How Might We Lead Through The Lens of Two World Views?

*Disclaimer

• I’m a male Pakeha New Zealander born in 1958 (Baby Boomer!)

• I gained an MA in History with a focus on NZ History (received and delivered through the lens of one world view)

• 66% of my teaching and leading in schools occurred in communities of high Māori populations (Ngāruawāhia and Ōpōtiki)

• Largely through the lens of one world view

• I’ve made several forays into learning te Reo, including University of Waikato Certificate of Māori Studies. 

Last week I spent a day in a hui with 11 people who I would consider some of the deepest thinkers not only about our education system, but, more importantly, about what the characteristics of and a vision for a future-ready education system for Aotearoa could be.

What one of the participants said hit me like a bolt of lightning. To paraphrase, she said:

“Actions since 1840 have let down both partners to Te Tiriti. Te Tiriti promised that 2 world views would shape our country. Ours (Māori) has been problematised and you have missed out on experiencing the world through ours.”

I spent the rest of the hui moving through a range of emotions as this insight rattled around in my head (and heart). I thought about my 42 years of teaching and struggled with feelings of regret that all of those years passed by without the benefit of the insight described above.

Yes, I had attempted to upskill my own te Reo. Yes, I had participated in many wānanga and noho. Yes, I led the committee that constructed a wharenui, Te Huingaongawai, on the grounds of Ngāruawāhia High School and worked with others to create a Year 9 Bi-lingual Class (which later became a Rumaki). Yes, I stopped all suspensions at Ōpōtiki College (which had impacted disproportionately on rangatahi and whānau Māori).

But all of this had been done through the one world view. All of it occurred within the structures and processes that stemmed from that one world view, so there was no challenge to the basic status quo and attached hierarchies of power and influence.

Of course, the consequence of designing our system, structures and processes through the one world view is the high levels of inequity that we experience.

Participants at the hui all agreed that what we have got from the system designed by one world view (inequity) is a result of purposeful design. The system is doing exactly what it was designed to do!

It has been designed in such a way that many, including indigenous learners, do not see themselves and the values embedded in their view of the world in the very place that is charged with the responsibility of overseeing their growth and development. The response from such learners seem to be to suppress who they are and what they value and believe to fit into the system or to push back, disengage and retaliate.

Even just the simple fact that until quite recently many schools had rules banning pounamu as part of their jewelery rules (some, I suspect, still do) reinforces that. Even more revealing is the voice of rangatahi and whānau Māori which describes the relentless racism they experience in their everyday experience of school.

The good news is that if we designed the system to have these specific outcomes we can design a system that has different outcomes.

It doesn’t have to be this way!

The even better news is that we have elements within the wider system that are proven to be effective which could form the starting point of a re-design.

Russell Bishop and his colleagues have done the research and designed frameworks to support the conditions that need to exist in schools that support more equitable experiences and outcomes. This has been presented to the sector through Te Kotahitanga and, more recently, Teaching (and Leading) to the North-east.

As well, there is now clear evidence that students who experience Kura Kaupapa, Kura-a-Iwi etc approaches achieve high levels of success.

All of us in education realise that connection with our community is crucial. My world view has resulted in schools driving that connection and generally informing whanau what they will be doing. I suspect that the world view driving the Kura models is one that results in whanau telling kura what they will do for their child.

The hui I attended has committed to doing some work around developing a future-ready vision for our system (not just individual schools). I am excited about this work progressing through the lenses of two world views as promised by Te Tititi.

At the same time as these thoughts are rattling around in my head I’ve been enjoying a re-acquaintance with NZ literature (a place where different world views can be brought to life). Reading Becky Manawatu’s Auē and Kataraina  and Tina Makareti’s The Mires have certainly brought two world views to life for me, including the consequences of having one suppressed. Right now, I have almost finished Monty Soutar’s first in his Kāwai series, which will be followed up by reading his second. I am learning more about Te Ao Māori from these than I ever did from my own schooling and my Masters degree.

Thanks to all the participants in that hui for contributing to the rattling in my head. Long may it continue.