Catálogo de publicaciones - libros

University is not for everyone, but a university should be for everyone. To a certain extent, the choice not to participate in higher education should be respected given that there are other avenues and reasons to participate in education and employment that are culturally, socially and/or economically important for society. Those who choose to pursue higher education should do so knowing that there are multiple pathways into higher education and, once there, appropriate support is provided for a successful transition.

In 2008, the Bradley highlighted the importance of ‘increasing the number of under-represented groups within Australia’s higher education system – including Indigenous people, people with low socio-economic status, and those from regional and remote areas’ (Bradley et al. Review of Higher Education in Australia: final report. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, Canberra, 2008). Building on over two decades of equity policy development in higher education in Australia, these ‘equity groups’ were subsequently afforded a more legitimate place in the future national higher education policy arena. One notable example was a greater focus on Indigenous higher education, including the commissioning of the Behrendt (Behrendt et al. Review of Higher Education access and outcomes for aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: final report. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education, Canberra, 2012). This review, in tandem with incremental investments in Indigenous higher education over the previous decades, has led to dedicated funding streams for Indigenous higher education initiatives. We argue that the parallel policy focus on the broad national equity agenda and the more specific Indigenous higher education agenda can be both complementary and divergent. These contrasting positions are particularly evident in the implementation of respective equity and Indigenous programs in higher education institutions across Australia. In this chapter we discuss the unique theoretical dimensions and principles underpinning each of these higher education policy agendas and explore the synergies and tensions between them. We adopt a strengths-based perspective to explain what the future possibilities and opportunities might be in promoting greater cohesion, integration and interdependence between equity and Indigenous higher education agendas in Australia.

Community engagement is often cited as a critical component of working with Indigenous communities in both Australia and other countries. Ideally, this involves engaging in ‘bottom-up’ approaches that scope, identify and subsequently respond to community needs and aspirations. Community engagement is usually participatory and developmental in nature. It is often used as a means to shape policy and program development, scope research approaches and support enhanced service delivery in a range of settings, including the education sector. However, the physical, social, cultural, economic and political contexts in which community engagement occurs can be different. As such, there is no definitive approach to what community engagement both ‘looks’ and ‘feels’ like within different Indigenous education contexts. This chapter systematically explores what we already know about , and how this relates to , and more specifically, contexts in Australia. We argue that there are four key factors that can impact on pathways into higher education for Indigenous students, which include ‘redefining community engagement from Indigenous standpoints’; ‘appropriately resourcing Indigenous community engagement activities’; ‘continuing to build an evidence base to learn from recent Indigenous community engagement investments’ and the need to ‘move beyond the rhetorical language used in many policy documents and frameworks.’ We conclude by suggesting that improvements in the quality and quantum of Indigenous community engagement work occurring in higher education in Australia will ultimately enhance opportunities for successful Indigenous pathways and transitions into university.

This chapter reports on the development and implementation of the University of Adelaide’s whole of institution Indigenous Education Strategy between 2012 and 2014. Analysing multiple change efforts generated across five academic faculties and four administrative divisions, the research has developed a ‘Design and Evaluation Framework for Indigenisation’ that aims to consider and evaluate university change practices beyond single isolated approaches towards innovative whole of university approaches to improve Indigenous participation.

Indigenous Knowledges (IK) is now considered in many universities to be essential to the academy and is referenced in individual universities’ Indigenous Education Statements, Reconciliation Action Plans and/or strategic plans or frameworks. Many universities report on how IK is put into practice through teaching and learning initiatives; however, this does not occur without tensions. These tensions exist around how IK is defined, taught and assessed, and how graduate attributes are determined. Most Australian universities recognise that previous formal study and life experiences contribute to higher education study, and have in place a procedure that recognises the contribution of prior learning for advanced standing to account for this; however, in many cases the rhetoric of transformation does not match the practice. IK within the academy calls for transformative practice, not just within teaching and learning, but practice that is formally assessed and measured at the entry and exit levels, and this should include a process that recognises the contribution of prior learning for advanced standing.

This chapter addresses Indigenous student equity in higher education by focussing on a narrative account of one Indigenous student’s successful transition into and completion of higher education studies. Throughout Australia, there have been many ‘small successes’ of Indigenous individuals who have completed higher education, but these stories are largely absent from the literature. There has, instead, been a strong focus on the barriers and challenges to Indigenous participation, and the high attrition rate. In a recent report, ‘“Can’t be what you can’t see”: the transition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students into higher education’, it was stated that success exists on a spectrum defined by individual and collective terms, as well as a range of measures utilised by universities and government departments. Success was viewed not so much as measured outcomes but more as a ‘ripple effect of many small successes’. Research shows that to attain a sense of success requires a high level of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy is not created by easy success; it requires experience in overcoming obstacles and challenging situations through maintained effort and persistence. Self-efficacy is informed by four principal sources: performance accomplishments, modelling, verbal persuasion, and physiological states. Each of these sources provides rich themes for personal narratives of success.

In this chapter, Ottmann focuses on a people group that contributes to the complexity of the educational landscape, people who are indigenous to the land but often not recognised as such, people that continue to confound many researchers, educators, leaders and policy-makers at all levels of education (elementary, secondary and post-secondary) – Canada’s First Nations, Métis and Inuit peoples. As an Anishinaabe person, the author resides within this circle. Ottmann asks the following questions: Why do significant educational gaps still exist and why do many First Nations, Métis and Inuit students disappear from the halls of our learning institutions, particularly in times of transition (i.e. from grades 6–7, 9–10, and 12–post-secondary)? How can educational leaders and teachers equip themselves to support students who see and experience the world differently – students who, in general, have not been responsive to traditional Eurocentric educational approaches? Do foundational educational precepts (i.e. philosophies, theories, methodologies and strategies) need to change to resolve long-standing issues (i.e. the education gap between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal students in Canada) to make way for inclusive, innovative, caring and supportive spaces in education? To answer these questions, Ottmann first provides a picture of the educational landscape of Canada’s Indigenous peoples, which includes insight and history of the systemic and systematic barriers, and the worldview differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples when it comes to the pursuit of post-secondary schooling success. Ottmann then explains the important role that Indigenisation and decolonisation has in strengthening post-secondary institutions and provides examples of access and transitioning programs in Canada, and ends with a case study. In the pursuit of the ‘new buffalo’ (education), the Trickster (transformational character) is at play in terrain defined by constant flux (change). It is by embracing and learning from these key concepts that learning institutions can develop sustainable access and transitioning programs that will not only benefit Indigenous students but all students. Ultimately, what is good for Indigenous students is good for all students.

Indigenous students, particularly those from regional and remote areas, are under-represented in both higher education and vocational education in Australia. Enabling programs seek to address this under-representation. They offer pathways to higher education, are important in lifting participation rates and potentially encourage mobility between the sectors. However, strategic development of enabling programs is based on little evidence about student or staff experiences. This chapter presents a qualitative research project underpinned by the strengths-based approach of conscientisation, exploring how Indigenous learning journeys via enabling programs can respect and grow cultural identity, while simultaneously developing study skills. The research considered interpretations of ‘success’ from the perspectives of students and teachers participating in enabling courses. The research found that enabling programs were an ‘important’ and ‘exciting journey’ for students that brought about transformation of the inner self through the building of ‘resilience’, ‘strength’, ‘confidence’, ‘self-esteem’, ‘self-worth’, ‘cultural understanding’ and ‘identity’. Success was experienced across multiple dimensions of students’ lived experience including ‘cultural identity’, ‘voice’, self-realisation, self-acceptance and ‘pride’. Staff suggested that enabling programs imparted an ‘underlying layer’ of skills. Recognition of Indigenous people as ‘yarners’ and ‘story tellers’, along with ways of incorporating ‘both-ways’ methodologies, need to be considered when developing the curriculum. This chapter reports on research which will be used to inform the development of a best-practice framework for Indigenous education enabling programs in Australia, particularly in regional and comprehensive education settings.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students face a range of barriers to participating and succeeding at university. To address these barriers, it is critical that universities create an environment where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students feel they belong and are culturally safe. Developing cultural competence at all levels of the university system is a critical mechanism to address these barriers and to create a safe teaching and learning environment. The University of Sydney (the University) is committed to embedding cultural competence throughout the whole university. To facilitate its strategy, it has established the National Centre for Cultural Competence (NCCC) to become a thought leader in cultural competence philosophy, process, praxis and methods. The NCCC’s mandate is to lead the thinking for individual, organisational and systemic changes that are genuinely transformational within the complex communities of the University and beyond. This chapter discusses the approach the NCCC has taken to lay the foundation for an environment that is culturally safe and where Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students will flourish. While the University’s strategy encompasses a range of policies and programs, this chapter will focus on the implications of the change agenda for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students and will set out the rationale for locating this systemic change in a cultural competence framework.

Relationships with and support from family is vital to increasing Native American college students’ persistence and their overall degree attainment. Native family and support systems extend beyond the nuclear family. Missing from our general conversations about family support is the powerful and unique influence that grandmothers have among Native college students. Using , an Indigenous qualitative methodological approach, first-year Navajo (n=10) college students share stories of how grandmothers supported their transition into college. Findings reveal that grandmothers’ teachings such as listening, sharing stories, and an openness to vulnerability motivated students to navigate through complex challenges. Examples from universities that have incorporated grandmother-like pedagogy are discussed. These lessons probe our thinking to consider how higher education institutions can move towards grandmothers’ pedagogy that cultivates a loving and caring environment for Native students.