Indigenous Knowledge and Cultural Responsiveness

My understanding of indigenous knowledge and cultural responsiveness is based on developing strong relationships with students so that I get to know and understand them. I am particularly conscious of not acting in a way that could be interpreted as tokenism and offensive. My approach is to try to provide opportunities for students to bring their own knowledge and talents to the classroom. After all, for any of us, we feel better about ourselves and more confident if we feel valued. I began teaching when my own children were in their teens and have previously employed a range of people who bought much needed differences to the workplace and with whom I worked and learned from. I am also fortunate to work in an environment where difference is celebrated and the school culture actively encourages and provides a range of opportunities for students to shine and demonstrate their individual skills and talents.

So this definition resonates for me:

Gay (2010) defines culturally responsive pedagogy as teaching ‘to and through [students’] personal and cultural strengths, their intellectual capabilities, and their prior accomplishments’ (p. 26) and as premised on ‘close interactions among ethnic identity, cultural background, and student achievement’ (p.27).

While I put effort into planning learning activities to ensure students can bring their identity and strengths into the classroom and create opportunities for ako, I then fall back on traditional, “One Size Fits All” methods of assessment. 

This puts my practice in the purple zone of Milne’s action continuum until the issue of assessment is addressed however from the perspective of the Mauri Model I am in the state of being of Mauri Oho - awoken and engaged but yet to be at the forefront and showing leadership (Pohatu 2011).

 This section from the paper, Culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment in primary science classrooms, suggests multiple opportunities to give feedback:

Culturally responsive pedagogy thrives when teachers ensure that students have multiple and diverse opportunities to develop, express, and receive feedback on their understanding of science. Ideally, these opportunities accumulate and enable students to elaborate their science ideas by bringing different experiences and knowledge into dialogue (Cowie, Otrel-Cass, Glynn & Kara et al 2011).

I am aware of providing contextually relevant learning activities and am comfortable with becoming the learner in the relationship between myself and the student (ako) but I am not providing multiple and diverse opportunities for feedback. I need to do some research and consult with students to take the next step and rethink assessment. The effective teacher model (Bishop & Berryman 2009) would be a good place to start and my next step. Part two of Te Kotahitanga - Effective Teaching Profile describes the actions of effective teachers from the perspectives of students I need to consider. 

References:

Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Cavanagh, T., & Teddy, L. (2007). Te Kotahitanga Phase 3 Whänaungatanga: Establishing a culturally responsive pedagogy of relations in mainstream secondary school classrooms: Report to the Ministry of Education. Wellington: Ministry of Education.

Bishop, R. & Berryman, M. (2009) The Te Kotahitanga Effective Teaching Profile.

Cowie, B., Otrel-Cass, K., Glynn, T., & Kara, H., et al.(2011).Culturally responsive pedagogy and assessment in primary science classrooms: Whakamana tamariki. Wellington: Teaching Learning Research Initiative. Retrieved from http://www.tlri.org.nz/sites/default/files/projects/9268_cowie-summaryreport.pdf

Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Potahu, T. W. (2011). Mauri - Rethinki ng Human Wellbeing. MAI Review, 3, 1-12.