102096 Research Teaching & Learning

Assessment Two: Engagement with an educational issue

Introduction
Teaching is a research-based profession as educators are constantly revising, improving

and enhancing their teaching pedagogy and best-practice to ensure effective and

transformative learning experiences for students. Educators are pro-active researchers

through their critical abilities to critique, reflect, evaluate and implement findings

within their practice (Kervin, Vialle, Howard, Herrington, & Okely, 2016). The

interrelationship of research and education is evident within the context of Hewitt’s

(2000) article on Aboriginal worldviews within the classroom.

The educational issue addressed

Educational inequalities exhibit the educational system which privileges the Anglo and
European worldview and marginalises those of an Indigenous background who have a
variant worldview. Hewitt (2000) asserts that educational institutions value the
dominant discourse and values which derive from an Australian culture and worldview.
Therefore, the worldview of the Indigenous is discredited as it is isolated as the inferior
and invisible ‘other’ due to the perception that it devises no educational value. The
‘invisibility’ of the Indigenous worldview is a result of a ‘’hidden curriculum’’ which
undermines the knowledge and experiences of Aborigines and favours the dominant
one. As Hewitt (2000) outlines, Indigenous individuals universally report their
schooling experience as an isolating and marginalising one due to its lack of relevance,
opportunities, racism and discrimination.

Indigenous students are often depicted as experiencing learning failures due to their
cultural backgrounds which is void of educational qualities, however, this is a result of
the educational deficit in acknowledging Indigenous forms of education. The research of
Malin (1990) on Indigenous schooling experiences in a South Australian school revealed
a dominant treatment prevailed towards Indigenous students. Students were made
invisible and discriminated against, however, learning mistakes were visibly exposed
which perpetuates racism. (Malin, 1990). This indicates that racism and white
superiority is becoming entrenched within the Australian educational culture and
Indigenous students are expected to undergo a ‘deculturation’ despite the abundance of
their knowledge and experience (Lawrence, 1994). It is extremely difficult for
Indigenous students to conserve their cultural background as educational institutions
emphasise on their predicaments to meet educational outcomes (Lawrence, 1994).

Culturally inclusive education is necessary for improving educational outcomes as it is

‘’seen as a key lever for addressing the disadvantage faced by indigenous Australians’’
which impact every generation (Harris, 1990, p.2). There needs to be the sharing of
world-views from both cultures as this will highly impact the learning capabilities of the
indigenous and their engagement.

The relevance of Indigenous world-views, broadly, and specific to my KLA

ACARA (2010) has delineated Indigenous perspectives as a necessity for education

through its embedment in cross-curriculum priorities due to the educational gaps
which exists between the Indigenous and their peers. ACARA (2010) outlines
Indigenous world-views as a key for reforming inequalities as it enables Indigenes to
relate to a variety of learning areas through its reflection of their cultural background
(ACARA, 2010). This will also allow for their self-esteem and identity to be established
as the cross-curriculum priorities focus on the valuing, respect and recognition of the
Aboriginal culture (ACARA, 2010). The cross-curriculum priorities apply across all
KLA’S and units of work as educators have a responsibility to conscribe with the
curriculum within their teaching practice. AITSL (2017) also outlines the first teaching
professional standard as teachers must ‘’know students and how they learn’’, therefore
it is a professional requirement to implement teaching strategies in the interest of your
students and based on how they learn to improve educational outcomes, inclusive of
Indigenous students (p.1). Killen (2016) emphasises on the need to utilise students
background knowledge as ‘’you can take advantage of it, build on it, or compensate for any
lack of knowledge’’ which is an effective strategy of best-practice (p.69).

Indigenous world-views are particularly relevant within the teaching of English. The
education system privileges standard Australian English, however, this promotes
inequality within the English KLA and creates an endless ripple of perceived learning
failures. This is due to the dialectal difference between standard English and Aboriginal
English (Gibbons, 2014). Gibbons (2014) proclaims, much of Indigenes who declare
they are English speaking in fact ‘’speak a variety of Aboriginal English’’ (p.237). This
suggests that Indigenes will be perceived to have deficient writing, literacy and reading
skills due to their ‘cultural schemas’, however Indigenous world-perspectives within the
English KLA will also enable relevance. Students need to be provided the opportunity to
express their knowledge and strengthen their bilingualism. Teachers also need to value
and acknowledge Aboriginal English as a standard form of speaking, writing and
reading to tap into what Indigenes are truly capable and to transgress their continuous
underachievement.
Critical Summary
The issue of implementing Indigenous world-views is superficially explored in the
article ‘’A Clash of Worldviews: Experiences from teaching Aboriginal students’’,
composed by Hewitt (2000). The article is a study into the schooling experiences of
Indigenous mature-aged students participating in an academic teaching course. The
purpose of the research is to explore and evidently refute the ‘’deficit explanation of
learning failure’’ which has ‘’’become widely accepted in formal education’’ as the
learning failures are attributed to the learner’s ability or cultural background (Hewitt,
2000, p.114). Although the research purpose is loosely outlined as it is not ‘’clear and
explicit’’, Hewitt (2010) proposes his project to his Indigenous students to bridge the
educational and cultural gaps which exists within education (Shank, Brown, & Pringle,
2014, p.48). Through his reflection upon the suggested pedagogical practices and
strategies needed for improvement, Hewitt (2000) asserts that there is a need for the
integration of ‘’different worldviews in the development of a positive context for
learning for all students’’, explicitly the need for Aboriginal culture in the curriculum
(p.15).

Hewitt (2010) effectively reviews the literature of a range of researchers who explore
the educational gaps and experiences of Indigenous students to support his hypothesis.
He provides direct quotes and evidence which reasserts his proclamation of the
necessity for Indigenous worldviews and ontology. Hewitt (2000) also successfully
refers to cultural analysts to reveal the way in which ‘’learning is culture-specific’’ and
limits those of a variant culture as well as the ontology of Aboriginal culture (p.112).
However, Hewitt (2000) refers to the research of Harris and his strategy of two-way
schooling (1990) to support his assertion while excluding its basis in which it makes
‘’pedagogical and administrative sense in the context of remote aboriginal settlements’’
(p.20). Hewitt (2000) does not mention this critical detail within his article which
negates his credibility as he suggests it is strongly encouraged within all schooling and
not just remote ones. Hewitt (2000) supports his research with background
information, however it appears that previous research is answerable to his research
topic.
The qualitative research lacks reliability due to the insufficient use of the methodologies
in which the conclusions are derived from. Hewitt (2000) utilises a purposive sample
for his research to capture the educational experiences of potential Indigenous teachers
to reflect upon the ‘’lack of opportunity and blatant discrimination’’ within their
schooling days (p.114). Hewitt does not acknowledge the limitation in this sample as
they cannot truly capture the reality of all Indigenous experiences through focusing on a
predominantly educated sector. The article does not outline the process of consent,
ethics nor does it address the sensitivity of the topic. Kervin et al. (2016), states that
evidence needs to be provided for the attainment of ethical approval which Hewitt
(2000) fails to do which contradicts the validity of the research

Hewitt (2000) utilises an oral methodology of group interviews for students to reflect
and voice their experiences of schooling through a ‘’class discussion’’ (p.114). Hewitt
(2000) asserts ‘’ the quality of class discussion was generally better than my experience
with non-Aboriginal students’’ (p.114). Wilson (2008) states this form of methodology
is incredibly useful as it acts a form of Aboriginal ceremony in which both the
researcher and participants are initiated into. The use of an oral methodology replicates
the Indigenous oral tradition of storytelling and it allows the students of the project to
‘’address such irreconcilable relational divides with the past’’ through the speaker’s
subjectivity which is a powerful as no other resource possess (Llewellyn & Ng-A-
Fook,2017, p.74). To supplement this, Hewitt (2000) also utilised questionnaires in the
form of a study guide with provided stimulus in which ‘’participants were readily able
to identify with’’ and write responses too. However, questionnaires can be limited due
to the ‘’high level of literacy required to complete them’’ which marginalises the
Indigenous participants of the study as they reside in rural areas and Aboriginal English
is most likely used in their vocabulary (Kervin et al., 2016, p.86). Overall, the
methodologies carried out are carried out on a small scale which implicates the
reliability and validity of the results.

The conclusions and recommendations drawn from the results are a significant stretch
from what they denote. The authenticity and validity of the conclusions is evident
within Hewitt’s (2000) use of ‘investigator triangulation’ in which he draws upon a
range of critics and their research to support his own data (Shank, Brown, & Pringle,
2014). However, contrary to this the analysis of the data is poorly evident as there is a
lack of organisation of the findings into categories through a coding process with Kervin
et al., (2016) proclaims as a necessity for qualitative data. Hewitt (2000) formulates
assumptions and conclusions based on the experiences of his students, however, the
readers are not provided with direct evidence or a breakdown of the reoccurring
themes and ideas within these experiences which indicates that his analysis is not
reliably justified. The results are contextualised only in the realm of external research
which has done so previously and indicates the research on its own does not have its
own voice or stand strongly. Through focusing on ‘mature aged students’, Hewitt (2000)
believes he has been ‘’given an insight into an alternative world view’’ and emphasises
on the need for ‘cross-cultural learning’ and ‘two-way schooling’ (p.115). Concluding on
the reformations needed for education in which there needs to be both an Indigenous
culture and the dominant culture working hand in to improve and influence the
learning outcomes of all students is fallible based on the results provided. Hewitt
(2000) hastily concludes on the reasons Indigenous students have learning failures,
despite the lack of evidence from a minority group. He further implicates the reliability
and validity of the research through declaring ‘’the adult students I was teaching
assured me that their children were facing many of the same racist attitudes in schools
that they experienced a generation earlier’’, however there is no concrete evidence
presented to support this statement (Hewitt, 2000, p.14).

The recommendations of the article despite their credibility and validity through
evidential research, are extremely useful in creating positive learning outcomes and
environments in the interest of all students. They strive to close the educational gap
between the indigenous and non-indigenous through utilising the Aboriginal culture
within classrooms amongst with the dominant one. Killen (2016) emphasises on
educators utilising the background knowledge of students as an effective best-practice
strategy as teachers can ‘’take advantage of it, build on it, or compensate for any lack of
knowledge (p.69). The recommendations are drawn from Hewitts (2000) students
ideas and strategies which they perceived to be useful for indigenous equality and an
Indigenous teacher, Judy Geary. This is useful as they derive from the personal
experiences of Indigenees instead of Hewitt who lacks the subjectivity and personal
experience of the issues at stake. These recommendations which will be explored
further within the learning activity include all ‘’c ontributors to the learning process’’
such as teachers who must value, understand and recognise the Aborgiinal culture as a
legitimate form of knowledge. Indigneous studetns must also be proud of their heritage,
identify with their communities and share aspects of their culture with their peers and
teachers and utilise them confidently (Hewitt, 2000). Despite Hewitts (2000) focus on
these recommendations as a result of his research into an academic program within a
university, theyre effective in enhancing the schooling experience for indigenous
students and implementing cross-curiculum priorities.

Learning Activity
The recommendations of the article discussed can be implemented and explored within

the NESA-produced poetry analysis activity for Stage 4 students in the English KLA

(NESA, n.d.; Appendix). Students are to explore the language features of poetry and

how they create meaning for the reader through the allocation of a poem. Students

initially work independently with guide questions to undertake an analysis of the poem

and then form groups to refine their responses. They must then orally ‘teach’ a member

of a different group about their insights on the poem and compose a writing piece based

on how the poetic techniques have contributed to their enjoyment of it. A reflection

activity on the collaborative skills the students implemented and what they had newly

learnt concludes the lesson. Students are to engage in, ‘’language forms, features and
structures of texts’’ to enhance their analytical and interpretive language skills (NESA,

n.d.; Appendix).

The lesson plan will be critiqued and revised through the pedagogical strategy of cross-

cultural learning which is the, ‘’enriched integration of different world views in the

development of a positive context for all students’’ (Hewitt, 2000, p.115). Despite the

coherence of the lesson plan, it is ‘culturally deprived’ and lacks ‘cross-curriculum

priorities’, which promotes inequality through its privilege of the Australian experience

(Hewitt, 2000, p.115). The learning activity is devoid of Indigenous intertextual

references, worldviews and language features although research has suggested it

improves, ‘’attendance, engagement, participation and pathways into further education

and work’’ (Shipp, 2013, p.24). The activity therefore displays a partisanship of the

Australian-Eurocentric worldview which marginalises Indigenes through ‘cultural

alienation’ as it is culturally deficit and produced through an Australian worldview.

Hence, the learning failures of the Indigenous students will be most probable to being

attributed to their ‘’culturally acquired ways of learning’’ and their deficiency in

standard literacy skills despite their wealth of cultural knowledge and Aboriginal

English. The Eurocentric view of learning is perpetuated through all learning

contributors inclusive of educators, students and educational bodies such as NESA

(Hewitt, 2000, p.115).

The lesson plan authorises educators to select the poems for their class activity,

however, it is presumed that these texts will privilege Australian culture and poets to

replicate the compulsory novel-texts. Harrison (2010) advocates that Indigenous

perspectives should not be ‘’bolted on to the program rather than being integrated into
daily practice ‘’ (p.1). This activity should be modified to include the compulsory use of

Alexander Brown and Brian Geytenbeek’s (2004) publication of ‘Ngarla songs’ as Hewitt

(2000) recommends the recognition of Aboriginal culture as of value and importance to

enhance Indigenous learning experiences. Utilising Indigenous texts implements

Aboriginal worldviews as a routine practice of schooling instead of signifying it as the

‘other’ (Harrison, 2010). These texts enable students to explore alternative text

structures and language features through poetic story-telling as it is a collection of

Indigenous anecdotal songs which have been shared from generation to generation.

Centring the lesson on an important traditional ritual suggests to Indigenous students it

is of value and is an educational asset.

The texts are set with the Aboriginal language scripted on the left side of the page while

the Australian standard English version of it is transcribed on its right. The context of

the songs explores the daily lives of Indigenous Aboriginals and their colonial contacts

with colonisers. The Indigenous worldviews are entrenched within the songs through

exploring the Aboriginal cultural knowledge and their relationship with the Australian

land. This enables Indigenous students to confidently identify with the experiences and

knowledge of the texts through the valuing of its Indigenous perspectives within the

classroom. This reaffirms Hewitt’s (2000) recommendation as ‘’Aboriginal students

need to be encouraged to be proud of their culture’’ and be provided ‘’opportunities to

share aspects of it’’ (p.115). This will also promote respectability and acknowledgment

of Indigenous knowledge as of value to the dominant culture and create a sense of

understanding, ‘’first in teachers and later in students’’ (Hewitt, 2000, p.114). When

understanding and acceptance is enabled, it allows for discourses to be deconstructed

and new ways of thinking to be formed.

As outlined in the learning activity, students are to engage with language features and

texts, however, there is lack of acknowledgment and recognition of textual features

being culturally and historically configured. Students are provided a standard Anglo-

Saxon text type of poetry writing with language features that only conscribe with

standard English. However, Hewitt (2000) emphasises on the importance of recognising

Aboriginal English as a valid and legitimised form of language to improve the confidence

and self-esteem of Indigenous students as the suggested texts do. Therefore the texts

outlined explore the way Aboriginal English functions and its textual forms.Shipp

(2013) asserts that Indigenous students can only learn successfully through reducing

stress factors, creating positive environments and removing anxiety stressors.

Therefore, the lesson should be amended to explore the Indigenous oral tradition of

story-telling through the text of song story-telling and its language features as this

promotes ‘’cultural maintenance’’ and ‘’encourages children to identify positively with

their community’’ (Hewitt, 2000, p.115). The texts allow students to explore the

intersectionality of language features which transgress standard English and function

within cultural text types. The original learning activity does not acknowledge or reflect

upon the story-telling tradition functioning within the sharing of insights to peers which

would have promoted ‘two-way schooling’ and incorporated a learning outcome. The

very essence of this interaction according to Harrison (2010) is a form of reconciliation

if made consciously aware within the class. Students will use and reflect upon a

collaborative skill other than one which derives from the Australian culture through

story-telling (NESA, n.d.; Appendix).

‘Two-way schooling’ refers to the method of teaching European and Aboriginal culture

amongst one another in the interest of all students (Hewitt, 2000, p.116). Indigenous

students should be encouraged to utilise their cultural background of storytelling within

the learning activity and critically analyse the way language functions within them. This

promotes ‘’equal power relations’’ and an ‘’exchange of knowledge’’ which legitimises

the Aboriginal culture and language (Hewitt, 2000, p.116). Educators can utilise and

scaffold the background knowledge of Indigenous students in order for them to

academically succeed and fulfil the learning outcomes of the syllabus in a culturally

significant way. Research within Western Australia schooling has indicated that the

literacy targets of Indigenous students improved more than 50% through the

implementation of cross-cultural learning and valuing of the Aboriginal culture (Shipp,

2013).

The original activity lacks differentiation and direction in the use of language features

within the learning activities. The Indigenous students are expected to successfully

critically analyse the poems in Australian Standard English despite the lack of

scaffolding and exemplars provided. There is no recognition of Indigenous Aboriginal

English as a legitimised form of writing their reflections and analysis which implicates

student engagement, success and participation (Harrison, 2010). The lesson should be

amended to include explicit instructions on the expectations of language use and

whether the students are able to utilise Aboriginal English. Explicit quality criteria are a

necessity for Indigenous worldviews as students need to learn when to apply their

cultural schemas and the ‘’art of code-switching, being able to operate in two cultures

and dialects’’ (Shipp, 2013, p.26). Indigenous students should be permitted to utilise

the proficiency of their ‘’mother tongue, both oral and written forms’’ as this will
‘’increase the success rate in learning a second language’’ (Hewitt, 2000, p.116). As a

concluding activity, students should create a traditional poetic oral song based on the

poems they have examined with the use of language features. Indigenous students

should be enabled to utilise Aboriginal English as it is their first language as it should be

‘’given status in educational environments’’ (Hewitt, 2000, p.116). Students should be

able to apply their cultural knowledge within the classroom and vice versa for a

‘’partnership between home and school’’ to be developed (Hewitt, 2000, p.116).

Appendix (Original learning activity)

References
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2010). Australian

Curriculum. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au

Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2010). Cross-curriculum

priorities. Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-

curriculum/cross-curriculum-priorities/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-

histories-and-cultures/

Australian Institute for School Teaching and Leadership. (2017). Australian Professional

Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from

https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards

Gibbons, J. (2014). Language and the Law (2nd ed.). Abingdon, New York: Routledge.

Harrison, N. (2010). Relationship to place: positioning Aboriginal knowledge and

perspectives in classroom pedagogies. Critical studies in Education, 52(1), 65-76.

https://doi-org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1080/17508487.2011.536513

Harris, S. (1990). Two-Way Schooling: Educational and Cultural Survival (1st ed.).

Canberra, Australia: Aboriginal Studies Press.

Hewitt, D. (2000). A Clash of Worldviews: Experiences from Teaching Aboriginal

Students. Theory into Practice, 39(2), 111-117. doi:

10.1207/s15430421tip3902_8

Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Howard, S., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2016). Research for

Educators (2nd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Cengage Learning Australia.

Killen, R. (2016). Effective teaching strategies: Lessons from research and practice

(7th ed.). Newcastle, Australia: Cengage Learning Australia.

Lawrence, H. (1994). Aboriginal children in urban schools. Issues in Educational

Research,4(1), 19-26. Retrieved from

http://www.iier.org.au/iier4/lawrence.html

Llewewllyn, K., & Ng-A-Fook, N. (2017). Oral History and Education: Theories, Dilemmas

and Practices (1st ed.). Waterloo, Canada: Springer.

Malin, M. (1990). The visibility and invisibility of Aboriginal students in an urban

classroom. Australian Journal of Education, 34(3), 312-329.

https://doi.org/10.1177/000494419003400307

Moore, A. (2012). Teaching and learning: Pedagogy, curriculum and culture (2nd

ed). Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

NESA (n.d). Stage 4- Activity 6: Poetry Analysis. Retrieved from

http://syllabus.nesa.nsw.edu.au/english/english-k10/stage-4-activity-6/

Shank, G., Brown, L., & Pringle, J. (2014). Understanding Education Research. Boulder,

CO: Paradigm Publishers.

Shipp, C. (2013). Bringing Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perspectives into the

classroom: Why and how. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 21(3), 24-29.

Retrieved from https://www.alea.edu.au/documents/item/775

Wilson, S 2008, Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Nova Scotia,

Canada: Fernwood Publishing.