A Māori Pedagogy: Weaving The Strands TogetherDr Paora StuckiDeputy Principal, Tōku Māpihi Maurea Kura Kaupapa Māori, HamiltonAbstractLiterature on Māori pedagogy up until now hasbeen disparate, some dealing with methodologicalissues, some with learning theory, some withenvironment and so forth. This article seeksto build one comprehensive picture of Māoripedagogy by weaving the myriad disparate themesin the literature into one unifying model. It isbased on an EdD study researching Māori teachereducators’ perceptions of pedagogy.Research paperKeywords: Ako, kaupapa Māori, Māori pedagogy,relational ontologyIntroductionThis article sets out to describe a Māoripedagogy. It is based on a review of the existingliterature, enhanced and extended by interviewsconducted as part of an EdD research project. Theinterviewees were Māori and taught in a Māoritertiary insitution – Te Wānanga o Aotearoa. Theywere all teacher educators working in sub-degreeand degree pre-service programmes for earlychildhood, primary and tertiary teaching. Eighteducators were interviewed: six were interviewedin pairs, two individually. Two interviews wereheld with each individual or group. This structurewas utilised in order to develop what Bishop(1996) describes as a “spiral discourse” wherebythere can be ongoing and collaborative analysisand intepretation of meanings. The research hadboth Massey University Human Ethics Approvaland approval from Te Wānanga o AotearoaKāhui Rangahau. Perhaps, surprisingly, there is areasonable body of literature on Māori pedagogy,most generated within the last twenty years. Thematerial is quite disparate in nature however some dealing with methodological issues (Bishop,2000; Metge, 1984); some dealing with theoreticalissues (Royal-Tangaere, 1997); some with thelearning environment (Cormack, 1997), and somewith wider societal factors (Bishop & Glynn, 1999;Pere, 1991; Pihama, Smith, Taki, & Lee, 2004).Weaving educational threads. Weaving educational practice.This article seeks to weave these multiple strandsinto one coherent whole through the developmentof a model that also illuminates the relationshipsbetween the various strands.Defining PedagogyWatkins and Mortimore (1999), in a review of theliterature, posit three elements to their descriptionof pedagogy. These elements are: The teacher. The learning situation or context. Theories about learning and learningabout learning.They point out that theirs is just a beginningdescription and must be developed.Following the work of MacNeill, Cavanagh andSilcox (2005), the wider socio-political contextwithin which the pedagogical enterprise takesplace can also be added for a more holisticdefinition of pedagogy. Critical theorists suchas Freire (1996) highlight the importance ofcurriculum, both hidden and overt, and how theseare generated as essential to any definition ofpedagogy. Teacher behaviours and characteristicsare also commonly discussed in pedagogicalcontexts (Hattie, 2003; Nuthall, 2002) while it alsoneeds to be specified that pedagogical settings arenot confined just to the school (Hemara, 2000;Pere, 1991).Pedagogy might therefore be defined asencompassing a variety of teaching and learningmethods and other teacher behaviours andcharacteristics grounded in theories of studentlearning and influenced by internal and externalsocio-political contexts. This definition has beendepicted in the following model.While the definition illustrated in Figure 1 isessentially a generic one, universal conceptsare more applicable when referenced to thelocal context. In a metaphor drawing on Māoricosmology, Papatuanuku (Earth Mother, the world)becomes the socio-political and cultural context,and pedagogy becomes a subset within this world,KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 20127
that is one of the forests of Tāne, (a departmentalgod and one of the sons of Papatuanuku). Thelearning theories are the ground of the forestand the other four aspects of pedagogy are treeswithin it. This metaphor is rich enough to showthe complex links and relationships betweenthe various pedagogical elements. Pedagogy isfundamentally grounded within its parent cultureand affected by it in various ways – analogous toclimate, geography, geology and so forth. At microlevel, the trees within the forest are fundamentallyaffected by the ground in which they grow (i.e.the learning theories that are the current dominantdiscourse) and the micro-climate of that areaas well as by each other. This model depictspedagogy as one large, ever-changing ecosystem.Socio-politicaland CulturalForcesSocio-politicaland iticaland CulturalForcesTheories ofStudentLearningThecontext andorganisationof teachingTeaching & learningmethods (includeselements such asmotivation techniques,teaching strategies,assessment)Otherteachingbehaviours andcharacteristicsFigure 1. Universal model of pedagogy.The following discussion takes each of the strandsdepicted in the model and describes them inmore detail with reference to the literature andthe discussions with the teacher educators fromTe Wānanga o Aotearoa. It also illuminates therelationships between those strands.Strand One: Socio-political andcultural forces – PapatuanukuThe literature paints a picture of a society whichhas a well-articulated set of concepts, customs,practices, institutions and values, all of whichcan inform curriculum content (what is to betaught) as well as methodology (how it is to betaught). Some of the most commonly articulatedof these concepts, customs, practices, institutions8KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 2012and values are tapu (sacred), noa (profane), mana(power, prestige), tika (right), pono (true) and aroha(love, compassion) (Bishop, 2000; Durie 2003;Pere 1991; Roberts & Wills, 1998; Royal, 2003;Waikerepuru, 2004).Other aspects of culture that are important includetribal knowledge and history, Māori arts,Māori-specific subject knowledge and theMāori language (Easton, Anderson, Averill & Smith,2005; Hemara, 2000; Metge, 1984; Penetito,2004; Royal, 2003; Webster & Tangaere, 1992).Whānau (family, extended family), whakapapa(genealogical links), and whenua (land) arecultural concepts which appear axial to Māoriculture (Fitzsimons & Smith, 2000; Roberts& Wills, 1998). All three are closely linkedwith identity and the first two with both theessentially collective orientation of Māorithinking and practice, and a way of thinkingabout the world as continuous, dynamicand evolving (Roberts & Wills, 1998). Māoricosmologies indicate complex realities whichare unable to be apprehended by the fivesenses but, nevertheless, impact strongly onthe sensory world (Royal, 2003). Knowledgeis precious, specialised and some of it isnot necessarily universally available (Smith,1992; Stokes, 1992). The truthfulness of astatement is ascertained using the criteriaof reasonableness, precedent, experience(Roberts & Wills 1998) and spiral discussion(Metge & Waititi, 2001).Māori society and culture cannot bedescribed as though it were unchanged fromfirst landfall until now. Māori are very awareof the presence of non-Māori in Aotearoa/New Zealand and characterise this presenceas having had, and continuing to have, manynegative outcomes for Māori (Walker, 1996).With this in mind, words such as “emancipatory”,“transformative” and “decolonising” are used todescribe examples of best practice in modernMāori educational institutions (Pihama, Smith,Taki & Lee, 2004). These institutions also promotethe agency of the individual in overcoming socialand domestic barriers to advancement (Stucki etal., 2006). Such thinking has a profound effect onpedagogical practices and beliefs.Strand Two: Theories of StudentLearning – The Ground of thePedagogical ForestThe teacher educators were asked questionsto probe their theories of student learning. Themajority indicated a socio-constructivist orientationwith its emphasis on new learning occuring
through the interaction of teacher, learner and thelearner’s peers. They articulated this orientationmost clearly in the importance they placed onhigh-quality relationships between themselves andtheir students. This is opposed to behaviourist,humanist or developmental learning theorieswhich focus more on the learner in isolation(Biddulph & Carr, 1999).In seeking an explanation for this learning theorypreference, a relationship can be discerned withinthe model between theories of learning andsocio-political and cultural characteristics suchas the importance of whānau, whakapapa andwhenua which would also appear to have similarimplications for teaching and learning as a socioconstructivist approach. The contention of thisthesis is that the importance research participantsplaced on socio-constructivism and high-qualityrelationships is more fundamental than simplysupport of a current educational discourse, butrather, is consistent with the epistemology andontology of a Māori world-view. It is maintainedthat the emphasis participants placed onrelationships within their teaching reflects arelational Māori ontology which reaches beyondlearning theories and is fundamental to who theyare socially, politically, spiritually and culturally.Strand Three: Teaching and Learningmethods - a tree in the forest of TĀNeRelationshipsThe most important theme which weaves togetherthe myriad methodological discussions describedin the literature and amongst research participantsis relationships. This can be described as afocus on the quality of the relationship betweenteacher and learner. Bishop and Glynn (1999)urge the educator to use “whānau” or family asa metaphor for relations in the classroom, andKa’ai (1990) describes the relationships betweenkohanga workers and children as ones of “aroha”and “whanaungatanga” (family relationships).Certainly, if it is valid to extrapolate pedagogicalprinciples from the informal socialisation ofchildren as Hemara (2000) and others have done,then modelling a pedagogy on the family must befundamental since socialisation in pre-Europeantimes was, in the main, conducted within theimmediate and extended family. Co-construction through problemsolving (Bishop et al., 2003; Ritchie,2003). Collaboration (Zepke & Leach, 2002). Cooperation (Bishop et al., 2003; Rubieet al., 2004). “Groups compete, individualscooperate” (Cormack, 1997, p. 163).HolismThe concept of holism also weaves a numberof themes within the literature together. Theseinclude Durie’s (1994) Whare Tapa Wha (thesquare building) model of well being; curriculumintegration (Bishop, 2000) and the use ofmethodologies and techniques which engage thewhole learner (Hemara, 2000; Metge 1984).Interviews with the teacher educators fromTe Wānanga o Aotearoa both supported andextended discussions in the literature. Some spokespecifically of the Whare Tapa Wha model anddescribed how they taught it in class. They alsoreported using it as a model for how they treatedthe students as adults and how they thought oftheir class. The notion of koakoa (joy, humour)discussed by research participants is anotherexpression of this holistic view of the studentbecause its use attempts to engage the wholestudent, not just their cognition. The myriadmethodologies described by participants anddiscussed further below, cover cognitive, emotionaland social aspects of the person as well as variouslearning styles. Participants commented on visualand hands-on activities, music, waiata (song) andstopping, looking and listening. Activities andbeliefs which can only be described as spiritual innature featured far more prominently in researchparticipant discussions than in the literature, mostparticularly the practice of beginning and endingeach day with karakia (prayer).To borrow from the Whare Tapa Wha Model(Durie, 1994) which argues that all aspects of ahuman being need to be taken into account withinthe concept of ‘well-being’, not just their physicalhealth, so holism within the Māori pedagogydescribed by the literature and the researchparticipants might be illustrated in the followingway:Perhaps a logical extension of this is the emphasisin the literature on any form of group work: Mixed ability grouping (Metge, 1984). Single ability grouping (Bishop et al.,2003). Discursive teaching (Gorinski &Abernethy, 2003). Interactive teaching (Ritchie, 2003).Weaving educational threads. Weaving educational practice.KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 20129
learning process is the emphasis in theliterature on catering for the different wayspeople supposedly learn (Bishop et al., 2003;Ritchie, 2003).CognitiveWhare Tapa Wha as contentCurriculum integrationSpiritualBeginning and ending each daywith karakia [prayer]The use of spiritual healersBeliefs about the nature ofknowledgeThe StudentEmotionalMotivation techniquesHumourMusicWaiataPromotion of values such as“aroha” and “manaaki”PhysicalSocialClass as whānauMultiple ways of relatingMihimihi, WhakawhanaungatangaGroup workKinaesthetic approachesA concern for the student’sphysical comfortFigure 2. An holistic methodology.ReflectionReflection is another umbrella concept. Pere(1991) situates the learner at the centre of theteaching and learning activity. Bishop (2000)expands on how this might be made a reality byemphasising the importance of the learner being incontrol of the learning process or the constructionof meaning. Bishop urges teachers to interact withstudents in such a way that new knowledge isco-created. He references Lauritzen and Jaeger(1997), who state that one of their main beliefsabout curriculum is that it “should be designedto embrace diversity of all kinds and should usethe richness of each learner’s prior knowledgeand experience to the maximum benefit of thecommunity of learners” (p. 27). According toZepke and Leach (2002), reflection is the processwhich allows this to happen. They say “reflectionenables [the learner] to learn from their experienceand prior knowledge. In this process the teacher isno longer the ‘body of knowledge’. She becomesone of the many resources for the learner to tap into” (p. 18).Reflection is also fundamental to two majormethodologies described in the literature –narration or storytelling (Bishop, 2000; Royal,2003) and an activities-based or modellingapproach (Hemara, 2000; Hohepa, 1992). Theimportance of reflection is evidenced by theimportance some writers attach to clear andeffective feedback and assessment (Bishop etal., 2003; Rubie et al., 2004). Another aspect ofplacing the learner at the centre of the teaching/10KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 2012PragmatismHowever, it is important to note a strongsense of pragmatism in the literature. There isvery much a sense in which methodologiesare chosen for their appropriateness giventhe context and the subject matter eventhough they may at first seem to fall outsidemethodologies generated within the abovecategories. In this area are approachessuch as rote learning (Hemara, 2000;Metge, 1984); learning at night and in theearly morning (Hemara, 2000); exclusiveenrolment practices (Hemara, 2000; Royal,2003) and the use of anger as a motivationtechnique (Hemara, 2000). Also includedhere are the descriptions of the use ofinternationally utilised second languagelearning techniques such as those describedby Hohepa (1992), Martin, McMurchy-Pilkington& Martin (2004), and others.Strand Four: Curriculum Content –another tree in the forest of TĀNeMany definitions of curriculum (McGee, 2001)emphasise curriculum as a didactic tool which,when properly developed and organised, enhancesteaching and learning. Such definitions mask thefact that curriculum is fundamentally about culturalreproduction. Thaman (1993) on the other handdefines curriculum as:Selection from the culture of a society, ofaspects which are regarded as so valuablethat their survival is not left to chance but isentrusted to teachers for expert transmission tothe young (p. 249).At a macro-level a more important questionthan the “what” of curriculum content is the“who”. Whomever has control over curriculumdevelopment has a massive impact on what cultureis reproduced. After a period of almost no controlover curriculum content in the education of theirchildren, there has been increasing Māori controlover curriculum content particularly in Māorimedium environments since the 1990s (Stucki,2010). This has brought about significant progressin re-establishing Māori curricula in all sectorsof education. There are ongoing issues, however,such as: The continued heavy influence ofmainstream priorities (Smith,1992). Definitions and delineations such as‘Māori science’ and what this includes(Smith, 1992).
What traditional knowledge to includeand what to leave out as being nolonger of significance (Smith,1992) andthe related issue of the development ofnew knowledge being still only in itsinfancy. Ongoing issues of quality in the tertiarysector around pathways, staircasing andculturally-appropriate quality assurance(Kingsbury, 2006). The danger of misappropriationof Māori cultural and intellectualcapital brought about by processes ofcommodification (Smith, 1997).Strand FIVE: Other Teacher Behavioursand Characteristics – another tree inthe forest of TĀNeThere are a number of lists within the literature ofthe characteristics of a good teacher, for example:Howe (1993); Nuthall (2002), and the InterimFramework of Professional Standards for Teachers(in New Zealand Educational Institute, 2007). Allare systematically developed and comprehensive.Of these, however, only Howe’s (1993) list wasbased on work with Māori. In their influentialstudy, Bishop, Berryman, Tiakiwai & Richardson(2003) have outlined six dimensions of theeffective teacher in their Te Kotahitanga EffectiveTeaching Profile. The dimensions were developedmainly from interviews with Māori students as tothe characteristics of effective teachers, supportingthis with material from interviews with parents,principals and teachers, and then synthesising itwith the results of similar studies.The six dimensions are:1. Manaakitanga: They care for thestudents as culturally-located humanbeings above all else.2. Mana motuhake: They care for theperformance of their students.3. Ngā tūrango [sic] takitahi me ngāmana whakahaere: They are able tocreate a secure, well-managed learningenvironment.4. Wānanga: They are able to engage ineffective teaching interactions withMāori students as Māori.5. Ako: They can use strategies thatpromote effective teaching interactionsand relationships with their learners.6. Kotahitanga: They promote, monitorand reflect on outcomes that in turnlead to improvements in educationalachievement for Māori students (Bishopet al., 2003, p. 108).Weaving educational threads. Weaving educational practice.In addition to the above, teacher educators inthe research interviews identified additionalbehaviours and characteristics around culturaladaptability and the development of personalagency in students. To encompass these elementsin the research, a sub-category under ManaMotuhake called “whakamana” was introduced. Itis argued that these are not merely miscellaneousadd-ons but are fundamental characteristics andbehaviours exhibited by the teacher-educatorsin responding to the social reality in which theirstudents find themselves. Aspects included withinthis seventh category include: Developing personal agency. Being able to adapt to life in situationswhere Māori is not the dominantculture but still finding “spaces” inwhich to be Māori. Developing a balanced approach to theexperience of Māori marginalisationand racism in general i.e. not beingeither too passive or too aggressive.Strand six: THE context andorganisation of learning – thelearning environment – another tree inthe forest of TĀNeWhen asked about the learning environmentresearch participants’ main focus was thephysical environment and the need to cater forthe physical comfort of learners. However. therewas also considerable discussion of other aspectsthat contributed to a good environment. Theseincluded: The way the kaiako (teacher) comesacross emotionally (Bishop et al., 2003). The social milieu (Durie, 1994). Cultural environment (Cormack, 1997) Intellectual environment (Bishop et al.,2003). Spiritual environment (Pere, 1991).While none of these aspects of a good environmentare unique to Māori, some of the expressions ofthem are. Concurring with the literature, it wasimportant to the participants that the environmentreflected Māori culture, not just in material wayssuch as with Māori-themed visual displays andMāori music but that it was also “safe” in otherdomains as explained by research participant D:I notice the question here on tikanga (custom)and to me tikanga is about tika (rightness,correctness) aye, doing what’s right and propergiven the context that something has happenedin. And so I think that tikanga is alwaysimportant and therefore making sure thatpeople are safe. You know people can’t learn ifthey don’t feel safe KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 201211
conclusion(Interviewer) And mihimihi is an importantpart of that?Given the Māori pedagogy described in thisarticle and illustrated above, a set of questionshas been developed to help the educator toreflect on their own practice and identify areasthat might be modified in order to facilitatelearning for their Māori students. If there is ahigher congruency between home culture andschool culture then learning is likely to be morepowerful for Māori students (Bishop. 2000). It ishoped that the following questions will provide atool for increasing home-school congruency andincorporating aspects of Tane’s forest.Oh it is.WEAVING THE STRANDS TOGETHERThe above discussions can be summarised by“filling in” the universal model of pedagogyillustrated in Figure 1. As can be seen in Figure3, few of the elements or the strands within them,particularly within the pedagogy circle, are uniqueto Māori. Taken as a whole, however, it is obviousthat a unique mechanism of cultural and socialreproduction exists which is much more than thesum of its parts.PovertyTe ReoSocio-political andCultural forcesMarginalisationTransformationPakeha as “Other”Making a livingWhanauPonoPoorer sing Maori controlHeavy influence of mainstreamprioritiesNew knowledgeCulturally-appropriatequality assuranceTe Ao MaoriSelf-determinationRelational ontologyTikaManaTheories of Student LearningNoaSocial ConstructivismTapuConcepts aboutknowledgeWorlds beyondthe sensoryWhakapapaNonengagementFigure 3. Applied universal model of pedagogy.KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 2012The Context andOrganisationof Learninge.g.Safe, secure, structuredWhanau involvementMaori culture evidentFun, respectful,challengingDecolonisationTeaching and LearningMethodsReflective (e.g. feedback, feedforward,critical, Maori metaphors)Holistic (e.g. integrated, multi-sensory)Relationship-oriented (e.g. group work,teina/tuakana, ako,whanaungatanga, mihi,contribute to group success)Other TeachingBehavioursand Characteristicse.g.Holistic student careWell-managedEffective teaching strategiesReflectiveCo-constructor ofknowledgeLower levels of educationalachievement12ArohaPedagogy
Te Ao MāoriHow well do I know and engage with Māoriculture?In what spaces am I and the Māori students I teachable to be Māori?How well do I understand the history ofcolonisation and its effects on Māori?How do I realise my commitment to studentwelfare?How do I conscientise and decolonise?What are my values as a teacher?Teaching and Learning MethodsHow important for me is the development andmaintenance of strong respectful relationships withstudents?How does this inform my practice?Am I informed about the lives of my studentsbeyond the institution?Do I relate to them in ways other than merely as ateacher?Do I have well-articulated, mutually respectfulforms of conflict resolution?In what ways is my teaching “student centred”?What personal systems do I have in place whichenable me to change my practice according tostudent feedback?What reflective tools do I use in my teaching?How important is an holistic approach to me?Do I try to utilise multiple approaches that cater fordifferent learners’ needs?How do I engage with the non-academic aspectsof my students’ lives – the physical, emotional,social and spiritual aspects?Do I utilise the strength of the group to effectindividual achievement?Do I view the students in a collective as well as anindividual sense?Do I utilise groups and in what ways?Do I utilise a tuakana/teina approach?Theories of Student LearningCan I articulate my own theories of learning?Other Teacher Characteristics and BehavioursHow do I define and practise the following:manaaki; building mana motuhake; managingngā tūranga takitahi and mana whakahaere; ako;kotahitanga; whakamana?The Context and Organisation of Learning –Learning EnvironmentsHow do I manage the following aspects of myWeaving educational threads. Weaving educational practice.educative environment and to what extent is itMāori in character: physical; emotional; social;cultural; intellectual and spiritual?CurriculumWhat Māori knowledge do I consciously include inmy teaching?What is my commitment to finding out more?What is my commitment to Māori languagerevitalisation?ReferencesBiddulph, F., & Carr, K. (1999). Learning theories andcurriculum. Teachers and Curriculum, 3, 31-35.Bishop, R. (1996). Collaborative research stories:Whakawhanaungatanga. Palmerston North, NewZealand: Dunmore Press.Bishop, R. (2000). Kaupapa Māori messages formainstream. set: Research Information forTeachers, 2000(1), 4-7.Bishop, R., Berryman, M., Tiakiwai, S., & Richardson,C. (2003). Te kotahitanga: The experiences of year9-10 Māori students in mainstream classrooms.Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.Bishop, R., & Glynn, T. (1999). Culture counts:Changing power relations in education.Palmerston North, New Zealand: Dunmore Press.Cormack, I. (1997). Creating an effective learningenvironment for Mäori students. In P. Te Whaiti,M. McCarthy & A. Durie (Eds.), Mai i rangiātea:Māori wellbeing and development. Auckland,New Zealand: Auckland University Press withBridget Williams Books.Durie, M. (1994). Whaiora: Māori healthdevelopment. Auckland, New Zealand: OxfordUniversity Press.Durie, M. (2003). Nga kahui pou: LaunchingMāori futures. Wellington, New Zealand: HuiaPublishers.Easton, H., Anderson, D., Averill, R., & Smith, D.(2005). Use of a cultural metaphor in pre-servicemathematics teacher education. In P. Clarkson, A.Downton, D. Gronn, M. Horne, A. McDonough,R. Pierce & A. Roche (Eds.), Building connections:Theory, research and practice. Proceedings ofthe 28th annual conference of the MathematicsEducation Research Group of Australasia (Vol. 1,pp. 81-88). Sydney: MERGA.Fitzsimons, P., & Smith, G. (2000). Philosophy andindigenous cultural transformation. EducationalPhilosophy and Theory, 32(1), 25-41.Freire, P. (1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed. London:Penguin Books.KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 201213
Gorinski, R., & Abernethy, G. (2003, July 9-11).Māori student retention and success: Curriculum,pedagogy and relationships. Paper presented atthe 7th Pacific Rim First Year in Higher EducationConference. Enhancing transition to highereducation: Strategies and policies that work,Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane,Australia.Hattie, J. (2002). What are the attributes of excellentteachers? In R. Baker (Ed.), Teachers make adifference: What is the research evidence? (pp.3-26). Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Council forEducational Research.Hemara, W. (2000). Māori pedagogies: A view fromthe literature. Wellington, New Zealand: NewZealand Council for Educational Research.Hohepa, M. (1992). Te kohanga reo hei tikanga akoi te reo Māori: Te kohanga reo as a context forlanguage learning. Educational Psychology, 12(34), 333-346.Howe, P. (1993). Towards a pedagogy for Māoristudents. Paper presented at the New ZealandAssociation of Teachers of English (NZATE)Conference, English in Aotearoa, Nelson, NewZealand.Ka’ai, T. (1990). Te hiringa taketake: Mai i te Kohangareo i te kura. Māori pedagogy: Te kohanga reoand the transition to school. Unpublished M.Philthesis, University of Auckland, Auckland, NewZealand.Kingsbury, N. (2006). Report of the Tertiary EducationCommission strategic review of pathways andstaircasing. Wellington, New Zealand: TertiaryEducation Commission.Lauritzen, C., & Jaeger, M. (1997). Integrating learningthrough story: The narrative curriculum. Albany,New York: Delmar Publishers.MacNeill, N., Cavanagh, R. F., & Silcox, S. (2005).Pedagogic leadership: Refocusing on learningand teaching (Electronic Version). InternationalElectronic Journal For Leadership in Learning, 9.Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/iejll/vol9/silcoxMcGee, C. (2001). Understanding curriculum. InC. McGee & D. Fraser (Eds.), The professionalpractice of teaching (2nd ed.). Palmerston North,New Zealand: Dunmore Press.Martin, N., McMurchy-Pilkington, C., & Martin,R. (2004, July 5-7). Te rito: Centring Māoripedagogy in teacher education. Paper presentedat the Teacher Education Forum of Aotearoa/New Zealand (TEFANZ), Auckland College ofEducation, Auckland, New Zealand.Metge, J. (1984). Akonga Māori, he tikanga Māori:Learning and teaching. Wellington, New Zealand:Māori and Island Division, Department ofEducation.14KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 2012Metge, J., & Waititi, T. (2001). Learning throughtalking together: The whānau workshops. In N.Benton & R. Benton (Eds.), Te rito o temātauranga: Experiential learning for the thirdmillenium. Auckland, New Zealand: JamesHenare Māori Research Centre.New Zealand Educational Institute. (2007). Primaryteachers’ (including deputy principals andassistant principals and other unit holders)collective agreement, 12 December 2007 to30 June 2010. Wellington, New Zealand: NewZealand Educational Institute, Te Riu Roa.N
Weaving educational threads Weaving educational practice KAIRARANGA – VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1: 2012 7 A Māori Pedagogy: Weaving
realm of weaving.” The weaving curve for a k-factor of 1.0 essentially identified the limit of weaving length that resulted in weaving movements. Beyond these lengths, which depended upon weaving volume or flow rate, the section was believed to operate as a basic freeway section, with merging at one end and diverging at the other.
been seeking a pedagogy of the oppressed or critical pedagogy and has proposed a pedagogy with a new relationship between teacher, student and society. As a result of the broader debates on pedagogy, practitioners have been wanting to rework the boundaries of care and education via the idea of social pedagogy; and perhaps .
Dark Age Tablet Weaving for Viking and Anglo-Saxon re-enactors 1 Introduction Tablet weaving, also known as card weaving, is a method of using square tablets with holes in the corners to weave narrow decorative bands made of wool, linen or silk threads. Tablet weaving was widespread in E
Free Weaving Patterns from Eplore Techniques for nlay Plain Weave and uck Lace The Draft: How to Read Weaving Patterns P atterns for weaving are written in a form called a “draft.” The draft is a standardized short-hand way
10 - Miss Otis Regrets (standard key - Eb) 11 - I Get a Kick Out of You (standard key - Eb) 12 - I love Paris (standard key - C) 13 - It's D'Lovely (Ori's provided chart) 14 - Just One of those Things (Ori's provided chart) 15 - Anything goes (Ori's provid
music (CCM) vocal pedagogy through the experiences of two vocal pedagogy teachers, the other in the USA and the other in Finland. The aim of this study has been to find out how the discipline presently looks from a vocal pedagogy teacher's viewpoint, what has the process of building higher education CCM vocal pedagogy courses been
Weaving God’s Promises is: For children ages 3-11 and youth ages 12-14 A three-year program: year One: weaving Our faith year Two: weaving together the family of God year Three: weaving God’s beloved Community You get access to all three years with your annual purchase. Episcopal: wri
Introduction A description logic (DL) knowledge base (KB) consists of a terminological box (TBox), storing conceptual knowledge, and an assertion box (ABox), storing data. Typical applica-tions of KBs involve answering queries over incomplete data sources (ABoxes) augmented by ontologies (TBoxes) that provide additional information about the domain of interest as well as a convenient .