further to this, the Productivity Commission (2016) highlights how the focus is
primarily on Numeracy and Literacy and fails to indicate student achievements in the
General Capabilities, one component of the three-dimensional Australian Curriculum
(ACARA, 2015b). In doing so, the Productivity Commission highlights a limitation
in NAPLAN testing. The 2017 Closing the Gap report further highlight the
limitations of NAPLAN testing stating that, “caution is required in interpreting [the]
results, as they vary a lot from one year to the next” (Department of the Prime
Minister and Cabinet, 2017, p. 38). NAPLAN data is being manipulated to provide a
narrative of progress rather than the realities of the inequitable gaps between
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non-Indigenous students.
The NAPLAN data in the most recent Closing the Gap report (Department of
the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2017) regarding the reading, writing and numeracy
skills of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in Years 3, 5, 7 and 9
produces data sets to establish ‘improvement’ in the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary schooling.
The ‘progression’ of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in Numeracy and
Literacy is cross-compared with previous years’ results as well as using discourses of
imaginaries to contextualise the data. The report asserts that,
although the literacy and numeracy gap remains, the good news is that in
terms of actual student numbers the gap is not large. If an additional 440
Indigenous Year 3 students achieved the [National Minimum Standards - ]
NMS [-] in reading and 800 in numeracy, the target would have been met
for Year 3 in 2016 (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, 2017, p.
39).
362 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
The narrative regarding the interpretation of the NAPLAN data suggests that the
target was almost achieved for Year 3 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.
However, what is silenced is that 16.5% [Table 3.R3] of the 15, 685 [Table 3.P2]
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Year 3 student population that sat the
NAPLAN test were ascertained to be working at Band 1, below the NMS (ACARA,
2016, p. 4; 58). That is, almost one-fifth of Year 3 Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students who sat the test were below the NMS. While the focus here is on
the reading test data sets, the figures are similar for the Numeracy test. The figures
become even more dire with 23.6% [Table 9.R3] of the total Year 9 Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander cohort (10, 256 [Table 9.P2]) who sat the Reading test below
the NMS (ACARA, 2016, p. 196; 250), whereby almost one-quarter of the tested
population are not meeting the expected standards.
It is important to note that these standards are set by non-Indigenous peoples;
privileging Western standards and values (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). In turn, the
social structures and social practices continue to maintain the hegemonic position of
the coloniser. Data is manipulated to present the illusion of ‘improvement’,
dismissing historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors still prevalent
that influence Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander student, parents and community
engagement in education systems.
Chapter Summary
In summary, the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), as an
Indigenous produced policy, privileged Indigenous voices and Indigenous values. It
criticised the inactivity of government to address the rights of Indigenous peoples in
education and the longevity and power of colonial values to maintain social
structures and social practices that act to devalue Indigenous knowledges, values and
Chapter 8: Indigenous education 363
philosophies. The Coolangatta Statement asserts the perceived failures of Indigenous
students are the rejection of Western education systems that privilege Western
knowledges, standards and understandings. That is, Western education systems do
not reflect the axiologies, epistemologies or ontologies of Indigeneity and therefore,
maintain the assimilatory values of colonial educational provision.
The Strategy’s production is informed and formed by other educational policies
(Education Council, 2015). Not all these policies are Indigenous-specific such as the
Melbourne Declaration (MCEETYA, 2008) but are focused on education for all
Australians. The blatant disregard of the historical, political, cultural and social
contextual factors and their influence on the current educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary schooling is
evident throughout the Strategy. Instead, discourses of imaginaries are consistently
used to describe the potential futures of Indigenous students in Indigenous education
by articulating the principles and priority areas necessary to be addressed.
Epistemic and deontic modality is used extensively throughout the Strategy’s
principles and priority areas (Education Council, 2015) to validate the position
assumed by government as the ‘knower’ (Nakata, 2007b). Values are shared to
further legitimise the reasons for action to be taken. However, the undervaluing of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander values and voices maintain the social structures
and social practices; validating deficit discourses regarding the potential futures and
educational attainment of Indigenous students in primary and secondary schooling.
364 Chapter 8: Indigenous education
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 365
Chapter 9: Land ahoy
In hindsight, when I entered the ocean of research this time round, I
already had some of the skills necessary to navigate the waves. This
did not temper the bouts of isolation, the uncertainty and feelings of
inferiority whenever a wave swamped my boat or reduced the
sightings of a mirage or two. Reflecting on the voyage, as I reach dry
land and look back at the ocean and leave my boat, another sense of
‘leaving the nest’ is coming over me.
As I re-smooth my feathers and prepare to step out of the boat, I
cannot help but recognise the many times I felt I would capsize or
sink. But here I am, standing on solid ground. I know this is not
possible without the trailblazers who went before me. I know this is
not possible without the songs of support echoing in the winds as I
sailed the terrain.
Land is here. I must now report what I found, the various barriers and
challenges I faced and list the things that would have helped to calm
the waves for those who will follow my path. The dirt feels good
between my toes. I have a new perspective and yet, a yearning to
return to the sea. There are other routes I want to explore; there are
other boats I want to trial.
366 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
After such a voyage, I now yearn to return to the ocean of research.
The winds are picking up and there is so much more I want to learn
about this world that we live.
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 367
For far too long, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ voices have
been silenced. The aim of this study was to critically analyse the National
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 [the Strategy]
(Education Council, 2015) through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education [the Coolangatta Statement] (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006). Focus was placed on how the Strategy addresses the rights of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education when seeking to improve
the educational attainment of Indigenous primary and secondary students. In turn,
the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, parents and
communities were explored, and established.
However as the study progressed, an additional focus was brought to the
forefront. I found the methodologies to analyse texts were very Eurocentric
privileging the Western ideologies of the lived experiences of the marginalised
(Fairclough, 2015; Nakata, 2007b; Smith, 1999), and therefore, there was a need to
find a methodological approach that enabled Indigenous voices and values to be
privileged (Rigney, 1999); that questioned the social structures and social practices
maintained in Australian society (Fairclough, 2015); and/or, that provided
opportunity for the representations of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students
to be considered when addressing their educational attainment (Nakata, 2007a). I
did not find a methodology that provided this and so the conceptualisation and
development of Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis [ICDA] as a methodological
approach that investigated the representations of Indigenous students in policy
discourses through an Indigenous lens that privileged Indigenous voice and values
evolved (Hogarth, 2017b).
368 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
The conceptualisation of a methodological approach as a PhD candidate is a
presumptuous position to find myself in and is terrifying as it leaves me open to
further critique by others but necessary according to Foley (2003) and Nakata
(2007b). As a result, throughout the data chapters, reflective entries have been
provided to explicate the processes, thoughts and solutions while analysing the data.
This has been purposefully included to establish credibility through my reflexivity in
the findings but also, the methodological approach used in this study (Shenton,
2004). By explicating the critical constructions that occurred, I also address the
issues of reliability and dependability. I have articulated barriers and challenges that
I faced while using ICDA and within the data analysis process. Samples of the data
analysis processes have been provided within the Appendices to give an insight to
the audit trail and address objectivity. Therefore, the reflective entries act as an
additional layer to contribute to Indigenous education and the limited Australian
Indigenous theoretical and methodological framework corpus (Rigney, 1999).
The overarching question that informed the study was:
1) What are the key elements of the current Australian Indigenous education
policy, the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Strategy 2015 that address the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander young peoples, as reported in the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education, in primary and secondary
schooling?
Three sub-questions evolved to focus the study and analysis. They were:
1) How are the principles of the Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous
peoples’ rights in Education signified, represented and enacted in the
National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015?
2) What discourses are identifiable in the National Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Education Strategy 2015 and the Coolangatta Statement on
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 369
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education and how do they influence,
maintain and/or challenge social structures and social practices?
3) How do the discourses within the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Education Strategy 2015 and the Coolangatta Statement on
Indigenous peoples’ rights in Education illustrate relations of power and
tensions at the cultural interface?
The questions evolved from the ‘discovery’ of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan,
et al., 1999, 2006) from an offhand comment made at a conference I attended in late
2015. Upon accessing the document, I saw opportunity to triangulate the critical
analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) by privileging Indigenous voices
and their rights in education. The inclusion of the Coolangatta Statement also
ensured that my voice was supported within a collective Indigenous voice, albeit
through mediated quasi-interactions (Chouliaraki & Fairclough, 1999), reliant on my
interpretations of the authors’ intentions.
A primary interest of the study was to determine the extent the varying
discourses in the Strategy encourage, support and provide an education that is
scholarly and empowering, as well as embedded in Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander knowledges and cultures (Education Council, 2015). Furthermore, the study
was interested in discerning whose values and voices were privileged within
Australian Indigenous education policy, namely, the Strategy. The tensions and
complexities, within the cultural interface where power relations and assumed
hegemonic positions, were explored to make explicit how the social conditions and
processes of production and interpretation influence, maintain or challenge social
structures and social practices through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). My interests were to illustrate how language is used to
maintain the implicit bias, stereotypes, assumptions and colonial values about
370 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in contemporary Australian society
from an Indigenous perspective and in turn, to demonstrate and complicate the
governmental control assumed within Indigenous education.
A surprising outcome from the development of ICDA was a critical means
through which to critique how dominance is maintained. The power of language,
and also the ways in which government covertly retain their power through the
illusion of consultation and implicit colonial values filtered throughout policy,
became apparent within the major findings of the study.
Major findings
Several major findings emerged from the critical analysis of the Strategy
(Education Council, 2015) when countering the hegemonic position of the colonial
discourses through the lens of the resistant discourses of the Coolangatta Statement
(Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). In summary, there is a distinctive lack of intertextual or
incremental properties between the Strategy and the Coolangatta Statement when
addressing the educational attainment and/or the rights of Indigenous peoples in
education. Further demonstrating the conflicting discourses are:
The apparent rejection of self-determination in favour of self-
empowerment placing responsibility and accountability on students,
parents and communities. This perpetuates deficit discourses and
maintaining colonial bias, assumptions, values about Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander students in primary and secondary schooling;
The recognition of the blatant dismissal of historical, political, cultural and
social contextual factors within the Strategy’s discourses, principles and
priority areas signifying that political agenda and rhetoric maintain
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 371
ideologies of equity and equality while ignoring the rights of Indigenous
peoples in education; namely, the right to be Indigenous and the right to
self-determination;
The location of discursive trickery giving the illusion of Indigenous voices
within the production of the Strategy illustrating the tensions at the cultural
interface; and,
The identification of binary constructs that enable Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander peoples to speak back and assume a position of power and
knowing to counter the hegemonic position of the coloniser.
Elaboration of each of these findings and their interrelationship with answering the
research questions follows.
They don’t talk to each other: The lack of incremental and intertextual
properties
The Strategy (Education Council, 2015) rarely reflects the principles of the
Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). I argue that the privileging of
Indigenous voice, values and knowledges in the Coolangatta Statement, where the
critique of Western education systems occurs, is contrastingly different to the
Strategy which promotes the value of Western education and its probability to
improve the potential futures of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students. They
don’t talk to each other. In other words, while the Coolangatta Statement is founded
in international human rights charters and conventions (see, for example: United
Nations General Assembly, 1948; United Nations General Assembly, 2008), the
Strategy illustrates the increasing control of Federal government in Indigenous
education and scarcely addresses the rights of Indigenous peoples in education.
372 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
The acknowledgement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as the
“first Australians” is the lone concession to Indigeneity in the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015, p. ii). While this is not an explicit reference to the right to be
Indigenous (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), it does concede the heritage and longevity
of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in colonial Australia. There is a
reference to Indigenous peoples’ connection to Mother Earth albeit “cultural
associations” (Education Council, 2015, p. ii) rather than the spiritual connection and
parent-child relationship described in the Coolangatta Statement. The notion of
Indigenous self is explicated in the Coolangatta Statement and, yet, minimised within
the Strategy.
The right to self-determination is dismissed by the Strategy (Education
Council, 2015). Instead, the Strategy advocates the premise that the educational
attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling and their potential futures can only be addressed by the
intervention of the coloniser. The opportunity for Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples to have agency to address the educational attainment of their
children and young people are denied (Foley, 2003).
Celebrating the intricacies and uniqueness of Indigeneity, the Coolangatta
Statement advocates for the notion of Indigenous self (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). It
makes explicit the diverse languages, cultures, histories and knowledges of
Indigenous peoples. Drawing on the rights of Indigenous peoples within the human
rights charters and conventions (see, for example: United Nations General Assembly,
1948; United Nations General Assembly, 2008), it calls for the legitimatisation by
the coloniser. However, as was made evident within the analysis, the Strategy and
its authors refuse to acknowledge the lack of understanding about Indigenous
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 373
knowledges, histories, cultures and values within Australian society as a whole
(Education Council, 2015). Instead, the Strategy assumes that teachers, principals
and other education stakeholders are culturally competent despite the denial and
racist reforms of the past that surmised that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people were dying out and would readily assimilate to the colonisers’ ways of being,
knowing and doing (Attwood & Markus, 1999, 2007; Francis, 1996; Reynolds, 1989,
1996, 2006).
In turn, while the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006)
champions Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing and their value in
educating and addressing the educational attainment of Indigenous children and
young people; the Strategy (Education Council, 2015) illustrates the control Federal
government is usurping in Indigenous education and positioning Western standards
and values as superior. Despite the embedding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander histories and cultures within the Australian Curriculum (ACARA, 2015b),
the lack of Indigenous representation in the “decision making, planning, delivery and
evaluation” maintains social structures and social practices (Education Council,
2015, p. 3). In doing so, the Strategy silences and marginalises Indigenous voice
and values.
The Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) promotes Article 14 of
the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples where
Indigenous peoples have “the right to establish and control their educational
systems” and therefore, the negotiation of non-Indigenous involvement in Indigenous
education is viable (United Nations General Assembly, 2008, p. 7). In an Australian
context, the data illustrates the dominance of non-Indigenous peoples in all facets of
Indigenous education. The positioning of the Strategy ignores the lack of
374 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
representation and continues to maintain the hegemonic position of the coloniser as
the ‘knower’ (Education Council, 2015).
The Australian way: The championing of colonial values, bias,
assumptions and stereotypes
Illustrated in the data chapters is the championing of Australian colonial
values, bias, assumptions and stereotypes within the Strategy (Education Council,
2015). As discussed in the previous section, the blatant rejection of the historical,
political, cultural and social contextual factors and the effects of past reform and
policy act as a basis for the production of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006). As it states, “the need for such an instrument is self-evident” (Morgan,
et al., 2006, p. 229). That is, the perceived failures of Indigenous peoples’
educational attainment in Western education systems are the result of Indigenous
peoples rejecting the assimilatory properties of the Eurocentric classroom and the
colonial values prevalent; essentially speaking back to the colonial and deficit
discourses. The need to counter and challenge the dominant positions maintained
and sustained by the coloniser to advocate for change and reform in the dominant
ideologies begins with the questioning of the societal norm.
Language acts as the means of communication to convey meaning, to share
ideologies, and to call for reform (Fairclough, 2015). The investigation and analysis
of how language and discourses maintain, sustain and challenge these norms
encourages critical discussions whereby Indigenous peoples can counter the
hegemonic position of the coloniser from a position of knowing. The consistent
espousing of the Australian way, the colonisers’ way, continues to silence and
marginalise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education and as a
result, fails to address the rights of Indigenous peoples in education (Morgan, et al.,
1999, 2006).
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 375
The Strategy proffers a soft concession to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples’ rights to self-determination by advocating for the inclusion of Indigenous
peoples in decision making. Moreover, focus is placed on the notions of self-
empowerment and human capital that serve to address the neoliberal agenda, driving
the colonisers’ political agenda and indicating that the intention of addressing the
educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary
and secondary schooling being an expected outcome rather than an objective.
A sleight of hand and a positive to binaries: The power of language
The Coolangatta Statement provides a strong foundation in which to build
my arguments on the need for the privileging of Indigenous voice in education when
addressing the educational attainment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
primary and secondary students. The discursive trickery used in the Strategy to give
the illusion of Indigenous voice indicates the hegemonic position that government
assumes.
The naming of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Working
Group [ATSIEWG] is discursive trickery. It gives the illusion that the members of
the group are Indigenous. However, as discussed in Chapter 7, the minimal
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representation in ATSIEWG makes me
question why it is named as such with the majority of the members being senior
officials from Australian Education Senior Officials Committee [AESOC] – non-
Indigenous representatives of government. The positioning of the senior officials
and the dominant non-Indigenous representation acts to silence and marginalise
Indigenous voice and values in Indigenous education.
The ‘stacking’ of governmental bodies such as ATSIEWG with non-
Indigenous peoples further demonstrates the contradictory political rhetoric that is
376 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
becoming increasingly evident within society. That is, government states that
together, with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, they will redress the
past and work towards reconciliation (Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet,
2016), and yet, silences Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples with a press
release (Turnbull, 2017). The rhetoric suggests equality, equity and the privileging
of Indigenous voices; of working towards addressing the atrocities of past policy and
then, on the other hand, contradicts these very sentiments in their actions by
maintaining control over Indigenous peoples and dismissing self-determination.
The study also brought to the forefront the necessity for binary constructs.
Binaries are often positioned as a means to define differences so that the dominant
can assume power and therefore, are seen as a negative. However, they also enable
Indigenous peoples to establish power.
It became evident as I investigated the discourses within the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) that the position maintained within the
collective voice and speaking back to the coloniser through the very articles within
the international human rights charters and conventions established power. That is,
by embracing the binary, Indigenous peoples can position themselves to speak back
to the biases, stereotypes and taken for granted assumptions through their
understanding of the ‘knower’. We are able to speak from an insider perspective,
using the knowledges of the coloniser to advocate the very differences that are
viewed as inferior to become superior.
In other words, our strength is founded within our Indigeneity; our lived
experiences; and, our ability to see the world through two lenses. We are different;
we are the colonised living in both worlds. We have been told to learn the language
of the coloniser. Schooling systems consistently champion the superiority of the
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 377
coloniser. Our voice to embrace the binary rejects the notion of assimilation. The
binary construct becomes our source of power.
The contribution and limitations of the methodological approach, ICDA
In my Masters of Education (Research) [Masters] (Hogarth, 2015), I drew on
Rigney’s Indigenist Research Principles [IRP] (1999) and Fairclough’s Critical
Discourse Analysis [CDA] (2015) to critically analyse the Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Education Action Plan 2010-2014 [the Plan] (MCEECDYA, 2011c).
The findings and limitations in that study indicated that there was need to further
investigate the new Indigenous education policy and explore how, or if, the
discourses differed. However, it also became apparent that I was taking a particular
position within the research, and that in this study; I needed to incorporate and
acknowledge my Indigenous standpoint.
In this study, I sought a methodological approach that privileged Indigenous
axiologies, ontologies, and epistemologies. In Chapter 5, I proffered three principles
that informed the theoretical framework for ICDA; being, Analysis of discourses,
Standpoint of researcher and Position of researcher drawn from the collation of
Rigney’s IRP (1999), Nakata’s Indigenous Standpoint Theory [IST] (2007a) and
Fairclough’s Critical Discourse Theory [CDT] (2015). The principles enabled me to
position myself as a female Aboriginal educator and researcher making explicit how
my interpretations of the social conditions and processes of production and
interpretation are shaped by my members’ resources [MR]. Such a principle gave
me the confidence to make assertions about schooling based on my experiences
within the Queensland schooling systems and establishing my standpoint.
The inclusion of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006) to act
as a lens in which to guide the analysis of the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
378 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
further strengthened my standpoint. My voice was not a lone voice but informed and
formed within the collective Indigenous voice of the Coolangatta Statement. In turn,
it gave me the knowledge of international human rights charters and conventions
advocating for the rights of Indigenous peoples in education to challenge the
dominant discourses within the Strategy. As a result, the Coolangatta Statement
provided an alternative lens and enabled me to privilege Indigenous voice throughout
the study.
Figure 9.1 A visual representation of ICDA
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 379
The theoretical constructs informed the development of the methodological
approach. Figure 9.1 of the conceptual overview of ICDA provides a visual
reminder of the methodological approach. The MR that I drew on were made
explicit within the conceptual overview. Fairclough’s CDA (2015) informs the three
levels of analysis with the social conditions of production and interpretation at the
macro-level; the processes of production and interpretation at the meso-level; and,
text at the micro-level. Figure 9.2 is a simplified conceptual overview of ICDA to
illustrate the three levels of CDA that inform ICDA.
Figure 9.2 Simplified visual representation of ICDA
The simplified version does not sit well with me and hence, is only being
introduced here to indicate the three levels and the Indigenous lens. It lacks
substance and the finite details are necessary to adequately illustrate the research
design. The historical, political, cultural and social contextual factors evident in
Figure 9.1 in the social conditions of production at the macro-level and the MR in the
process of production at the meso-level informs and forms the ‘knowledge winds’ to
380 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
build my understanding in Chapter 2 prior to undertaking the analysis in Chapters 6,
7, and 8 (Fairclough, 2015). In Chapter 2, I explored the historical, political, cultural
and social contextual factors that influence, maintain or challenge social structures
and social practices in Indigenous education. The various components of the policy
cycle were investigated in Chapter 2 to gain an understanding of the processes
involved when developing, implementing and evaluating policy.
The MR elements within the social conditions of interpretation at the macro-
level and the process of interpretation at the meso-level acted as an extra lens when
analysing the data (Fairclough, 2015). I consistently asked questions such as how are
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples represented within this section of text?
Are Indigenous values and voice being privileged?
A limitation of ICDA became apparent. I created the visual representation in
the early parts of the study. As a result, certain elements were found to be less
influential during the analysis stage such as social justice and consistency which
were not explicitly referred to in the analysis chapters. Nonetheless, the articulation
of the MR provided a means to guide the analysis.
The textual elements provided the foundation when undertaking the finite
textual analysis. These elements worked well informing and forming the meso- and
macro-level analyses. Another limitation resulted from the early development of the
methodological conceptual overview. Metaphor was included within the textual
analysis at the micro-level but was rarely encountered within the texts. That being
said, it was important to include metaphor as a textual element to ensure that the
connection to Country and spirituality, components of the notion of Indigenous self,
were included within the analysis.
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 381
ICDA provided opportunity to bring to the forefront Indigenous voice on the
rights of Indigenous peoples in education. As the data chapters indicated, Indigenous
voice has been silenced or marginalised throughout the production of the Strategy.
This study therefore becomes a response in the mediated quasi-interaction of policy
discourses. The time-space distantiation limits the possibility of any ‘true’
interaction.
Primary Recommendation
As a result, the major recommendation coming from this study echoes the calls
from the Redfern Statement and the Uluru Statement and is based within
international human rights charters and conventions cited in the Coolangatta
Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006), which is:
The voice of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, parents and
communities must be privileged in the production, implementation,
recontextualisation and evaluation of Indigenous education policy.
Involvement in the “decision making, planning, delivery and evaluation” removes
the silences found in mediated quasi-interactions (Education Council, 2015, p. 3). If
government is truly seeking to address the ever growing chasm evident between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous students’ educational attainment in primary and
secondary schooling, the inclusion and privileging of Indigenous peoples is
necessary. It is quintessential that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are
listened to and not just heard. While I could provide more recommendations here in
response to the findings, I find myself more drawn to providing recommendations for
future and current Higher Degree Research (HDR) students, in particular Indigenous
students, to resist the conventions and institutional constructs evident in academia.
382 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
Recommendations for Higher Degree Research students
Other recommendations are based around the study itself and are directed at
higher degree researchers. The recommendations are based on my own experiences
as I navigated the ocean of research. They are based around the notion of resistance
and taking ownership of your research.
The thesis becomes an extension of ourselves, and therefore, it should ‘mirror’
or at least, give some indication of who we are and why we are undertaking this
research. The thesis template acts as a means of control; homogenising us as ‘same’
when we all come from various backgrounds, understandings and knowledges. Our
theses should differ because of the varying reasons and purpose of our studies,
because of the varying approaches to study and because of the varying cultural
backgrounds. The first subsequent recommendation is to encourage other higher
degree researchers to ‘own’ the thesis. I would encourage other students to disrupt
the thesis template and manipulate the template to suit their approach to research.
In this ever-changing world in which we live, there is a need to critique the
theories and methods of the past. Our role as emerging academics and researchers is
to build on the theories and methods, ‘contemporising’ them for a globalised world.
The technologies available to us now, not only to access information, but how we
present information and data; how we collect and analyse data; and, how we
communicate and disseminate findings are constantly changing. Perhaps as an
Aboriginal researcher, I am more willing to challenge the dominant norms as a
means of resistance but I would suggest that it is our duty to make our research
relevant for future generations so that they too can build on our work. Therefore,
another recommendation would be for higher degree researchers to challenge the
applications of historically-embedded theories and methods for today’s world.
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 383
Finally, I would recommend that higher degree researchers begin conversations
regarding ethics prior to beginning their research. Ethical consideration is necessary
throughout the entire process. There are many ‘hiccups’ that disrupt your own
intentions and ambitions as illustrated in my own reflection of disappearing data. Be
prepared to ‘lose’ some of the data. Sometimes the solution is to admit defeat. I
could have included an artistic impression of each of the photographs but it was not
ethically appropriate and so perhaps ‘defeat’ is the wrong word here. As a result of
my decision to omit the photographs, I felt better in myself knowing I was
demonstrating my own position as an Aboriginal researcher but also, an ethical
researcher. The internal reflections shared throughout the data chapters and the
reflections on self are processes I would recommend higher degree researchers to
include in their practice.
Future directions for study
This study has critically analysed the Strategy (Education Council, 2015)
through the lens of the Coolangatta Statement (Morgan, et al., 1999, 2006). The
analysis and findings indicate that colonial values are maintained and sustained in the
Strategy but challenged in the Coolangatta Statement. The lack of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander representation in all levels of Indigenous education policy
production and interpretation maintains the relations of power and enables
government and the coloniser to assume a hegemonic position as the ‘knower’. The
rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in education are rarely located
within the Strategy with the right to self-determination being dismissed. With the
growing Federal government control being identified within Indigenous education,
future directions for study that should be considered include:
384 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
An exploration of the experiences of educators and school principals in the
implementation and recontextualisation of the Strategy
The experiences of educators and school principals when implementing and
recontextualising the Strategy would provide insight into the adoption of the Strategy
despite the lack of communication as indicated in Chapter 7.
A cross-comparative research study of Indigenous education policies in
other countries where the British were the coloniser.
Focus in this study was on the Australian Indigenous education policy. Exploration
of how other countries colonised by the British such as Canada, America and New
Zealand and the Indigenous education policies they may or may not have developed
to address the inequities between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students
educational attainment in primary and secondary schooling may provide insight into
other ways that Australia may pursue and/or consider.
An investigation of Indigenous education stakeholders’ socio-cognitive
understandings of Indigenous education and the purpose of Indigenous
education policy.
In this case study, investigation of the beliefs, attitudes, stereotypes and values of
Indigenous education stakeholders in regards to Indigenous education occurs. A
premise of genres of governance is shared ideologies. Identification of the common
understandings of educators, administrators and politicians about the purposes of
Indigenous education policy and how it addresses the educational attainment of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students occurs. In turn, a finite exploration of
the social conditions in Australia making explicit the dominant ideologies and
stereotypes maintained in colonial Australia.
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 385
Exploring the applications of ICDA in other genre types
As ICDA is in its infancy as a methodological approach and the limited number of
Indigenous Australian methodologies present in the corpus, application of ICDA in
other discourses such as media discourse or social media discourse would further
demonstrate its applications and limitations. Further application will also provide
opportunity for the methodological approach to become more defined.
In conclusion…
I had the privilege in the final weeks of my thesis to spend time and
space with some very strong Aboriginal women and educators. I had
opportunity to listen to their stories about life, the histories of
education in Australia for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
peoples and about their research. In their stories, I heard the lived
experiences of past policy and the findings of this study echoed. One
of those women was one of the authors of the Coolangatta Statement
and I was able to share ever so briefly about my research and discuss
the document. The insight into the writing process and the potential
future of the document was invigorating as the study concludes.
Our discussions spoke to the power of language; of government; and,
of current institutional and societal constructs. We lamented about
how the deficit narratives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
students are maintained, the ‘failures’ of systems and the educational
attainment of our future generations and the normalisation of ‘poor’
386 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
potential futures without the intervention of the coloniser for
Indigenous peoples sustained in colonial Australia’s psyche. We
shared stories of our experiences within the system; as student and as
teacher. We considered how, or if, things had changed. The
oppressive control by government continues today albeit implicitly
rather than overtly as past practices. The denial of self-determination
maintains societal norms; preventing Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples from providing solutions.
These discussions highlighted the importance of this study. While my
initial focus was to make explicit how Indigenous education policy is
‘failing’ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students in primary and
secondary schooling, it has inadvertently brought to the forefront a
means to illustrate how the oppression of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander peoples continues today.
While I reflect now on the voyage, I know now how to navigate some
of the waves. I have a better sense of self and I can see where I want
to go. I am the emu; a land bird and yet, I hear the ocean calling me.
I dream of returning to the waters. This is just the beginning of many
voyages on the ocean of research. I owe it to those who went before
me and I owe it to those who will follow. The maps have served me
well but it is now time to draw my own – to find my place. I need to
gather new knowledge winds beneath my wings so that this emu can
fly once again. An impossibility maybe but not in my Dreamings!!
Chapter 9: Land ahoy 387
388 Chapter 9: Land ahoy
389 Bibliography
Bibliography
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy. (1997). Curriculum
Perspectives, 25. Retrieved from http://www.acsa.edu.au/pages/page25.asp
Aboriginal Consultative Group. (1975a). Education for Aborigines: Report to the
Schools Commission by the Aboriginal Consultative Group - June 1975.
Aboriginal Child at School, 3(4), 60-64. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/documentSummary;dn
=016131448533487;res=IELAPA.
Aboriginal Consultative Group. (1975b). Education for Aborigines: Report to the
Schools Commission by the Aboriginal Consultative Group - June 1975.
Aboriginal Child at School, 3(5), 3-26. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=01644820
9044877;res=IELAPA.
Aboriginal Education Policy Task Force. (1988). Report of the Aboriginal Education
Policy Task Force. Retrieved from
http://www.voced.edu.au/content/ngv:20015.
Absolon, K., & Willett, C. (2005). Putting ourselves forward: Locating in Aboriginal
research. In L. Brown & S. Strega (Eds.), Research as resistance: Critical,
Indigenous & anti-oppressive approaches (pp. 97-126). Toronto, Ontario:
Canadian Scholars' Press/Women's Press.
ACARA. (2013). National Assessment Program - NAP. Retrieved from
http://www.nap.edu.au/
ACARA. (2015a). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures.
Retrieved from
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/crosscurriculumpriorities/aboriginal-
and-torres-strait-islander-histories-and-cultures/overview
ACARA. (2015b). Australian Curriculum v 8.3. Retrieved from
http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/
ACARA. (2015c). National report on Schooling in Australia 2015. Retrieved from
https://www.acara.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-document-
library/national-report-on-schooling-in-australia-2015.pdf?sfvrsn=0.
ACARA. (2016). NAPLAN Achievement in Reading, Writing, Language
Conventions and Numeracy: National report for 2016. Sydney: ACARA.
Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu.au/docs/default-source/default-
document-library/2016-naplan-national-report.pdf?sfvrsn=2.
Acil Allen Consulting. (2014). Report to the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Advisory Group of the Education Council: Evaluation of the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plam 2010-2014.
Bibliography 390
Retrieved from
http://www.acilallen.com.au/cms_files/ACILAllen_ATSI_Education2014.pdf
AEEYSOC, National Teaching Workforce Dataset, & MATSITI. (2014). Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander Teacher Workforce Analysis. Canberra, Australia:
Australian Government Retrieved from http://matsiti.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2014/09/MATSITI-Data-Analysis-Report-2014.pdf.
AITSL. (2013). Accreditation of Initial Teacher Education Programs in Australia:
Guide to the accreditation process. Carlton South, VIC: Education Services
Australia Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/aitsl-
research/insights/re00058_accreditation_of_initial_teacher_education_progra
ms_in_australia_guide_to_the_accreditation_process_may_2013.pdf?sfvrsn=
4.
AITSL. (2014a). Australian Professional Standard for Principals. Retrieved from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standard-for-principals
AITSL. (2014b). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from
http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-
teachers/standards/list
Alford, J. (2015). Conceptualisation and enactment of critical literacy for senior
high school EAL learners in Queensland, Australia: Commitments,
constraints and contradictions. Unpublished Doctorate Dissertation.
Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Alfred, T. (2017, October 13). For Indigenous nations to live, colonial mentalities
must die. Policy Options. Retrieved from
http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2017/for-indigenous-nations-
to-live-colonial-mentalities-must-die/
Altman, J., Biddle, N., & Hunter, B. H. (2008). How realistic are the prospects for
'Closing the Gaps' in socioeconomic outcomes for Indigenous Australians? :
Retrieved from
http://caepr.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/Publications/DP/2008_DP287.pdf.
Altman, J., Biddle, N., & Hunter, B. H. (2009). Prospects for ‘Closing the Gap’ in
socioeconomic outcomes for Indigenous Australians? Australian Economic
History Review, 49(3), 225-251.
Altman, J. C. (2009). Beyond closing the gap: Valuing diversity in Indigenous
Australia (Vol. 54): Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research, ANU.
Anderson, P. (1996). Priorities in Aboriginal health. In G. Robinson (Ed.),
Aboriginal health, social and cultural transitions: proceedings of a
conference at the Northern Territory University, Darwin, 29-31 September,
1995 (pp. 15-18). Darwin: NTU Press.
391 Bibliography
Anderson, P. M. (2005). The meaning of pedagogy. In J. Kincheloe (Ed.), Classroom
Teaching: An Introduction (pp. 53-69). New York, USA: Peter Lang
Publishing.
Armitage, A. (2014). Comparing the Policy of Assimilation : Australia, Canada and
New Zealand. Retrieved from
http://QUT.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=3412219
Atkinson, J. (2013). Trauma-informed services and trauma-specific care for
Indigenous Australian children. Retrieved from
http://www.aihw.gov.au/uploadedFiles/ClosingTheGap/Content/Publications/
2013/ctg-rs21.pdf
Attwood, B., & Markus, A. (1999). The struggle for Aboriginal rights: A
documentary history. St Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
Attwood, B., & Markus, A. (2007). The 1967 referendum: Race, power and the
Australian Constitution (Vol. 2nd). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2013). 2077.0 - Census of Population and Housing:
Understanding the increase in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander counts,
2006-2011. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/Lookup/2077.0main+features22006
-2011.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2017). 4221.0 - Schools, Australia, 2016. Retrieved
from http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/[email protected]/mf/4221.0
Australian Government. (2016). Quality schools, Quality outcomes. Retrieved from
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/quality_schools_acc.pdf.
Ball, S. (1990). Politics and Policy Making in Education: Explorations in Policy
Sociology. London, New York: Routledge.
Ball, S. J. (2013). Foucault, power, and education (Vol. 1). New York: Routledge.
Banks, G. (2003). Indigenous disadvantage: Assessing policy impacts. In Pursuing
Opportunity and Prosperity Conference hosted by Melbourne Institute of
Applied Economic and Social Research and The Australian (Vol. 13).
Banks, G. (2009). Evidence-based policy-making: What is it? How do we get it? In
ANU Public Lecture Series, presented by ANZSOG: Productivity
Commission.
Bardon, G. (1991). Papunya Tula: Art of the Western Desert. Ringwood, Vic:
McPhee Gribble.
Battiste, M. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy in First Nations education:
A literature review with recommendations. Retrieved from
http://www.usask.ca/education/documents/profiles/battiste/ikp_e.pdf
Bibliography 392
Battiste, M. A. (2000). Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision. Vancouver; Great
Britain: UBC Press.
Behrendt, L. (2006). Foreword. In P. Read, G. Meyers & B. Reece (Eds.), What
Good Condition?: Reflections on an Australian Aboriginal Treaty 1986-2006
(pp. x-xi). Canberra: ANU E Press. Retrieved from
http://press.anu.edu.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/publications/aboriginal-
history-monographs/what-good-condition.
Beresford, Q. (2012). Separate and unequal: An outline of Aboriginal education
1900-1996. In Q. Beresford, G. Partington & G. Gower (Eds.), Resistance
and reform in Aboriginal Education (Vol. Revised Edition, pp. 85-119).
Crawley, W.A: UWA Publishing.
Beresford, Q., Partington, G., & Gower, G. (2012). Reform and resistance in
Aboriginal education (Vol. Revis). Crawley, W.A: UWA Publishing.
Berndt, R. M., & Berndt, C. H. (1988). The world of the First Australians -
Aboriginal traditional life: Past and Present (5th ed.). Canberra: Aboriginal
Studies Press for the Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Blair, E. (2016). A reflexive exploration of two qualitative data coding techniques.
Journal of Methods and Measurement in the Social Sciences, 6(1), 14-29.
Retrieved from
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/jmmss/article/view/18772.
doi:10.2458/jmm.v6i1.18772
Bolt, A. (April 22, 2016). Welcome to what's actually your country - and to an
ancient ceremony invented the other day, The Herald Sun. Retrieved from
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/welcome-to-whats-actually-
your-country--and-to-an-ancient-ceremony-invented-the-other-day/news-
story/b197728e4aef514d0be68b28bcfdc14e
Bourke, J. F., & Lucadou-Wells, R. (2011). Colonial education: Progression from
cottage industry roots. Macquarie Journal of Business Law, 8, 161-180.
Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=75818952
8425641;res=IELHSS.
Brandt, D. (2015a). The rise of writing: Redefining mass literacy in America.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brandt, D. (2015b). Writing for the State. In The rise of writing: Redefining mass
literacy (pp. 53-88). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brockliss, L., & Sheldon, N. (2012). Mass education and the limits of state building,
c. 1870-1930. Hampshire, UK.; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
393 Bibliography
Bruce-Ferguson, P. (2005). Contractual relationships: Lessons learned, consultation
with communities. Tihei Oreore, 35.
Burke, G., & Spaull, A. (2007). Australian Schools: Participation and funding 1901
to 2000. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/Ausstats/[email protected]/0/A75909A2108CECAACA2569D
E002539FB?Open
Burridge, N., & Chodkiewicz, A. (2013). An historical overview of Aboriginal
education policies in the Australian context. In N. Burridge, F. Whalan & K.
Vaughan (Eds.), Indigenous education: A learning journey for teachers,
schools and communities (pp. 11-22). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense
Publishers.
Burridge, N., Whalan, F., & Vaughan, K. (2013). Indigenous education: A learning
journey for teachers, schools and communities. Retrieved from
http://site.ebrary.com/lib/qut/reader.action?docID=10643143
Cadzow, A. (2007). A NSW Aboriginal Education timeline 1788-2007. Retrieved
from http://ab-ed.bostes.nsw.edu.au/files/timeline1788-2007.pdf
Calma, T. (2009). The perilous state of Indigenous languages in Australia. In Social
Justice Report 2009 (pp. 57-105). Sydney: Australian Human Rights
Commission, Paragon Australiasia Group. Retrieved from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/publications/chapter-3-introduction-social-
justice-report-2009.
Carapetis, J., & Silburn, S. (2011). Key factors influencing educational outcomes for
Indigenous students and their implications for planning and practice in the
Northern Territory. Paper presented at Indigenous Education: Pathways to
success, ACER Research Conference, Darwin, Australia.
Charteris-Black, J. (2005). Politicians and rhetoric: The persuasive power of
metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (1999). Discourse in late modernity: Rethinking
Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Chouliaraki, L., & Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis in
organizational studies: Towards an integrationist methodology. Journal of
Management Studies, 47(6), 1213-1218. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/10.1111/j.1467-
6486.2009.00883.x/epdf. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.2009.00883.x
COAG. (2008). National Partnership Agreement on Remote Service Delivery.
Retrieved from
http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/community_services/
national-partnership/past/remote_service_delivery_NP.pdf.
Bibliography 394
COAG. (2012). National Education Agreement. Retrieved from
http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/education/national-
agreement.pdf
COAG. (2013). National Education Reform Agreement. Retrieved from
http://federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/national_agreements/past/n
ational-education-agreement.pdf.
COAG. (2017). About COAG. Retrieved from https://www.coag.gov.au/about-coag
COAG Reform Council. (2013). Education in Australia 2012: five years of
performance: report to the Council of Australian Governments.
Commonwealth of Australia. (1997). Bringing Them Home: National Inquiry into
the separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children from their
families. Sydney, NSW: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission
Retrieved from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/pdf/social_justice/
bringing_them_home_report.pdf.
Conifer, D., Brennan, B., Higgins, I., Crothers, J., & Wellington, S. (2017).
Indigenous advisory body rejected by PM in 'kick in the guts' for advocates.
Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-26/indigenous-advisory-
body-proposal-rejected-by-cabinet/9087856
Council of Australian Governments. (2008). National Indigenous Reform Agreement
(Closing the Gap). Retrieved from
http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/npa/health_indigenous/in
digenous-reform/national-agreement_sept_12.pdf.
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating
quantitative and qualitative research (Vol. 4). Boston: Pearson.
Crowley, T. (1993). Tasmanian Aboriginal Language: Old and new identities. In M.
Walsh & C. Yallop (Eds.), Language and culture in Aboriginal Australia (pp.
51-71). Canberra, ACT: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Crump, D. (2017). Our Languages Matter. Paper presented at NAIDOC Week Public
Lecture, University of Southern Queensland.
David Unaipon College of Indigenous Education and Research. (2009). Review of
Australian Directions in Indigenous Education 2005–2008 for the Ministerial
Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs.
Retrieved from
http://scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/ATSI%20docume
nts/review_of_aust_directions_in_indigenous_ed_2005-2008.pdf
Davis, S. (2016). As an Aboriginal woman, I've learned education is essential to our
freedom, The Guardian. Retrieved from
395 Bibliography
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/feb/01/as-an-aboriginal-
woman-ive-learned-education-is-essential-to-our-freedom
de Leeuw, S., & Greenwood, M. (2014). History lessons: What Empire, Education
and Indigenous Childhoods teaches us. In H. May, B. Kaur & L. Prochner
(Eds.), Empire, education and Indigenous childhoods: Nineteenth-century
missionary infant schools in three British colonies. Surrey, England, UK:
Ashgate Publishing Limited.
DEET. (1989). National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Policy.
Retrieved from
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/national_aboriginal_and
_torres_strait_islander_education_policy.pdf.
Department of Education and Training. (2011). Embedding Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Perspectives in schools: A guide for school learning
communities. Retrieved from
http://indigenous.education.qld.gov.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/eatsips-
docs/eatsips_2011.pdf.
Department of Education and Training. (2015). School planning, reviewing and
reporting cycle. Retrieved from
http://education.qld.gov.au/strategic/accountability/pdf/sprr-framework.pdf.
Department of Education and Training. (2016). School Education. Retrieved from
https://www.education.gov.au/school-education
Department of Finance. (2017). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Group. Retrieved from http://www.finance.gov.au/node/116741/
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. (2015). Closing the Gap: Prime
Minister's Report 2015. Retrieved from
https://www.dpmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/publications/Closing_the_Gap_2
015_Report.pdf.
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. (2016). Closing the Gap: Prime
Minister's Report 2016. Canberra, Australia: Commonwealth of Australia
Retrieved from http://www.naccho.org.au/download/aboriginal-
health/PM&C%20Closing%20the%20Gap%20Report_AccPDF_01.pdf.
Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. (2017). Closing the Gap Prime
Minister's Report 2017. Retrieved from
http://closingthegap.pmc.gov.au/sites/default/files/ctg-report-2017.pdf.
Dodson, M. (1996). Assimilation versus self-determination: No contest. ANU, North
Australia Research Unit (NARU) Retrieved from
https://digitalcollections.anu.edu.au/bitstream/1885/47283/3/Dodson_Assimil
ationSelfDetermination1996.pdf.
Bibliography 396
Dorey, P. (2005). Defining problems and devising policies. In P. Dorey (Ed.), Policy
making in Britain: An introduction (pp. 8-48). London: SAGE Publications
Ltd.
Doyle, L., & Hill, R. (2008). Our children, Our future: Achieving improved Primary
and Secondary education outcomes for Indigenous students. Retrieved from
http://apo.org.au/node/9175
Dudgeon, P., Wright, M., Paradies, Y., Garvey, D., & Walker, I. (2010). The social,
cultural and historical context of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Australians. In N. Purdie, P. Dudgeon & R. Walker (Eds.), Working together:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and wellbeing principles
and practice (pp. 25-42). Canberra, Australia: Department of Health and
Ageing, Telethon Institute for Child Health Research, Kulunga Research
Network and Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER).
Eckermann, A. K. (1998). The economics of Aboriginal education. International
Journal of Social Economics, 25(2/3/4), 302-313. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/1683934614?pq
-origsite=summon. doi:10.1108/03068299810193470
Education Council. (2014). Communiques and Media Releases. Retrieved from
http://www.educationcouncil.edu.au/EC-Communiques-and-Media-
Releases.aspx
Education Council. (2015). National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Strategy 2015. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/ATSI%20do
cuments/DECD__NATSI_EducationStrategy.pdf.
Education Council. (2016). AESOC Members. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/EC-AESOC/AESOC-Members.aspx
EDUCATION.govt.nz. (2017). Our Ministers. Retrieved from
https://www.education.govt.nz/ministry-of-education/our-role-and-our-
people/our-ministers/
Engle, K. (2011). On fragile architecture: The UN Declaration on the rights of
Indigenous peoples in the context of human rights. European Journal of
International Law, 22(1), 141-163. Retrieved from https://academic-oup-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/ejil/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/ejil/chr019.
doi:10.1093/ejil/chr019
Evans, J. R., Wilson, R., Dalton, B., & Georgakis, S. (2015). Indigenous
participation in Australian sport: The perils of the 'Panacea' proposition.
Cosmopolitan Civil Societies Journal, 7(1), 53-79. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/ccs.v7i1.4232
Fairclough, N. (1992). Intertextuality in critical discourse analysis. Linguistics and
Education, 4(3), 269-293. Retrieved from http://ac.els-
397 Bibliography
cdn.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/089858989290004G/1-s2.0-
089858989290004G-main.pdf?_tid=2596d6e6-09d6-11e6-95b1-
00000aab0f27&acdnat=1461472784_f3a623cb02bf4eff7c0aa8fe6ef57bf3.
doi:10.1016/0898-5898(92)90004-G
Fairclough, N. (2001a). Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific
research. In R. Wodak & M. Meyer (Eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse
Analysis (pp. 121-138). London, UK: SAGE Publications.
Fairclough, N. (2001b). The dialectics of discourse. Textus, 14(2), 231-242.
Fairclough, N. (2001c). The discourse of New Labour: Critical Discourse Analysis.
In M. Wetherell, S. Taylor & S. Yates (Eds.), Discourse as data: A guide for
analysis (pp. 229-266). London, UK; Thousand Oaks, California, USA; New
Delhi, India: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research.
London, U.K.: Routledge.
Fairclough, N. (2008). The language of critical discourse analysis: reply to Michael
Billig. Discourse & Society, 19(6), 811-819. Retrieved from
http://das.sagepub.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/content/19/6/811.
doi:10.1177/0957926508095896
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical Discourse Analysis: The critical study of language
(2nd ed.). New York, USA: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Fairclough, N. (2012). Critical discourse analysis. International Advances in
Engineering and Technology, 7, 452-487. Retrieved from
http://scholarism.net/FullText/2012071.pdf.
Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and power (3rd ed.). New York, London:
Longman.
Ferreira, M. L. (2013). The UN Declaration on the rights of Indigenous peoples. In
M. L. Ferreira (Ed.), Acting for Indigenous rights: Theatre to change the
world (pp. 7-14). Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Human
Rights Center.
Field, S., Kuczera, M., & Pont, B. (2007). No more failures: Ten steps to equity in
education. Retrieved from
http://www.oecd.org/education/school/49623744.pdf.
Foley, D. (2003). Indigenous epistemology and Indigenous standpoint theory. Social
Alternatives, 22(1), 44-52. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dennis_Foley/publication/256702869_I
ndigenous_Standpoint_Theory_An_Indigenous_Epistemology/links/02e7e52
3a517289f60000000.pdf.
Bibliography 398
Foley, D. (2013). Indigenous Australia and the education system. In R. Connell
(Ed.), Education, change and society (Vol. 3). South Melbourne, Vic: Oxford
University Press.
Fossey, E., Harvey, C., McDermott, F., & Davidson, L. (2002). Understanding and
evaluating qualitative research. Australasian Psychiatry, 36(6), 717-732.
Retrieved from
http://anp.sagepub.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/content/36/6/717.full.pdf+ht
ml. doi:10.1046/j.1440-1614.2002.01100.x
Foucault, M. (1974). Prisons et asiles dans le mécanisme du pouvoir. Dits et ecrits, 2,
523-524.
Fowler, R. H. (1985). Power. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Handbook of discourse
analysis (pp. 61-82). London, UK: Academic Press.
Francis, M. (1996). Social Darwinism and the construction of institutionalised racism
in Australia. Journal of Australian Studies, 90-105. Retrieved from
http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/14443059609387281.
Fuller, R., Anderson, M., Norris, R., & Trudgett, M. (2014). The Emu Sky
Knowledge of the Kamilaroi and Euahlayi peoples. Retrieved from
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1403/1403.0304.pdf.
Gable, A., & Lingard, B. (2013). NAPLAN and the performance regime in Australian
schooling: A review of the policy context. Retrieved from
http://www.uq.edu.au/swahs/Governing%20performance%20NAPLAN%20P
olicy%20Summary%20for%20upload.pdf.
Garnett, S., & Sithole, B. (2009). Sustainable Northern Landscapes and the nexus
with Indigneous Health: Healthy Country, Healthy People, Land and Water.
Australian Government: Land and Water Australia Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.363.8351&rep=rep
1&type=pdf.
Gee, J. P. (2011). Discourse Analysis: What makes it critical? In R. Rogers (Ed.), An
introduction to critical discourse analysis in education (2nd ed., pp. 23-45).
New York: Routledge. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfebooks.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/isbn/9780203836149.
Gilbert, S. (2007). Another world, not a brave new world: Is there a place for
Aboriginal people in higher education? In J. Scevak & R. Cantwell (Eds.),
Stepping Stones: A guide for mature-aged students at university (pp. 16-20).
Camberwell, Vic: ACER Press.
Gillborn, D. (2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness,
critical race theory and education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 20(4),
485-505. Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
399 Bibliography
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/02680930500132346.
doi:10.1080/02680930500132346
Gonski, D., Boston, K., Greiner, K., Lawrence, C., Scales, B., & Tannock, P. (2011).
Review of Funding for Schools: Final Report. Canberra: Department of
Education, Employment and Workplace Relations Retrieved from
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review-of-funding-for-
schooling-final-report-dec-2011.pdf.
Gover, K. (2016). Indigenous membership and human rights: When self-
identification meets self-constitution. In D. Short & C. Lennox (Eds.),
Handbook of Indigenous Peoples' Rights (pp. 35-48). Florence: Routledge.
Guenther, J. (2013). Are we making education count in remote Australian
communities or just counting education? The Australian Journal of
Indigenous Education, 42(2), 157-170. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=78346309
8042750;res=IELIND. doi:10.1017/jie.2013.23
Guenther, J., & Bat, M. (2013). Towards a good education in very remote Australia:
Is it just a case of moving the desks around? The Australian Journal of
Indigenous Education, 42(2), 145-156. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=78344446
5071492;res=IELIND. doi:10.1017/jie.2013.22
Guenther, J., Bat, M., & Osborne, S. (2013). Red dirt thinking on educational
disadvantage. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 42(2), 100-
110. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=78336993
3186459;res=IELIND. doi:10.1017/jie.2013.18
Haddad, W. D., & Demsky, T. (1995). Education policy-planning process: An
applied framework. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization.
Haebich, A. (1988). For their own good: Aborigines and Government in the
southwest of Western Australia. Western Australia: UWA Press.
Handler, R. (1994). Is 'identity' a useful cross-cultural concept? In J. R. Gillis (Ed.),
Commemorations: The politics of national identity (pp. 27-40). Princeton;
Chichester: Princeton University Press.
Hardee, K., Feranil, I., Boezwinkle, J., & Clark, B. (2004). The policy circle: a
framework for analyzing the components of family planning reproductive
health maternal health and HIV/AIDS policies. Retrieved from
http://www.policyproject.com/pubs/workingpapers/wps-11.pdf.
Harrington, M. (2011). Australian Government funding for schools explained.
Retrieved from
https://www.aph.gov.au/binaries/library/pubs/bn/sp/schoolsfunding.pdf.
Bibliography 400
Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, nature and the geography of difference. Cambridge,
USA; Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Hasluck, P. (1950). Commonwealth of Australia - Parliamentary Debates: Session
1950 (Hansard), House of Representatives: 8th June, 1950. Retrieved from
http://indigenousrights.net.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/382591/f89.pdf.
Hasluck, P. (1961). The policy of assimilation: Decisions of Commonwealth and
State Ministers at the Native Welfare Conference. Canberra, Australia: AJ
Arthur, Commonwealth Government Printer.
Henry, J., Dunbar, T., Arnott, A., Scrimgeour, M., & Murakami-Gold, L. (2004).
Indigenous research reform agenda: A review of the literature. Retrieved
from
https://www.lowitja.org.au/sites/default/files/docs/IRRA5LinksMonographs.p
df.
Henry, M., Lingard, B., Rizvi, F., & Taylor, S. (2013). Educational Policy and the
Politics of Change. Retrieved from
http://QUT.eblib.com.au/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=1111650
Hickling‐Hudson, A., & Ahlquist, R. (2003). Contesting the curriculum in the
schooling of Indigenous children in Australia and the United States: From
Eurocentrism to culturally powerful pedagogies. Comparative Education
Review, 47(1), 64-89. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/pdf/10.1086/345837.pdf?
_=1461834386872. doi:10.1086/345837
Higgins, D. (2012). Past and present adoptions in Australia. Retrieved from
https://aifs.gov.au/publications/past-and-present-adoptions-australia
Hodge, B. (2017). Social semiotics for a complex world: Analysing lanuage and
social meaning. Malden, MA, USA: Polity Press.
Hogarth, M. (2015). A critical analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Action Plan Masters of Education (Research). Queensland
University of Technology. Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89754
Hogarth, M. (2017a). Die, Brain Demons, Die!: The internal monologue of an
Aboriginal Researcher. In C. McMaster, C. Murphy, B. Whitburn & I.
Mewburn (Eds.), Postgradute study in Australia: Surviving and Succeeding
(pp. 137-148). New York, USA.: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.
Hogarth, M. (2017b). Speaking back to the deficit discourses: A theoretical and
methodological approach. [journal article]. The Australian Educational
Researcher, 44(1), 21-34. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13384-
017-0228-9. doi:10.1007/s13384-017-0228-9
401 Bibliography
Holland, C., & Close the Gap Campaign Steering Committee. (2015). Progress and
priorities report 2015. Retrieved from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/document/publication/CT
G_progress_and_priorities_report_2015.pdf.
Hughes, P., & Willmot, E. (1982). A thousand Aboriginal teachers by 1990. In J.
Sherwood (Ed.), Aboriginal Education. Issues and innovations (pp. 45-49).
Perth: Creative Research.
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. (2008). Close the Gap:
Indigenous Health Equality Summit - Statement of Intent. Retrieved from
https://www.humanrights.gov.au/sites/default/files/content/social_justice/heal
th/statement_intent.pdf.
Independent Schools Council of Australia. (2016). ISCA Board of Management.
Retrieved from http://isca.edu.au/about-isca/isca-board-of-management/
Institute of Public Administration Australia - South Australian Division Inc. (2016).
On the Couch Chief Executive Series with Tony Harrison, Chief Executive,
Department for Education and Child Development. Retrieved from
http://sa.ipaa.org.au/Events/20160429OTCTonyHarrison.asp
Ives, P. (2004). Language and hegemony in Gramsci. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/j.ctt183q4d3
Jackson-Barrett, E. M. (2011). The context for change: Reconceptualising the 3Rs in
education for Indigenous students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education,
36(12), 2.
Jacob, W. J., Cheng, S. Y., & Porter, M. (2015). Indigenous Education : Language,
culture and identity. Dordrecht: Springer.
Johnson, P., Cherednichenko, B., & Rose, M. (2016). Evaluation of the More
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Teachers Initiative Project: Final
Report. Retrieved from http://matsiti.edu.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/05/MATSITI-2016-Project-Evaluation-Final-
Report.pdf.
Kari-Oca Declaration the Indigenous Peoples’ Earth Charter. (1992). Paper
presented at World Conference of Indigenous Peoples on Territory,
Environment and Development, Brazil. Retrieved from
http://www.tebtebba.org/index.php/all-resources/category/92-unced-
conference
Karmel, P. (1973). Schools in Australia: Report of the Interim Committee for the
Australian Schools Commission. Canberra, ACT, Australia: Australian
Government Publishing Service; Union Offset Company Pty Ltd. Retrieved
from
http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/schools_in_australia_karmel_report_1973.pd
f.
Bibliography 402
Kerwin, D., & Van Issum, H. (2013). An Aboriginal perspective on education -
Policy and practice. In R. Jorgensen, P. Sullivan & P. Grootenboer (Eds.),
Pedagogies to enhance learning for Indigenous students: Evidence-based
practice (pp. 1-20). Singapore: Springer. Retrieved from
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/lib/qut/reader.actio
n?docID=1083719.
Kettle, M. (2005). Agency as discursive practice: From "nobody" to "somebody" as
an international student in Australia. Asia Pacific Journal of Education,
25(1), 45-60. Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/02188790500032525?needAcc
ess=true. doi:10.1080/02188790500032525
Kettle, M. (2007). Agency, discourse and academic practice: Reconceptualising
international students in an Australian University Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations, and
contexts. Buffalo;Toronto;: University of Toronto Press.
Krakouer, J. (2016). Literature review relating to the current context and discourse
surrounding Indigenous Early Childhood Education, school readiness and
transition programs to primary school. Retrieved from
http://research.acer.edu.au/indigenous_education/43/
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva reader. Blackwell: Oxford.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what is it doing in a
nice field like education? International Journal of Qualitative Studies in
Education, 11, 7-24.
Ladwig, J. G., & Luke, A. (2014). Does improving school level attendance lead to
improved school level achievement? An empirical study of Indigenous
educational policy in Australia. The Australian Educational Researcher,
41(2), 171-194. Retrieved from
http://link.springer.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/article/10.1007%2Fs13384-
013-0131-y. doi:10.1007/s13384-013-0131-y
Langton, M., & Rhea, Z. M. (2009). Indigenous education and the ladder to
prosperity. Perspectives, 95-119.
Lattas, A. (1996). Humanitarianism and Australian Nationalism in Colonial Papua:
Hubert Murray and the Project of Caring for the Self of the Coloniser and
Colonised. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 7(2), 141-164. Retrieved
from
http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/212665683/fullt
extPDF/C31C049513794066PQ/1?accountid=13380. doi:10.1111/j.1835-
9310.1996.tb00159.x
403 Bibliography
Lawry, J. R. (1972). The free, compulsory and secular education acts reassessed.
Melbourne Studies in Education, 14(1), 211-227. Retrieved from http://www-
tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/17508487209556052.
doi:10.1080/17508487209556052
LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (2012). Analysis and Interpretation of
Ethnographic Data : A Mixed Methods Approach (2nd ed. Vol. Book 5).
California: AltaMira Press.
Leeuwen, T. v. (1993). Genre and field in critical discourse analysis: a synopsis.
Discourse & Society, 4(2), 193-223. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1177/095792
6593004002004. doi:10.1177/0957926593004002004
Leonardo, Z. (2002). The souls of White Folk: Critical pedagogy, Whiteness studies,
and globalization discourse. Race Ethnicity and Education, 5(1), 29-50.
Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/13613320120117180.
doi:10.1080/13613320120117180
Lillian, D. L. (2008). Modality, persuasion and manipulation in Canadian
conservative discourse. Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis across
Disciplines, 2(1), 1-16.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E. (2007). But is it rigorous? Trustworthiness and authenticity
in naturalistic evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 114, 15-25.
Lingard, B. (2003). Leading learning: Making hope practical in schools.
Philadelpha;Maidenhead, England;: Open University Press.
Luke, A. (1995). Text and discourse in education: An introduction to Critical
Discourse Analysis. Review of Research in Education, 21, 3-48. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/pdf/1167278.pdf.
doi:10.2307/1167278
Luke, A. (2002). Beyond science and ideology critique: Developments in Critical
Discourse Analysis. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 22, 96-110.
Retrieved from
http://journals.cambridge.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/action/displayFulltext?
type=1&fid=135894&jid=APL&volumeId=22&issueId=-
1&aid=135893&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOCSession=.
doi:10.1017/S0267190502000053
Lynch, K., & Baker, J. (2005). Equality in education: An equality of condition
perspective. Theory and research in education, 3(2), 131-164.
Malezer, L. (2013). Challenges in evaluating Indigenous policy. In Productivity
Commission (Ed.), Better Indigenous policies: The role of evaluation -
Roundtable Proceedings (pp. 69-79). Canberra: Productivity Commission,.
Bibliography 404
Retrieved from http://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/better-indigenous-
policies/better-indigenous-policies.pdf.
Malik, K. (1996). The meaning of race: race, history and culture in Western society.
Houndsmills, Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Malin, M., & Maidment, D. (2003). Education, Indigenous survival and well-being:
Emerging ideas and programs. The Australian Journal of Indigenous
Education, 32, 85-100. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=17498321
4699777;res=IELIND.
Martin, K. (2008). Please knock before you enter: Aboriginal regulation of Outsiders
and the implications for researchers. Brisbane: PostPressed.
Martin, K., & Mirraboopa, B. (2003). Ways of knowing, being and doing: A
theoretical framework and methods for Indigenous and Indigenist re‐search.
Journal of Australian Studies, 27(76), 203-214.
Maynard, J. (2003). Vision, voice and influence: The rise of the Australian
Aboriginal Progressive Association. Australian Historical Studies, 34(121),
91-105. Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/10314610308596238.
McConville, G. (Singer-songwriter). (2002). Regional agreements, higher education
and representations of indigenous Australian reality: why wasn't I taught that
in school? On Australian Universities' Review. Retrieved from:
http://search.informit.com.au/search;res=APAFT;search=DN=200210820
MCEECDYA. (2011a). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan
2010-2014: 2010 Annual Report. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/ATSI%20do
cuments/2010%20ATSI%20Report/FINAL_2010_Annual_Report-
ATSIEAP.pdf.
MCEECDYA. (2011b). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan
(2010-2014). Retrieved from
http://www.mceecdya.edu.au/verve/_resources/A10-
0945_IEAP_web_version_final2.pdf
MCEECDYA. (2011c). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan
(2010-2014). Retrieved from
http://www.mceecdya.edu.au/verve/_resources/A10-
0945_IEAP_web_version_final2.pdf.
MCEETYA. (1999). Adelaide Declaration on National Goals for Schooling in the
Twenty-First Century. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/archive/Publications/Publications-archive/The-
Adelaide-Declaration.aspx.
405 Bibliography
MCEETYA. (2006). Australian Directions in Indigenous Education 2005-2008.
Retrieved from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/Australian_Directions_in_In
digenous_Education_2005-2008.pdf.
MCEETYA. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young
Australians. Retrieved from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the
_Educational_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf.
MCEETYA Taskforce on Indigenous Education. (2000). Achieving Educational
Equality for Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples.
Retrieved from
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/reporta_file.pdf.
MCEETYA Taskforce on Indigenous Education. (2001). Exploring multiple
pathways for Indigenous students: Discussion Paper. Carlton South, VIC,
Australia: Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and
Youth Affairs Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/Reports%20
and%20publications/Publications/Cultural%20inclusion%20and%20ATSI/Ex
ploring%20multiple%20pathways%20for%20Indigenous%20Students-
Discussion%20paper.pdf.
McGrath, A. (1995). Contested ground: Australian Aborigines under the British
crown. St. Leonards, N.S.W: Allen & Unwin.
McIntosh, P. (1998). White privilege: Unpacking the invisible knapsack. Race, class
and gender: An anthology, 94-105.
McLennan, V., & Khavarpour, F. (2004). Culturally appropriate health promotion:
Its meaning and application in Aboriginal communities. Health Promotion
Journal of Australia, 15(3), 237-239. Retrieved from
http://www.publish.csiro.au/he/pdf/HE04237
Meadmore, P. (2001). 'Free, compulsory and secular'? The re-invention of Australian
public education. Journal of Education Policy, 16(2), 113-125. Retrieved
from http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/02680930010025329.
doi:10.1080/02680930010025329
Mellor, S., & Corrigan, M. (2004). The case for change: A review of contemporary
research on Indigenous education outcomes. Victoria, Australia: ACER Press
Retrieved from
http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=aer.
Messing, S., Jabon, M., & Plaut, E. (2016). Bias in the flesh: Skin complexion and
stereotype consistency in political campaigns. Public Opinion Quarterly,
80(1), 44-65. Retrieved from
http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.usq.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vi
Bibliography 406
d=1&sid=ba1d7c98-7cfe-4e6d-b934-f85210c9c4f0%40sessionmgr120.
doi:10.1093/poq/nfv046
Mills, C., & Gale, T. (2010). Schooling in disadvantaged communities: Playing the
game from the back of the field. Retrieved from https://link-springer-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/content/pdf/10.1007%2F978-90-481-3344-
4.pdf
Mingat, A., Tan, J.-P., & Sosale, S. (2003). Tools for education policy analysis.
Washington, DC.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development/The World Bank.
Moran, A. (2002). As Australia decolonizes: Indigenizing settler nationalism and the
challenges of settler/Indigenous relations. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 25(6),
1013-1042. Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/0141987022000009412.
doi:10.1080/0141987022000009412
Moreton-Robinson, A. (1998). Witnessing whiteness in the wake of Wik. Social
Alternatives, 17(2), 11-14. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=98080789
2;res=IELAPA.
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2004). Whiteness, epistemology and Indigenous
representation. In A. Moreton-Robinson (Ed.), Whitening Race: Essays in
Social and Cultural Criticism (pp. 75-88). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies
Press.
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous Women's
Standpoint Theory: A methodological tool. Australian Feminist Studies,
28(78), 331-347. Retrieved from http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/08164649.2013.876664.
doi:10.1080/08164649.2013.876664
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015a). I still call Australia home. In A. Moreton-Robinson
(Ed.), The White Possessive: Property, power and Indigenous sovereignty
(pp. 3-18). Minneapolis, USA: University of Minnesota Press.
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2015b). Indigenous Americas: White Possessive : Property,
Power, and Indigenous Sovereignty: University of Minnesota Press.
Morgan, B., West, E., Nakata, M., Hall, K., Swisher, K., Ahenakew, F., . . . Blair, N.
(1999). The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Rights in Education.
Journal of American Indian Education, 39(1), 52-64. Retrieved from
http://gateway.library.qut.edu.au/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.
aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=507660953&site=ehost-live&scope=site
Morgan, B., West, E., Nakata, M., Hall, K., Swisher, K., Ahenakew, F., . . . Blair, N.
(2006). The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples' Rights in
Education. In P. Read, G. Meyers & B. Reece (Eds.), What good condition? :
407 Bibliography
Reflections on an Australian Aboriginal Treaty 1986-2006 (pp. 229-236).
Canberra: ANU E Press.
Munro, K. (2005). The Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill
(2005) : a threat to self-determination in indigenous education. Indigenous
Law Bulletin, 6(12), 12-15. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;res=AGISPT;
dn=20053321.
Myers, F. (1991). Representing culture: The production of discourse(s) for
Aboriginal acrylic paintings. Cultural Anthropology, 6(1), 26-62. Retrieved
from
http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/pdf/656494.pdf?_=14679
53266340. doi:10.1525/can.1991.6.1.02a00020
Nakata, M. (1995). Culture in education: A political strategy for us or for them?
Ngoonjook(11), 40-61. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=03259162
2745468;res=IELAPA.
Nakata, M. (1998). Anthropological texts and Indigenous standpoints. Australian
Aboriginal Studies, 1998(2), 3-12. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=15199170
2568013;res=IELAPA.
Nakata, M. (2007a). The Cultural Interface. The Australian Journal of Indigenous
Education, 36, 7-14.
Nakata, M. (2007b). Disciplining the savages: Savaging the disciplines. Canberra:
Aboriginal Studies Press.
National Catholic Education Commission. (2016). Commissioners. Retrieved from
http://www.ncec.catholic.edu.au/about-ncec/commissioners
National Congress of Australia's First Peoples. (2016). Redfern Statement - A call for
urgent Government action. Retrieved from
http://nationalcongress.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/The-Redfern-
Statement-9-June-_Final.pdf.
National Health and Medical Research Council, Australian Research Council, &
Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee. (2015). National Statement on
Ethical Conduct in Human Research 2007 (Updated May 2015). Canberra:
Commonwealth of Australia Retrieved from
https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/_files_nhmrc/publications/attachments/e72_nation
al_statement_may_2015_150514_a.pdf.
Niesche, R. (2013). Combating role discontinuity for principals of remote Indigenous
schools. In R. Jorgensen, P. Sullivan & P. Grootenboer (Eds.), Pedagogies to
enhance learning for Indigenous students (pp. 61-74). Singapore: Springer.
Retrieved from
Bibliography 408
http://ebookcentral.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/lib/qut/reader.actio
n?docID=1083719.
Novak, L. (2016). Families SA to be separated from Education Department on
recommendation of Nyland Royal Commission, The Advertiser. Retrieved
from http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/families-sa-to-be-
separated-from-education-department-on-recommendation-of-nyland-royal-
commission/news-story/39e8ce869d71046e02fd1dfec9fef24d
O'Brien, A., & Hall, L. (March 17, 2010). Ernie Dingo claims the first welcome, The
Weekend Australian. Retrieved from
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/archive/in-depth/ernie-dingo-claims-the-
first-welcome/news-story/a19a26bd8b31e8cfde361a5db68c546f
O’Donoghue, L. (1994). Keynote address: Australian government and self–
determination. In C. Fletcher (Ed.), Aboriginal Self–Determination in
Australia (pp. 3-12). Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Office of Research Ethics and Integrity. (2016). Research Integrity. Retrieved from
http://www.orei.qut.edu.au/integrity/
Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development (OECD). (2010).
Overcoming School Failure: Policies that work. Retrieved from
https://www.oecd.org/edu/school/45171670.pdf.
Organisation for Economic and Co-operation Development (OECD). (2012). Equity
and Quality in Education: Supporting Disadvantaged Students and Schools.
Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/school/50293148.pdf.
Osborne, S., & Guenther, J. (2013). Red dirt thinking on power, pedagogy and
paradigms: Reframing the dialogue in remote education. The Australian
Journal of Indigenous Education, 42(2), 111-122. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=78338856
6157717;res=IELIND.
Ozga, J. (2000). Policy research in educational settings: contested terrain.
Buckingham: Open University Press.
Parbury, N. (2011). A history of Aboriginal education. In R. Craven (Ed.), Teaching
Aboriginal Studies: A practical resource for primary and secondary teaching
(pp. 132-152). Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Parliament of Australia. (2017). Current Ministry List. Retrieved from
https://www.aph.gov.au/about_parliament/parliamentary_departments/parlia
mentary_library/parliamentary_handbook/current_ministry_list
Parliament of Victoria. (1869). Aboriginal Protection Act 1869 (Vic). Retrieved
from
https://www.foundingdocs.gov.au/resources/transcripts/vic7i_doc_1869.pdf.
409 Bibliography
Parliamentary Education Office and Australian Government Solicitor. (2010).
Australia's Constitution with Overview and Notes by the Australian
Government Solicitor. Retrieved from
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_practice_n_proced
ures/Constitution.aspx.
Partington, G. (1998a). In those days it was that rough: Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander history and education. In G. Partington (Ed.), Perspectives on
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education (pp. 27-54). Tuggerah,
N.S.W, Australia: Social Science Press.
Partington, G. (1998b). Perspectives on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
education. Katoomba, N.S.W: Social Science Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Peters-Little, F. (2000). The community game: Aboriginal self definition at the local
level. Retrieved from
https://aiatsis.gov.au/sites/default/files/products/discussion_paper/littlefp-
dp10-community-game-aboriginal-self-definition-local-level.pdf
Pholi, K., Black, D., & Richards, C. (2009). Is ‘Close the Gap’ a useful approach to
improving the health and wellbeing of Indigenous Australians? Australian
Review of Public Affairs, 9(2), 1-13.
Poroch, N., Arabena, K., Tongs, J., Larkin, S., Fisher, J., & Henderson, G. (2009).
Spirituality and Aboriginal people's social and emotional wellbeing: A
review. Darwin: Cooperative Research Centre for Aboriginal Health
Retrieved from
https://www.lowitja.org.au/sites/default/files/docs/DP_11_spirituality_review
.pdf.
Porter, M. (2015). Somos Incas: Enduring cultural sensibilities and Indigenous
education. In W. J. Jacob, S. Y. Cheng & M. Porter (Eds.), Indigenous
Education : Language, Culture and Identity (pp. 241-279). Dordrecht:
Springer.
Price, K. (2012a). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education: An introduction
for the teaching profession. Port Melbourne, VIC: Cambridge University
Press.
Price, K. (2012b). Chapter 1 - A brief history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
education in Australia. In K. Price (Ed.), Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander education: An introduction for the teaching profession (pp. 1-20):
Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from
http://ebooks.cambridge.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/pdf_viewer.jsf?cid=CB
O9781139519403A007&ref=true&pubCode=CUP&urlPrefix=cambridge&pr
oductCode=cbo.
Bibliography 410
Productivity Commission. (2015). National Indigenous Reform Agreement:
Performance Assessment 2013-2014. Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/supporting/indigenous-reform-
assessment/indigenous-reform-assessment.pdf.
Productivity Commission. (2016). National Education Evidence Base: Productivity
Commission Draft Report. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia Retrieved
from http://apo.org.au/files/Resource/prod_comm_education-evidence-
draft_2016.pdf.
QSRInternational. (n.d.). NVivo 10 Overview. Retrieved March 15, 2015from
http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspx
Read, P., Meyers, G. D., & Reece, B. (2006). What good condition?: reflections on
an Australian Aboriginal treaty 1986-2006. Vol. no. 13. Retrieved from
http://press.anu.edu.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/publications/aboriginal-
history-monographs/what-good-condition
Reconciliation Australia. (2015). Submission to the Department of the Treasury:
2015-16 Commonwealth Budget. Retrieved from
https://www.reconciliation.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/2015-16-Pre-
budget-submission-Reconciliation-Australia.pdf.
Reconciliation Australia. (2016). The State of Reconcilation in Australia: Our
history, Our story, Our future. Kingston, ACT, Australia: Reconciliation
Australia Retrieved from http://iaha.com.au/wp-
content/uploads/2016/02/The-State-of-Reconciliation-report_FULL_WR.pdf.
Referendum Council. (2017). Uluru Statement from the Heart. Retrieved from
https://www.referendumcouncil.org.au/sites/default/files/2017-
05/Uluru_Statement_From_The_Heart_0.PDF.
Renes, C. M. (2011). The stolen generations, a narrative of removal, displacement
and recovery. Retrieved from http://www.ub.edu/dpfilsa/3renes.pdf
Reynolds, H. (1989). Dispossession: Black Australians and white invaders. Sydney:
Allen & Unwin.
Reynolds, H. (1996). Frontier: Aborigines, settlers and land. St. Leonards, N.S.W:
Allen & Unwin.
Reynolds, H. (2006). The other side of the frontier: Aboriginal resistance to the
European invasion of Australia (Vol. Revis). Sydney: University of New
South Wales Press.
Reynolds, R. J. (2009). "Clean, Clad and Courteous" revisited: A review history of
200 Years of Aboriginal education in New South Wales. The Journal of
Negro Education, 78(1), 83-94. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/222069067/fullt
extPDF/45C2F90BEE2744AEPQ/1?accountid=13380.
411 Bibliography
Richardson, V., & Anders, P. L. (1998). A view from across the Grand Canyon.
Learning Disability Quarterly, 21(1), 85-97. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/pdf/1511374.pdf.
doi:10.2307/1511374
Rigney, L. (1999). Internationalization of an Indigenous anticolonial cultural critique
of research methodologies: A guide to Indigenist Research Methodology and
its principles. Wicazo sa review, 14, 109-121.
Rigney, L. I. (2002). Indigenous education and treaty : Building Indigenous
management capacity. Balayi : Culture, Law and Colonialism(4), 73-82.
Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;res=AGISPT;
dn=20030434.
Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2010). Globalizing education policy (Vol. 1). New York,
USA: Routledge.
Rorris, A., Weldon, P., Beavis, A., McKenzie, P., Bramich, M., & Deery, A. (2011).
Assessment of current process for targeting of schools funding to
disadvantaged students: A report prepared for The Review of Funding for
Schooing Panel. Retrieved from
http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1009&context=policy
_analysis_misc
Ryan, G. W., & Bernard, H. R. (2003). Techniques to identify themes. Field
Methods, 15(1), 85-109. Retrieved from
http://journals.sagepub.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1177/152582
2X02239569. doi:10.1177/1525822X02239569
Said, E. W. (2003). Orientalism (Rev. ed.). London: Penguin.
Sanders, W. (2002). Towards an Indigenous order of Australian government:
Rethinking self-determination as Indigenous affairs policy. Centre for
Aboriginal Economic Policy Research.
Sarra, C. (2015). High expectations realities through high expectations relationships:
Delivering beyond the Indigenous policy rhetoric - Senate Occasional
Lecture (13th November, 2015). Canberra: Parliament of Australia Retrieved
from
http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Senate/Whats_On/Seminars_and_
Lectures/Senate_Occasional_Lecture_Series/Transcripts/~/~/link.aspx?_id=6
11C36968D1B47DA8E6C29D5DB3CE5E7&_z=z.
Schools Commission. (1975). Schools Commission Report for the Triennium 1976-
1978: Chapter 9 - Education for Aborigines. Aboriginal Child at School, 3(3),
42-54. Retrieved from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/fullText;dn=01126824
3035097;res=IELIND.
Bibliography 412
SCRGSP. (2016). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2016.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/2016/report-documents/oid-2016-overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage-key-indicators-2016-report.pdf.
SCSEEC. (2012). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan
2010-2014: 2011 Annual Report. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/ATSI%20do
cuments/2011%20ATSI%20Report%20Folder/ATSI%202011%20Annual%2
0Report-FinalB.pdf.
SCSEEC. (2013). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education Action Plan:
2012 Annual Report. Retrieved from
http://www.scseec.edu.au/site/DefaultSite/filesystem/documents/ATSI%20do
cuments/2012%20ATSI%20Report/ATSIEAP%202012%20Report.pdf.
Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research
projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75. Retrieved from
http://www.crec.co.uk/docs/Trustworthypaper.pdf.
Sherington, G., & Campbell, C. (2007). Middle-class formations and the emergence
of national schooling. In K. Tolley (Ed.), Transformations in schooling:
Historical and comparative perspectives (pp. 15-39). New York , USA.:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Smith, G. H. (2003). Indigenous struggle for the transformation of education and
schooling: Keynote address to the Alaskan Federation of Natives Convention.
Paper presented at Alaskan Federation of Natives Convention, Anchorage,
Alaska.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples.
Dunedin: University of Otago Press.
Sonn, C. C., & Green, M. J. (2006). Problematising the discourses of the dominant:
Whiteness and reconciliation. Journal of Community & Applied Social
Psychology, 16(5), 379-395. Retrieved from
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/10.1002/casp.877/
epdf. doi:10.1002/casp.882
Standing Committee on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Affairs. (2001). "We
can do it!": The report of the inquiry into the needs of urban dwelling
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Retrieved from
https://www.aph.gov.au/parliamentary_business/committees/House_of_Repre
sentatives_Committees?url=/atsia/urbandwelling/inquiryreport.htm.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2003). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2003.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
413 Bibliography
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/keyindicators2003/keyindicators2003.pdf.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2005). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2005.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/keyindicators2005/keyindicators2005.pdf.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2007). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2007.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/keyindicators2007/keyindicators2007.pdf.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2009). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key Indicators 2009.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/keyindicators2009/key-indicators-2009.pdf.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2011). Overcoming Indigenous Disadvantage: Key indicators 2011.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/key-indicators-2011/key-indicators-2011-report.pdf.
Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision (SCRGSP).
(2014). Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: Key Indicators 2014.
Canberra: Productivity Commission Retrieved from
http://www.pc.gov.au/research/ongoing/overcoming-indigenous-
disadvantage/key-indicators-2014/key-indicators-2014-report.pdf.
Stubbs, M. (1996). Text and text types. In M. Stubbs (Ed.), Text and Corpus
Analysis: Computer-assisted studies of language and culture (pp. 1-15).
Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Retrieved from https://www.uni-
trier.de/fileadmin/fb2/ANG/Linguistik/Stubbs/stubbs-1996-text-corpus-ch-
1.pdf.
Sulkunen, P., & Törrönen, J. (1997). The production of values: The concept of
modality in textual discourse analysis. Semiotica, 113(1-2), 43-70. Retrieved
from
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jukka_Toerroenen/publication/2365024
13_The_production_of_values_The_concept_of_modality_in_textual_discou
rse_analysis/links/547cad990cf285ad5b0883ef.pdf.
Taçon, P. S. (2004). Ochre, clay, stone and art: The symbolic importance of minerals
as life-force among Aboriginal peoples of Northern and Central Australia. In
N. Boivin & O. M-A. (Eds.), Soils, stones and symbols: Cultural perceptions
of the mineral world (pp. 31-42). London, UK: UCL Press.
Bibliography 414
Taffe, S. (1995). Australian Diplomacy in a policy vacuum: Govenrment and
Aboriginal Affairs, 1961-62. Aboriginal History, 19(1/2), 154-172. Retrieved
from
http://search.informit.com.au.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/documentSummary;dn
=857041552739671;res=IELAPA.
Taylor, S. (2004). Researching educational policy and change in ‘new times’: Using
critical discourse analysis. Journal of Education Policy, 19(4), 433-451.
Taylor, S., Knight, J., Henry, M., & Lingard, R. (2006). Understanding schooling:
An introductory sociology of Australian education. Retrieved from
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/qut/detail.action?docID=178354doi:10.
4324/9780203135990
Tenorio, E. H. (2011). Critical discourse analysis, an overview. Nordic Journal of
English Studies, 10(1), 183-210.
Thomas, S. (2005). The construction of teacher identities in educational policy
documents: A critical discourse analysis. Critical Studies in Education, 46(2),
25-44.
Thompson, J. R. (2010). Documents that shaped Australia: Records of a Nation's
heritage. Millers Point, NSW, Australia: Murdoch Books.
Tiwari, J. (2004). Child Abuse and Human Rights (Vol. 2). Delhi, India: Isha Books.
Turnbull, M. (2017). Response to Referendum Council's Report on Constitutional
Recognition. Retrieved from https://www.pm.gov.au/media/2017-10-
26/response-referendum-councils-report-constitutional-recognition.
Turner, J. C., Oakes, P. J., Haslam, S. A., & McGarty, C. (7-10 May, 1992).
Personal and social identity: Self and social context. Paper presented at The
Self and the Collective, Princeton University, NJ. Retrieved from
http://psychology.anu.edu.au/files/Abstracts-Presentations-1-Personal-and-
Social-Identity-Self-and-Social-Context-Princeton-1992.pdf
UNESCO. (2013). UNESCO Handbook on Education Policy Analysis and
Programming - Education Policy Analysis. Bangkok, Thailand: UNESCO
Bangkok Retrieved from
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0022/002211/221189e.pdf.
United Nations General Assembly. (1948). The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights. Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/UDHR/Documents/UDHR_Translations/eng.pdf.
United Nations General Assembly. (2008). The United Nations Declaration on the
rights of Indigenous peoples.: Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/DRIPS_en.pdf.
415 Bibliography
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (1966).
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr.pdf.
United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner. (n.d.). Leaflet No. 1
- Indigenous Peoples and the United Nations systems: An overview.
Retrieved from
http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuideIPleaflet1en.pdf.
United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues [UNPFII]. (2009). State of
the World's Indigenous Peoples. Retrieved from
http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/SOWIP/en/SOWIP_web.pdf
Universities Australia. (2017). Indigenous Strategy 2017-2020. Retrieved from
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/Media-and-Events/media-
releases/Universities-unveil-indigenous-participation-
targets#.Wd4KzK27qpo.
Van Dijk, T. A. (1993). Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & society,
4(2), 249-283. Retrieved from
http://das.sagepub.com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/content/4/2/249.full.pdf+htm
l.
Van Dijk, T. A. (2009). Critical discourse studies: A sociocognitive approach.
Methods of critical discourse analysis, 2(1), 62-86. Retrieved from
http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/Critical%20discourse%20studies.pdf.
Venkateswar, S., & Hughes, E. (2011). The politics of Indigeneity: Dialogues and
reflections on Indigenous activism. New York;London;: Zed.
wa Thiong'o, N. (1986). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African
literature. Portsmouth, N.H;London;: J. Currey.
Walsh, M. (1993). Languages and their status in Aboriginal Australia. In M. Walsh
& C. Yallop (Eds.), Language and Culture in Aboriginal Australia (pp. 1-14).
Canberra, A.C.T: Aboriginal Studies Press.
Watkin, D. (2015). A history of Western architecture (Vol. 6). London: Laurence
King Publishing.
Weiss, G., & Wodak, R. (2003). Critical discourse analysis: Theory and
interdisciplinarity. New York, USA; Basingstoke, Hampshire, UK: Palgrave
Macmillan.
Welch, A. R. (1988). Aboriginal education as internal colonialism: The schooling of
an Indigenous minority in Australia. Comparative Education, 24(2), 203-215.
Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/stable/3099076.
Wharton, C. (2006). Document analysis. In V. Jupp (Ed.), The SAGE Dictionary of
Social Research Methods (pp. 80-82). London, UK: SAGE Publications.
Bibliography 416
Williamson, A. (1997). Decolonizing historiography of colonial education: Processes
of interaction in the schooling of Torres Strait Islanders. International
Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 10(4), 407-423. Retrieved from
http://www-tandfonline-
com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/doi/pdf/10.1080/095183997236990.
doi:10.1080/095183997236990
Wodak, R., & Meyer, M. (2009). Critical Discourse Analysis: History, agenda,
theory and methodology. Methods of Critical Discourse Analysis, 2, 1-33.
Yunkaporta, T., & Shillingsworth, D. (2016). Relationally Responsive Standpoint.
Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/relationally-responsive-
standpoint-tyson-yunkaporta
Zubrick, S., & Silburn, S. (2006). Western Australian Aboriginal Child Health
Survey: Improving the educational experiences of Aboriginal children and
young people. Perth: Curtin University of Technology and Telethon Institute
for Child Health Research Retrieved from
http://aboriginal.telethonkids.org.au/media/395536/western_australian_aborig
inal_child_health_survey_main_volume.pdf.
417 Bibliography
Appendices
Bibliography 418
419 Appendix A: Timeline for study
Appendix A: Timeline for study
Dec 2015 - Feb 2016 Mar 2016 Apr 2016 May -July 2016
August 2016
Timeline of
milestones to
Confirmation
Stage 2 Document / REIS
Ethics Quiz
Reading of Lit: Jul 2015 – Feb
2016
1. V1 draft Ch 1 Intro address
supervisory feedback
2.V1 draft Ch 2 Lit Review;
send to supervisory team; Feedback
from team
V2 draft Ch 1 address
supervisory feedback; feedback from
team.
V2 Ch2 Lit Review, address
supervisory feedback; feedback from
team.
V1 draft Ch 3 Theoretical
Framework; send to supervisory
team; feedback from team
V3 penultimate draft Ch 1 feedback addressed in preparation for final
V3 penultimate draft Ch 2 feedback addressed in preparation for final
V2 draft Theoretical framework send to supervisory team; feedback from team
V1 draft of methodology send to supervisory team; feedback from team
Ch1 final
Ch 2 final
V3 penultimate draft of Ch 3 addressed in preparation for final
V2 draft of methodology send to supervisory team; feedback from team
Ch 1, 2 & 3
Ch 4 final
Prepare confirmation
presentation
Begin NEAF ethics
application
Journals/Con
ference s
AER Journal – Articulation
of Ind theoretical with CDA
Sept 2016 – Nov 2016 Dec 2016 – May 2017 Jun 2017 – Nov 2017 Dec 2017 Jan 2018
Timeline of
milestones to Final
Seminar
Ch 1 & 2
Ch 3 final
V3 penultimate draft Ch 4
feedback addressed in preparation for
final
Notice of intent for
confirmation; prep document for proof-
reading and submission.
Data Analysis – policy documents
V1 and V2 draft Ch 5 Data Analysis –supervisory feedback
V1 and V2 draft Ch 6 Discussion–supervisory feedback
V3 penultimate draft Ch 5 Data Analysis–feedback addressed in
preparation for final
V3 penultimate draft Ch 6 Discussion –feedback addressed in
preparation for final
V1 draft Conclusion; feedback from team
Revision of Ch 1-4 in preparation for final; prep document for proof
reading
Ch 5 final
Ch 6 final
Ch 5
Ch 6
V2 draft Conclusion; send to supervisory team; feedback addressed
for final
Ch 7 – Conclusion
Notice of intent for final seminar; prep Ch 5-7 for proof reading and
submission
Final Seminar presentation
Journals/
Conferences
Journal AARE Conference Journal Conference
421 Appendix B: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis
Appendix B: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis
Word Length Count Weighted Percentage
(%)
indigenous 10 176 4.70
education 9 128 3.42
peoples 7 81 2.16
aboriginal 10 61 1.63
islander 8 61 1.63
torres 6 61 1.63
strait 6 60 1.60
right 5 39 1.04
strategy 8 37 0.99
people 6 32 0.85
national 8 31 0.83
rights 6 30 0.80
children 8 27 0.72
school 6 23 0.61
cultures 8 21 0.56
young 5 21 0.56
actions 7 20 0.53
cultural 8 20 0.53
development 11 20 0.53
educational 11 20 0.53
council 7 19 0.51
languages 9 18 0.48
learning 8 17 0.45
australian 10 15 0.40
local 5 14 0.37
attendance 10 13 0.35
culture 7 13 0.35
including 9 13 0.35
systems 7 13 0.35
world 5 13 0.35
early 5 12 0.32
human 5 12 0.32
outcomes 8 12 0.32
principles 10 12 0.32
access 6 11 0.29
determination 13 11 0.29
governments 11 11 0.29
international 13 11 0.29
priority 8 11 0.29
provide 7 11 0.29
areas 5 10 0.27
collaborative 13 10 0.27
community 9 10 0.27
culturally 10 10 0.27
government 10 10 0.27
group 5 10 0.27
Appendix B: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis 422
improve 7 10 0.27
knowledge 9 10 0.27
values 6 10 0.27
advice 6 9 0.24
childhood 9 9 0.24
communities 11 9 0.24
declaration 11 9 0.24
fundamental 11 9 0.24
future 6 9 0.24
instruments 11 9 0.24
ministers 9 9 0.24
promote 7 9 0.24
senior 6 9 0.24
statement 9 9 0.24
students 8 9 0.24
wisdom 6 9 0.24
youth 5 9 0.24
achieve 7 8 0.21
action 6 8 0.21
423 Appendix C: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis: Like terms
Appendix C: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis: Like terms
Word Length Count Weighted Percentage
(%) Similar Words
indigenous 10 176 4.70 indigenous
educators 9 152 4.06 educate, education, educational, educators
peoples 7 121 3.23 people, peoples, peoples’
right 5 69 1.84 right, rights
cultures 8 64 1.71 cultural, culturally, culture, cultures
aboriginal 10 61 1.63 aboriginal
islander 8 61 1.63 islander
torres 6 61 1.63 torres
strait 6 60 1.60 strait
strategy 8 41 1.09 strategies, strategy
nations 7 40 1.07 nation, national, nations
development 11 34 0.91 develop, developed, developing, development
school 6 31 0.83 school, schooling, schools
actions 7 28 0.75 action, actions
children 8 27 0.72 children
languages 9 26 0.69 language, languages
governments 11 23 0.61 govern, governance, government, governments
including 9 22 0.59 include, included, includes, including
community 9 21 0.56 communication, communities, community
determination 13 21 0.56 determination, determine, determined
learning 8 21 0.56 learn, learning, learnings
provide 7 21 0.56 provide, provided, providers, provides, providing
young 5 21 0.56 young
australian 10 19 0.51 australian, australians
council 7 19 0.51 council
systems 7 18 0.48 system, systemic, systems
priority 8 17 0.45 priorities, priority
achieve 7 16 0.43 achieve, achievement, achievements, achieving
respect 7 16 0.43 respect, respected, respecting, respective, respects
collaborative 13 15 0.40 collaboration, collaborative, collaboratively
recognize 9 15 0.40 recognize, recognized, recognizes, recognizing
local 5 14 0.37 local
report 6 14 0.37 report, reporting, reports
access 6 13 0.35 access, accessibility, accessible
attendance 10 13 0.35 attendance
human 5 13 0.35 human, humanity
outcomes 8 13 0.35 outcome, outcomes
students 8 13 0.35 student, students, students’
transition 10 13 0.35 transition, transitions
values 6 13 0.35 value, valued, values
Appendix C: NVivo Word Frequency corpus analysis: Like terms 424
425 Appendix D: Exemplification of the semiotics analysis – The Strategy (2015)
Appendix D: Exemplification of the semiotics analysis – The
Strategy (2015)
PAGE TWO
THE IMAGE
1. Keyword Relevance
Does the image visualize the targeted keyword or referring link text?
2. yes
3. Purpose Clarity
Does the featured image help identify the page purpose and/or offer?
"Caption Test" Audit: Display just the image to someone not working on the project,
and have them write a caption. Does it align with what the page is about?
4. Page talks about collaboration/cooperation; has vision statement with context
5. Design Support
Does the featured image support and enhance seamless flow of page design leading
to the CTA? (i.e. photo size, complementary CTA color, contrast, complexity.) Does
the featured image have a subtle cue pointing in the direction of the CTA? If yes, +1
BONUS! (e.g. eye path, lines, shadows)
6. Indigenous student central
7. Authenticity
Does the featured image represent the organization and offer in an authentic, credible
fashion? (i.e. genuine, honest, believable, actual vs. stock photo, brand-aligned)
Appendix D: Exemplification of the semiotics analysis – The Strategy (2015) 426
8. Added Value
Does the featured image add value by showing detail or context to improve
relevance, demonstrate benefits, and answer questions?
9. Identification – social cohesion
10. Desired Emotion
Does the featured image portray desired qualities or emotion to resonate and inspire
action? (Considerations: mood, lighting, scene, body language, colors, urgency)
11. Definitely setting mood – future expectations; discourse of imaginaries
Customer "Hero"
Does the featured image depict the customer as the "hero" once equipped with this
solution?
NOTES:
The image depicts a readily recognisable Aboriginal girl (due to skin colour) and a readily recognisable non-Indigenous girl (due to skin colour and fair hair) smiling in a library – reference to Literacy
Smiling: happy; engaged – looking at something not pictures; assumption book; enjoyment
Individuals to left of image to allow for contextual clues – ie. Library
NOTE: Indigenous student in white shirt differing to peer – purpose??
Central to image also; Notion of white being pure??? Innocent?? Angelic??
427 Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta Statement (2006 Version)
Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta
Statement (2006 Version)
PAGE 229
Paragraph The need for such an instrument is self-evident.
Over the last 30 years, Indigenous peoples
throughout the world have argued that they have
been denied equity in non-Indigenous education
systems which has failed to provide educational
services that nurture the whole Indigenous person
inclusive of scholarship, culture and spirituality.
Text - Description
Genres:
semantic relations between
clauses and sentences (e.g.
elaborative); grammatical
mood
Declarative statements
Semantic relations:
Sentence 1: Causal – Reason (The need for x is y)
Sentence 2: Elaboration + Additive (use of relative
clauses to justify Reason)
Themes:
Coolangatta Statement, Indigenous peoples, equity,
non-Indigenous education systems, the whole
Indigenous person
Pronouns:
Sentence 1 – 0
Sentence 2 – 1
Discourses:
themes; metaphors;
collocations; nouns/pronouns;
inclusion/exclusion;
names/classified; processes –
active/passive; participants,
Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta Statement (2006 Version) 428
circumstances
Processes, participants, circumstances:
The Coolangatta Statement– necessary
Indigenous education – denied equity, non-
Indigenous education systems, failure to nurture the
whole Indigenous person
The need […] is (active); have argued (passive);
have been denied (passive); has failed (passive);
that nurture (active)
Recognition of the desire of Indigenous peoples to
gain an education that nurtures “the whole
Indigenous person”
Modality
Relational modality
The relation of one with others – the hegemonic
position of the coloniser over the colonised;
denying access to education; failure to provide
education that nurtures the whole Indigenous
person
Deontic modality
Indigenous peoples […] have argued – (deontic:
desirability; level – low)
Expressive modality
Establishing truth and confidence in the statement
Epistemic modality
The need…is self-evident – (epistemic : validity;
Styles:
Modality (modality verbs and
adverbs); evaluation
(adjectives); values (affective
mental processes – I think)
429 Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta Statement (2006 Version)
level – high); which has failed to provide –
(epistemic: validity; level – medium); that nurture
the whole Indigenous person (epistemic: validity;
level – low)
Euphemistic expression
Indigenous peoples; non-Indigenous education
systems
Binary construct
Establishing the hegemonic position of the
coloniser over the colonised; education of
Indigenous person includes culture and scholarship
Interaction – Interpretation
Genres:
Actions and actors – social
relationships
Hypotactic relations building the need for the
production of the Coolangatta Statement in the
lexis. Legitimation and rationalisation used to
further position the need for the production of the
Coolangatta Statement by providing statements in
regards to the denial and failure of non-Indigenous
systems providing a holistic education to
Indigenous peoples.
Indigenous = peoples, person
Non-Indigenous = education systems
Inequities in the provision of education for
Indigenous peoples within non-Indigenous
Discourses:
Representations of the world
Styles:
Persons and their identifying
Appendix E: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Coolangatta Statement (2006 Version) 430
education systems; arguments provided for over 30
years regarding the disparity evident by Indigenous
peoples
Indigenous peoples (adjective + plural noun)
Context – Explanation
What larger discourses are at play?
Indigenous education: the arguments presented by Indigenous peoples about
the failures of non-Indigenous education systems have been voiced for several
decades
Indigenous self: recognition of the whole Indigenous person “inclusive of
scholarship, culture and spirituality”
Actions: Or in this case, the lack of actions to address the concerns and
arguments brought forward by Indigenous peoples in regards to education
Indigenist Research Principles/Standpoint
Political Integrity: The arguments for reform and transformation within the
education provision of Indigenous peoples have been voiced for over 30 years.
Resistance as an emancipatory imperative: The means of voicing the failures of
non-Indigenous education systems illustrates the resistance against the
hegemonic positioning of the coloniser. The Coolangatta Statement highlights
the complexities of the Indigenous self: inclusive of the cultural and spiritual self
The Coolangatta Statement itself provides a collective Indigenous Standpoint on
the provision of education
431 Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015)
Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy
(2015)
PAGE ONE
Paragraph The strategy is the result of robust discussion,
reflection, debate and cooperation and its
development has been championed by the
Education Council’s Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander Education Advisory Group
established by the Australian Education, Early
Childhood Development and Youth Affairs
Senior Officials Committee to provide advice on
national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
policy initiatives and directions. The advisory
group is chaired by Tony Harrison, Chief
Executive of the South Australian Department for
Education and Child Development, and comprises
representatives from government departments, the
non-government school sector and community
representatives. I thank the advisory group for its
commitment, drive and wisdom through the
development process.
Text - Description
Genres:
semantic relations between
clauses and sentences (e.g.
Declarative statements
Semantic relations:
Sentence 1: Causal –Purpose
Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015) 432
elaborative); grammatical mood
+additive/elaboration
Sentence 2: Elaboration
Sentence 3: Elaboration
Themes:
Strategy, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Advisory Group, Tony Harrison,
government departments, non-government school
sectors, community representatives
Pronouns:
Sentence 1 – 0
Sentence 2 - 0
Sentence 3 - 2
Processes, participants, circumstances:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Group – established by AEEYSOC,
advise on policy initiatives, governmental and
non-governmental representatives, community
representatives, strategy
Is the result of (active); has been championed
(passive); to provide advice (active); is chaired by
(active); comprises representatives from (active);
I thank (active); for its commitment, drive and
wisdom (active); through the development
process (active)
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Discourses:
themes; metaphors;
collocations; nouns/pronouns;
inclusion/exclusion;
names/classified; processes –
active/passive; participants,
circumstances
Styles:
Modality (modality verbs and
adverbs); evaluation
(adjectives); values (affective
mental processes – I think)
433 Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015)
Advisory Group– the use of the possessive
apostrophe indicates that ATSIEAG is the
possession/works for Education Council (See
Brandt 2014); the chair is non-Indigenous (See
notes regarding TH; proffered as ‘wise’ indicating
knowledge and experience however the Chair’s
previous experiences were in anything but
education let alone Indigenous education
Modality
Relational modality
The relationship between Education Council and
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
Education Advisory Group; assistance in
producing policy
Deontic modality
Result of – (deontic : permission; level – low);
provide advice on (deontic: desirability; level –
low)
Expressive modality
Epistemic modality
has been championed – (epistemic : validity; level
– high); is chaired by – (epistemic: validity; level-
low); comprises representatives of – (epistemic:
validity; level – low)
Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015) 434
Interaction – Interpretation
Genres:
Actions and actors – social relationships
Elaborative relations building the
alignment between the Education
Council and the ATSIEAG in the lexis;
establishing the input in the production of
the Strategy provided by the ATSIEAG
The Strategy = is
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander =
Education Advisory Group; policy
initiatives
The positioning of the ATSIEAG as a
branch of the Education Council,
providing wisdom (knowledge and
experience) in Indigenous education
Strategy (proper noun); Education
Council (proper noun); AEEYSOC
(proper noun); Aboriginal and Torres
Strait Islander policy (noun); advisory
group (noun); South Australian DECD
(proper noun); government departments
(collective noun); non-government
school sector (collective noun);
community representatives (collective
noun)
Discourses:
Representations of the world
Styles:
Persons and their identifying
435 Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015)
Context – Explanation
What larger discourses are at play?
Indigenous education: the consultation and collaboration of Indigenous
Advisory Group to assist in the production of the Strategy
Actions: Consultation with the Indigenous Advisory Group as a process of
policy production
Values: Recognition of the contributions of the Indigenous Advisory Group in
the production of the Strategy
Indigenist Research Principles/Standpoint
Privileging Indigenous Voice: In particular in regards to privileging Indigenous
voice and the inclusion of Indigenous peoples in national decision-making as
well as the lack of transparency of who the representatives are on the
ATSIEAG, there are questions in regards to just what Indigenous voice is
actually present in the production of the Strategy. The only information
available about who is on the Advisory Group has a White male whose previous
experience does not indicate knowledge of educational processes as Chair. The
only representation of Indigenous peoples specifically is the ambiguous term of
“community representatives”. Again, no indication of whether both Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples are represented indicating the
homogenisation of Indigenous peoples as one. Further to this, there is no
indication as to who decides who these representatives are considering that
shortly after the formation of the ATSIEAG, the IECBs were defunded.
The term of reference “Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education
Advisory Group” is somewhat misleading as well as the assumption would be
that the Group is made up of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
Appendix F: Exemplification of the data analysis – The Strategy (2015) 436
which evidently from the information that is available it is not.
Furthermore, the reference to “wisdom” would indicate that the members of
this Advisory Group have knowledge and experience in Indigenous education as
a whole, an awareness of the various social determinants that influence and
effect the engagement and/or disengagement of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander students in education, as well as the many issues faced. However, again
the information provided is again limited and that which is available, does not
indicate that the Chair has had any experience within education as an educator
let alone, Indigenous education. Moreover, as TH was previously the Police
Assistant Commissioner of the South Australian Police system and the well-
documented relations of Indigenous peoples and the justice system… the orders
of discourse within the meetings would be determined by these positions of
authority.