What is the government doing about it? Government policies and legislations

 “We should be concerned that historic and current attempts by the state to educate Māori children too often result in failure” (Selby, 1999, p. 14).

In a report that discusses the government’s response to the report of Māori affairs select committee, which carried out an inquiry into Māori participation in ECE.  Researchers provided the necessary means required to break down the barriers to Māori participation (Governments response to the report of Māori affairs select committee, n.d.). So, did the government actually consider some of the recommendations?

I believe that the main issue is that government policy and legislation is tokenistic, yet ticks the box, but does not effectively support the early childhood sector to implement high quality culturally responsive mainstream early childhood education for Māori. Evidence is demonstrated in the first formal policy document of Aotearoa which was signed in 1840, Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Durie, 2001a; Orange, 2004; Selby, 1999). I believe the intention of the three articles of Te Tiriti in regards to ECE symbolise, Māori the right to quality teaching and learning through partnership, protection and tino rangatiratanga. Māori should be entitled to all that the other people of Aotearoa are privy to, a quality education and appreciation of our culture and tikanga and to be able to live as Māori and be Māori (Durie, 2001b; Durie, 1994; Education Review Office, 2008; Ritchie & Rau, 2006; Ritchie, n.d.).

Over the decades many policies have been created, apparently for the better of Māori. Below is a timeline that exhibits some of the policies and legislations that have influenced policy makers today. I feel the need to recognise the importance of acknowledging the past, as my belief is that we cannot move forward until the past has been addressed and learned from.

Māori Educational Policy Timeline 

• 1840  Te Tiriti O Waitangi
• 1867  Native Schools Act, By 1947 The term ‘Native’ changed to Māori
• 1877  Education Act
• 19^th Century dominance of assimilation policies
• 1960  The Hunn Report
• 1988 Education to be More: Report of the Early Childhood Care and Education Working Group (green paper)
• 1988 Before Five Early Childhood Care and Education in New Zealand (white paper)

 (Bishop, O’Sullivan & Berryman, 2010; Meade & Podmore, 2002; May, 2009; May, 2003; May, 1999; May, 1997; May, 1985). 

There are many more policies and legislations, but due to the nature of this assignment I am unable to discuss these and the others in depth.

The 19^th century education policies were dominated by assimilation. This was believed to be desirable. Subsequently, the Māori population dwindled from 150,000 in 1840 to 43,143 in 1901 (Selby, 1999). In 1960, the policies of assimilation officially ended, as it was said to be a time of ‘cultural adaptation,’ thanks to the Hunn Report. The report promoted the integration policies, which aimed to combine Māori and Pākeha. The report also called for aspects of Māoritanga to be incorporated into the education system (Selby, 1999). However, according to Selby (1999) it failed miserably. However, apparently no one can distinguish why. The following quote is why I believe the integration policies failed.

“Policies were being developed and instigated by departments which were managed and staffed by Pākeha people, people who theorised about what was best for Māori without having a ‘vision’” (Bunch, 1979 as cited in Selby, 1999, p. 19).

Now policy makers are finally starting to consider Māori as the indigenous culture of Aotearoa. Labour government initiatives have listened to key researchers such as Rau, Ritchie, Bishop and more.  Whose research acknowledges the importance of children, emphasising early childhood education as the foundation for success in the future, along with strong recommendations of honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi.

Subsequently a policy that aimed to improve the early childhood education service provision was introduced in 2002 Ngā Huarahi Arataki: Pathways to the future (Ministry of Education, 2002). After extensive research and feedback from the sector a key recommendation of the Strategic plan was that of increasing participation (Mitchell & Hodgen, 2008). The government focussed attention and money into the pilot initiative of ‘Promoting Participation Project’[PPP] to target Māori communities where participation was low (Dixon, Widdowson, Meagher-Lundberg, & McMurchy-Pilkington, 2007; Mitchell, Royal-Tangaere, Mara & Wylie, 2008).  A primary goal of the PPP programme was to ensure that “every child has the opportunity to participate in quality ECE, by assisting communities to address barriers resulting in non-participation” (Ministry of Education, 2005, p. 2 cited in Dixon, Widdowson, Meagher-Lundberg, & McMurchy-Pilkington, 2007, p. 1).  This well-intended project proved successful initially with obstacles to participation being addressed and overcome.  However, the programme faced many barriers such as; 

·         A lack of

o   appreciation of ECE by families

o   understanding of the child-centred approach of Aotearoa

o   responsiveness to the needs of Māori

o   Poverty and related social and economic demands on families and

o   A poor range and quality of ECE services

I believe the failure of the programme was purely down to one factor. The programme did not take into consideration the needs of Māori. In a recent ‘education update’ posted in the Education Gazette in March (2011) it clearly states what Māori needs are, declaring “there are families who experience difficulties which mean ECE is neither an option nor a priority.” I believe there is no way to appropriately and effectively attract and involve the Māori community without first acknowledging their needs. Therefore, I ask did the government really consider whether Māori actually want their children in the Pākeha education system? For the reason that, as history has demonstrated the more integrated Māori are in the Pākeha system, the more they lose.

As my research has demonstrated, there have been some gains in Māori education and the government believes that the gains can only increase due in part to the launching of Ka Hikitia: Managing for success (Ministry of Education, 2008; Ministry of Education, 2007), the Māori education strategy in 2008.  The strategies key focus is to improve educational outcomes for Māori children (Education Review Office, 2008). and “takes an evidence-based, outcomes-focussed approach” (Ministry of Education, 2009) and “draws on the policy framework from the Māori potential approach which emphasises partnership, working together and sharing power” and “emphasises the importance of Ako: effective ad reciprocal teaching and learning-for and with Māori learners” (Ministry of Education, 2009).  This strategy almost appears flawless, and all hope is that it will work, but… I find it disappointing that although this strategy was launched in 2008, 2011 was the first time I had ever heard of it. I have never been made known of Ka Hikitia through my studies, or in the centres I have worked in. So, where has it been? Was it not important up until now, one year away from its target date? Also, I find myself thinking, will this strategy be dismissed, prolonged and destroyed as Ngā Huarahi Arataki has been?  I believe it interesting, as the following quote states that policies that are created by Māori for Māori are more successful. Why?

“It is no coincidence that the success of Kohanga Reo, Kura Kaupapa and Whare Wananga education has been due in part to policies initiated, developed and implemented by the voluntary services of whānau, hapu and iwi in response to Māori needs and aspirations” (Te Whaiti, McCarthy & Durie, 1997, p. 109).

With all these policies being introduced, what are the prospective consequences, potential outcomes and pedagogical implications for practice in regards to mainstream early childhood education services?

References

Bishop, R., O’Sullivan, D., & Berryman, M. (2010). Scaling up education reform: Addressing the politics of disparity. Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.  

Dixon, R., Widdowson, D., Meagher-Lundberg, P., & McMurchy-Pilkington, A. (2007). Evaluation of promoting early childhood education participation project. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/ece/11760.

Durie, M. (1994). Whaiora. Auckland, New Zealand: Oxford University Press.

Durie, M. (2001a). Mana Māori motuhake: The state of the Māori nation. In R. Miller (Ed.), New Zealand government and politics (pp. 464-478). Auckland, New Zealand: Oxford University Press.

Durie, M. (2001b). Māori health: Key determinants for the next twenty-five years. Pacific Health Dialogue, 7(1), 6-11.

Education Gazzette. (March 7, 2011). Education update: Rates of Prior-Participation in early childhood education before school: changes to the statistics and publication of the 2010 rates. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.edgazette.govt.nz/articles/Article.aspx?Articled=8201

Education Review Office. (2008). Māori children in early childhood: Pilot study. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

Government Response to Report of Māori Affairs Select Committee. (n.d.). Inquiry into Māori Participation in Early Childhood Education. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/DFB271D5-A491-4ADC-A397-47F70933DCDA/151815/DBHOH_PAP_17742_GovernmentResponsetoReportoftheMao.pdf

May, H. (1985). Mind that child: A social and political history of childcare in New Zealand. Wellington, New Zealand: Blackberry Press.

May, H. (1997). The discovery of early childhood. Auckland, New Zealand: Bridget Williams Books.

May, H. (1999). The price of partnership: The Before Five decade. New Zealand Journal of Education Studies: Special Issue a decade of reform in NZ education: Where to now? 34(1), 18-27.

May, H. (2003). Politics in the playground: The world of early childhood in post war New Zealand. Auckland, New Zealand: Bridget Williams Books.

May, H. (2009). Politics in the playground: The world of early childhood in New Zealand. Dunedin, New Zealand: Otago University Press.

Meade, A., & Podmore, V. (2002). Early childhood education policy co-ordination under the auspices of the department: Ministry of Education: A case study of New Zealand (Early Childhood and family Policy Series n.1). Paris, France: UNESCO.

Ministry of Education. (2002). Pathways to the future: Ngā huarahi arataki: A 10-year strategic plan for early childhood education. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2007). Ka hikitia-Managing for success: The draft Māori education strategy 2008-2012. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2008b). Ka hikitia-Managing for success: The Māori education strategy. Wellington, New Zealand: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2009). Ka hikitia: Managing for success: Strategy overview. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/theMinistry/PolicyAndStrategy/KaHikitia/StrategyOverview/Background.aspx

Mitchell, L., & Hodgen, E. (2008). Locality-based evaluation of Pathways to the Future-Ngā Huarahi Arataki. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.

Mitchell, L., Royal-Tangaere, A., Mara, D., & Wylie, C. (2008). Locality-based evaluation of Pathways to the Future :Ngā Huarahi Arataki. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from www.educationcounts.edcentre.govt.nz/research/index.html

Orange, C. (2004). An illustrated history of the Treaty of Waitangi. Wellington, New Zealand: Bridget Williams Books.

Ritchie, J. (n.d.). Enacting Tiriti-based practice in early childhood education in Aotearoa. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.unitec.researchbank.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10652/1485/Enacting%20Tiriti-based%20practice.pdf?sequence=1

Ritchie, J., & Rau, C. (2006). Whakawhanaungatanga: Partnerships in bicultural development in early childhood education: Final Report from the teaching & learning research initiative project. Retrieved February 21, 2011 from http://www.tlri.org.nz/pdfs/9207_finalreport.pdf:

Selby, R. (1999). Still being punished. Wellington, New Zealand: Huia Publishers.