Educational consultant, Darwin
At the time I came in what was then Curriculum & Assessment, funding had been received for the Implementing the Common Curriculum in Aboriginal Schools program (ICCAS) from the Commonwealth Government. There were three officers employed to produce resource materials for science, two in primary (including an Indigenous man) and one in secondary. Over the following six years these people were replaced and the team has now dispersed. More recently the Indigenous Education Strategic Initiatives Program (IESIP) saw two officers involved in Australian Indigenous Studies who also have a part to play in the work being described here.
This introduction is a synthesis of a series of papers written, presented at conferences in Australia and New Zealand, and published by some of the officers mentioned above primarily by Mark Linkson and myself, together and individually, and with Jane Anlezark and Didamain Uibo. One paper which is previously unpublished focuses on the attempts to implement a science program at Murrupurtiyanuwu Catholic School at Nguiu. There are three themes running through the papers:
€ the perception that curriculum, curriculum support materials and teacher professional development need to articulate with each other
€ the value that research, and in these papers a strong emphasis on research in the cultural aspects of science education, has (especially recently) in the development of each of curriculum, curriculum support materials and teacher professional development
€ the place of consultation, collaboration and respect aspects which are more related to an Indigenous rather than a Western perspective have had throughout this work.
"Scientific knowledge... has been enriched by the pooling of understanding from different cultures - western, eastern and indigenous cultures including those of Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islanders - and has become a truly international activity" (Australian Education Council, 1994a, p. 3).
The need for the curriculum to be applicable to both Indigenous and Western students was consistent with the aims of the Science curriculum. One of the aims of the NT Board Approved Course of Study for Science is specifically to
"consider that the worldviews of Western and various Indigenous peoples may be different and that their alternative perspectives inform others about using and classifying materials, and understanding phenomena and relationships in the natural and technological world" (NT BOS, 1999, p. 3).
This was linked to the theoretical basis for incorporating worldviews. Curriculum support materials such as the ICCAS materials were being developed to provide Indigenous people access to Western science and they incorporated Indigenous cultural considerations and constructed knowledge based on these students' experiences at the same time. Teachers in a western setting were also encouraged to incorporate Indigenous and other cultural perspectives into their teaching/learning programs.
The term 'cultural considerations' was incorporated into the science curriculum from the ICCAS materials, mainly for Western teachers teaching Indigenous students, who are being replaced in community schools by Indigenous teachers. Many students in the Northern Territory are Indigenous Australians and many grow up with a different world view to that of Western science. Indigenous people¹s understandings of the world are based on
€ direct experience of the environment, both as individuals and through instruction within Indigenous social groups
€ learning about relationships between individuals and groups, their Ancestors and the environment.
An important opportunity in the development of the curriculum came through a visit to the Murrupurtiyanuwu Catholic School where the teachers wanted to develop a science program for the primary school. This is documented in Michie and others (in prep.). Rather than compartmentalise Tiwi knowledge into western categories, an attempt was made to see where western school science knowledge (according to the curriculum) overlapped with Tiwi knowledge. Two situations became obvious,
€ an acknowledgment that students at the early childhood level are primarily engaged in understanding their personal environment and that this situation may not be essentially different between cultures, although it may manifest itself in culturally-appropriate ways. Many of the science outcomes could be linked directly to the cultural program already operating in the school.
€ the community makes use of a range of western technologies which impact on the students' lives and environment. At the early childhood level their impact on the students' personal environment relates to the science outcomes, rather than an explanation of the principles behind the technologies. It is also unlikely that these students make any attempt to classify their surroundings and experiences into Tiwi and Muruntawi (2).
The recommendation from the visit was for the school to devise a science program which
€ is inclusive of Tiwi language and culture
€ based on the experiences of the students
€ complies with the Science Board Approved Course of Study, including
- addressing all the strands of the course each year
- being outcomes-based
- allowing student progress to be evaluated with the NT Outcomes Profile for Science.
The experience also focused on looking at the outcomes profile and suggesting activities which were more easily undertaken in an Indigenous (Tiwi) community and could be assessed by any teacher because they were consistent with those already in the draft BACOS. These are at levels 1 and 2 and make up the appendix to Michie and others (in prep.); they are also included as suggested activities in the BACOS (NT BOS, 1999).
Over the years of ICCAS and IESIP funding there were changes of personnel and policy in developing the materials. Mark Linkson came into the primary writer's position after several years working with Indigenous students and teachers. His task was to finish the production of the primary science materials and eventually he went on to develop some integrated units for early childhood teachers, still focusing on science. For him there was a degree of mismatch between the science he was writing about and the traditional beliefs and practices of the people in the communities. He took the opportunity of attending CONASTA and sharing his dilemma (Linkson, 1999).
Part of the dilemma stems from the desire of Indigenous people wanting their children to receive an education that will provide them with the skills to live as competent and engaged citizens while still learning and maintaining traditional beliefs and practices. This leads to some degree of mismatch because most schooling is based on Western curriculum and teaching approaches, particularly in science where Indigenous and Western explanations could be in conflict. Linkson (1999) outlined some issues relevant to teaching science to primary-aged Indigenous students and ways in which this teaching could be made more culturally appropriate and therefore more effective.
Linkson's paper reflects the high level of influence that the research into cultural aspects of science was having on us professionally. Glen Aikenhead from Canada, one of the main researchers in this field internationally, was a keynote speaker at CONASTA. Besides discussing the culture of science, another area which he suggested to us was to look at the types of developments going on elsewhere. By the time the ICCAS materials had been completed, we had become aware of approaches being taken overseas. Michie and Linkson (1999) discussed the curriculum and materials development involved in production of the ICCAS units and looked at indigenous curriculum developments overseas. Three models of curriculum developed were distinguished:
€ an indigenous curriculum, such as Inuuqatigiit (1998) which is a curriculum developed by Inuit educators from northern Canada and reflects the Inuit direction, perspective and values
€ restructuring a western curriculum: McKinley (1996) has discussed the development of a Maori science curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand, although "determined by the boundaries and parameters of the English language and Western knowledge codes" (Irwin, 1999)
€ writing resource materials based on a western curriculum, which is probably the most common approach taken to provide indigenous students with culturally-sensitive materials.
The new Handbook was seen as serving a number of purposes, which are reflected in its organisation into five sections
€ teaching science in NT schools
€ understanding Indigenous knowledge
€ protocols for working with Indigenous people
€ ICCAS primary science teachers' guide
€ Indigenous knowledge resources in schools
A Web-based conference held in association with the National Association for Research in Science Teaching in 1999 saw much of the research on culture in science education synthesised and opened for discussion over the World Wide Web (4). Not only did we take part in the discussion but we held a workshop in Darwin which attracted a number of local participants. The outcome of this was a declaration of our vision of what we refered to as intercultural rather than cross-cultural knowledge, a term we have since used elsewhere (Michie & Linkson, 1999; NTDE, 2000).
Much of the work in developing the ICCAS materials was undertaken with Indigenous teachers in workshops and in the office. Workshops were sometimes held in communities and trialling of the materials involved Indigenous teachers in community schools. Apart for consultation with the IESC, drafts were made available at meetings with Indigenous educators, science teachers, members of the Science Subject Area Committee and a number of researchers and teachers from other learning areas. Other people who were consulted were members of some of the IESIP-funded units in the department. Our understanding of working with Indigenous peoples were ultimately translated into a series of protocols included in the Handbook (NTDE, 2000).
May O'Brien, speaking at the closing session of the Australian Indigenous Education Conference in April this year, put forward a very strong critique of benchmarks as not being in the interests of Indigenous students (Neil Hooley, pers. comm.). There have been similar criticisms by a number of science educators. Rodriguez (1997) used the term discourse of invisibility in his critique of the US National Science Education Standards, because they failed to address "the ethnic, socioeconomic, gender, and theoretical issues which afflict science education today" (p. 19). Tobin, Seiler and Smith (1999) considered it was problematic whether standards and profiles can meet the needs for all students. Basing their experience on students in poverty, they suggest that school science typically reflects white, middle class experiences. Aikenhead (forthcoming) discusses how school science takes on a gatekeeping role. In common with students in poverty, indigenous students generally underperform in standardised tests, casting doubt on the appropriateness of these tests. The language used in science performance assessments can be very significant: if students do not understand a word or give it a slightly different meaning to that intended because of their cultural or linguistic background, their performance may not accurately reflect their scientific knowledge and skills (Solano-Flores & Nelson-Barber, 1999).
In comparing standards, benchmarks and profiles, Michie and Linkson (1999) considered profiles had more value for all students, provided they are used appropriately to show where a student is in a learning progression (Hannan & Ashenden, 1996), rather than a standard or benchmark which determines where the student should be at a particular age or year level. Their experience through both the ICCAS materials and the Murrupurtiyanuwu project, was that at least at the primary levels, Indigenous students can be profiled using the more general outcomes of the NT outcomes profile. However, beyond that point (level 4), they believed that the concepts tied into the profile are basically those relating to Western science.
I want to make two particular comments regarding the Collins report on Indigenous education in the NT (Collins, 1999).
€ I think that Collins failed to understand the value in using science (or any other subject) as a vehicle for literacy or numeracy. Unlike many teachers, he didn't understand that literacy is best developed in a context. The primary ICCAS materials not only provide a context for science and literacy learning, they also model these for teachers.
€ Collins also suggested acquisition of syllabuses, apparently in all subjects, "that provide(s) concise statements of the contents - specific knowledge and skills - that the students need to master" (Collins, 1999, p.136), regardless of context.
The current science curriculum allows teachers to place teaching and learning in the context of their community and to focus on what students already know, and the ICCAS materials model this for them. The suggestion that "(W)ith a clear syllabus in place, useful resources, such as self-contained student workbooks matching each step of the learning sequence..." (p. 136) appears to a step back to the anecdotal French minister's day and certainly would limit any opportunity for schools to map their cultural program onto the formal teaching/learning program.
Aikenhead, G.S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science. Studies in Science Education, 27, 1-52.
Aikenhead, G.S. (1997). Towards a First Nations cross-cultural science and technology curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217-238.
Aikenhead, G.S. (forthcoming). Renegotiating the culture of school science. In R. Millar, J. Leach & J. Osborne (eds), Improving science education: The contribution of research.
Australian Education Council. (1994a). A statement on science for Australian schools. Melbourne: Curriculum Corporation.
Cobern, W.W. (1996). Worldview theory and conceptual change in science education. Science Education, 80(5), 579-610.
Collins, B. (1999). Learning lessons: An independent review of Indigenous education in the Northern Territory. Darwin: Northern Territory Department of Education.
Inuuqatigiit. (1999). The curriculum from the Inuit perspective. http://siksik.learnnet.nt.ca/Inuuqatigiit/1/index.htm
Irwin, K. (1999). Maori education policy 1989-1998: Lampooning it up! New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 34 , 66-76.
Jegede, O.J., & Aikenhead, G.S. (1998). Transcending cultural boundaries: Implications for science teaching. Journal for Science and Technology Education, 17, 45-66.
Linkson, M. (1999). Some issues in providing culturally appropriate science curriculum support for Indigenous students. Australian Science Teacher¹s Journal, 45(1), 41-48.
Michie, M. (1998). Crossing borders: Understanding differing worldviews of science through the Northern Territory science curriculum. In Proceedings of the Australasian Joint Regional Conference of GASAT and IOSTE, (J.E. Goodell, ed.), 441-448.
Michie, M., & Linkson, M. (1999). Interfacing Western science and Indigenous knowledge: A Northern Territory perspective. Science and Mathematics Education Papers 1999, in press.
Michie, M., & Linkson, M. (in prep.) Providing teacher support materials for curriculum developments incorporating intercultural understandings in teaching science. Paper to be presented at the 31st Conference of the Australasian Science Education Association, Perth, July 2000.
Michie, M., and others. (in prep.). Introducing outcomes education and profiling in science in an Indigenous school. Australian Journal of Indigenous Education.
Michie, M., Anlezark, J., & Uibo, D. (1998). Beyond bush tucker: Implementing Indigenous perspectives through the science curriculum. CONASTA 47 Proceedings, Science Teachers Association of the NT Journal, 18, 101-110.
NTBOS. (1997c). Indigenous Australian Studies Curriculum Policy Transition - Year 12. Darwin: Northern Territory Board of Studies.
NTBOS. (1999). Board Approved Course of Study Science T-10. Darwin: Northern Territory Board of Studies.
NTDE. (1982). Aboriginal Science Teacher's Handbook. Darwin: Northern Territory Department of Education.
NTDE. (2000) Intercultural understandings in teaching science: A handbook for teachers. Darwin: Northern Territory Department of Education.
Rodriguez, A.J. (1997). The dangerous discourse of invisibility: A critique of the National Research Council's national science education standards. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34(1), 19-37.
Solano-Flores, G. & Nelson-Barber, S. (1999). Developing culturally-responsive science assessments. Paper presented to 1999 conference of the National Association for the Research of Science Teaching, Boston. http://www.ouhk.edu.hk/cridal/misc/solano.htm
Tobin, K., Seiler, G., & Smith, M.W. (1999). Educating science teachers for the sociocultural diversity of urban school. Research in Science Education, 29(1), 69-88.
Waldrip, B.G., & Taylor, P.C. (1999). Permeability of students' worldviews to their school views in a non-Western developing country. Journal of Research in Science Education, 36(3), 289-303.
(1) This paper was presented at the 3rd Annual Health and Education Research Symposium of the NT Institute of Educational Research, held at the Northern Territory University, Darwin in May 2000.
(2) white people, westerners
(3) Conference of the Australian Science Teachers Association, held in Darwin in July 1998.
(4) Culture studies in science education: Students' Indigenous cultures versus the culture of science. http://www.ouhk/cridal/misc/narst99.htm