International Journal of Science Education

ISSN: 0950-0693 (Print) 1464-5289 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsed20

Locating the global: culture, language and science

education for indigenous students

Elizabeth McKinley

To cite this article: Elizabeth McKinley (2005) Locating the global: culture, language and science
education for indigenous students, International Journal of Science Education, 27:2, 227-241, DOI:
10.1080/0950069042000325861

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000325861

Published online: 15 Jun 2012.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 1716

View related articles

Citing articles: 33 View citing articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tsed20

Download by: [National Dong Hwa University] Date: 04 November 2017, At: 09:55
 INT. J. SCI. EDUC., 4 FEBRUARY 2005, VOL. 27, NO. 2, 227–241

SPECIAL ISSUE

Locating the global: culture, language and science

education for indigenous students

Elizabeth McKinley, School of Education, University of Waikato, Hamilton,

Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

Aotearoa New Zealand; Email: mckinley@waikato.ac.nz

The international literature suggests the use of indigenous knowledge (IK) and traditional ecological knowledge
27
0950-0693
Original
Taylor
2004
School
ElizabethMcKinley
0000002004
00 &ofArticle
International
10.1080/0950069042000325861
TSED100787.sgm
and Francis
EducationUniversity
(print)/1464-5289
FrancisLtd
JournalLtd (online)
of ScienceofEducation
WaikatoHamiltonAotearoaNew Zealandmckinley@waikato.ac.nz

(TEK) contexts in science education to provide motivation and self-esteem for indigenous students is wide-
spread. However, the danger of alienating culture (as knowledge) from the language in which the worldview is
embedded seems to have been left out of the philosophical and pedagogical debates surrounding research and
comment in the field. This paper argues that one of the main ways in which indigenous knowledge systems will
survive and thrive is through the establishment of programmes taught through indigenous languages so that a
dialectal relationship between language and knowledge is established that continues to act as the wellspring. The
article concludes by reviewing the situation in Aotearoa New Zealand with respect to the indigenous population,
Maori, and the recent science education initiatives in te reo Maori (Maori language).

Introduction
Recently I submitted a book proposal to an American publisher exploring the issues
of ‘race’, gender and science in the framework of a colonizing history with specific
reference to Maori women in Aotearoa New Zealand. The reason given by the
publishers for turning down the proposal, despite considerable support from series
editors, was that it was ‘too local’ and would not be economic for the publishing
company. I have in previous years (although less lately) received reviews that ask me
to generalize my articles to be more widely applicable, mostly to appeal to a ‘multi-
cultural’ audience generally. The concern of publishers, editors and reviewers to be
more ‘universal’ in the appeal of articles and books implies that universal application
and translatability between cultures is not only possible but also desirable. A more
universal appeal is about similarities, drawing analogies in another context and
working towards sameness, which requires detaching knowledge (the universal
component) from the knower (location or context). Hence, the inevitable transla-
tion that occurs is more concerned with the subordination of the strangeness of the
‘different’ into another culture’s knowledge system through their language. For
many indigenous peoples this other culture is the colonizing one. In a time of global-
ization, where populations migrate, place based knowledge is dismissed as irrelevant
and the Internet makes location an abstract concept. This issue of making local
knowledge part of the global brings with it the attendant challenges of politics,
history, language, economics and ethics.
This article refers to indigenous peoples, their knowledges and languages as
‘local’, specific to a place, and often struggling for existence. Many indigenous

International Journal of Science Education ISSN 0950–0693 print/ISSN 1464–5289 online ©2005 Taylor & Francis Group Ltd
http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
DOI: 10.1080/0950069042000325861
 228 E. MCKINLEY

peoples have become (involuntary) minorities in their own countries while others
have been left with legacies of colonizing institutions and/or mindsets. However,
survival is not just about physical existence but also about the maintaining of local
indigenous worldviews, languages, and environments. While each country has to
attend to their own indigenous language(s) and culture(s), the issue of their survival
is global. In this paper I wish to address a science education for indigenous students,
not in the detail of a curriculum or pedagogy, but in discussing the global nature of
the educational crisis facing indigenous peoples. In particular, I want to explore how
science education research has addressed this issue and suggest what might need to
be done in the future.
It is my intention that this article moves on from the last one I wrote for this
journal on similar issues (see McKinley et al. 1992). I begin this one by reviewing
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

international literature regarding the current research into issues relevant to indige-
nous students participation and success in science education. This literature can be
divided into two broad areas – the philosophical debate regarding indigenous knowl-
edge and its relationship to science, and secondly issues relating to improving class-
room practice. While there is a very large volume of literature about the nature of
science with respect to culture, and much of this in the field of education, little of it
is based on studies done in schools and other contexts that focus on indigenous
learners and their communities. Following these sections I argue for the need to
include indigenous languages in culture and curriculum by examining the conse-
quences of a ‘translatability’ of using cultural contexts in science education but
leaves language detached. Finally I review the ‘local’ situation in Aotearoa New
Zealand with respect to Maori initiatives of teaching science in te reo Maori (Maori
language). Lastly, I will discuss future research highlighting specific issues that need
attention from an indigenous perspective.

Literature review
Indigenous knowledge and science education
There is a substantial international literature that explores the relationship between
indigenous knowledges, or native science, and Western scientific knowledge.
Indigenous peoples’ relationship to their ecologies, where there is respect and
appreciation of the inherent values in everything, is a worldview that is not held by
all. In a worldview that treats knowledge as being able to be ‘uncoupled’ from its
location and the person suggests knowledge can be treated as a commodity to be
shared, or bought and sold. Such diverse views of knowledge form the basis of the
debate in the literature that follows and sees the literature divided into two camps
often labeled as ‘universalist’ (includes Western modern science or WMS) and
‘pluralist’ or ‘multiculturalist’ (includes indigenous knowledge or IK). This debate
in education is part of a wider critique of science (Kuhn 1970) that has accompa-
nied the emergence of poststructuralist and postmodernist philosophies generally.
The relevance of this debate is that a universalist understanding of science informs
the assumptions school curricula make about the nature of science, and how
science should be taught (Stanley and Brickhouse 2001). There is an assumption
that it should be part of the school curriculum for all peoples and the only place for
IK is that which equates to, or at least does not disrupt the boundaries of, WMS
and people’s views of culture. IK (or culture) has non-material status – along with
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 229

such aspects as dancing, singing and ceremonies. By accepting only that know-
ledge that ‘fits’ science the status quo never changes, power and/or authority is not
contested, and extra resources are not required.
The universalist positions argue that WMS is the paradigmatic example of
science, has a universal essence, and provides knowledge which is uniquely and
epistemologically far more powerful than that of any IK or traditional native
sciences (e.g. Loving 1995, Loving and de Montellano 2003). In contrast, the
multiculturalist positions stress that all knowledges, including WMS, exist within a
cultural context (e.g. Lewis and Aikenhead 2001, McGovern 1999, Semali and
Kincheloe 1999, Snively and Corsiglia 2001). This position suggests that all knowl-
edge reflects and has embedded in it the values of the culture from which it is
produced. Some writers have suggested that the portrayal of WMS as universal also
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

dismisses IK as inadequate and inferior (Jegede 1997, Zaslavsky 1994). Others have
suggested the cultural context of WMS is ‘white’ rather than universal because
‘modernist scientific universalism excludes “white science” as a cultural knowledge,
a local way of seeing’ (Semali and Kincheloe 1999: 29). These authors argue that
conventional science education, and its use of WMS, automatically diminishes any
other way of knowing the world. This can be seen as part of a wider debate on power
and colonization of indigenous peoples, which I do not intend to cover here.
Thus some authors have argued for the inclusion of IK and Traditional
Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in the science curriculum (Corsiglia & Snively,
2001, Irzik 2001). However much of the writing uses modifiers and acknowledge
IK or TEK only to the extent that some insights of science can be arrived at by
other epistemological means. Other authors believe there is enough commonality
between IK in their countries such that inclusion is possible. For example, Dei
(2000) draws comparisons between IK and African development, and Goes in
Center (2001) argues for the incorporation of WMS into IK providing it fits with
the native people’s worldview and value system. Maori authors, such as Roberts
(1996) and Rikihana (1996), believe that IK can be taught alongside WMS as
distinct but not entirely dissimilar knowledge systems and that education could
start with the common elements. Lomax (1996) argues that the difference between
traditional Maori knowledge and WMS is one of process, while Durie (1996) sees
the ‘interface’ between Maori knowledge and science allows an expanded under-
standing of ourselves and the world around us. Some indigenous writers suggest
that WMS would co-opt and dominate IK if it were incorporated as science and do
not want to see it included at all (Battiste and Henderson 2000). Cobern and
Loving (2001) have suggested that IK is better placed as a different kind of knowl-
edge, and like the arts, economics, history and religion, should be valued for its
own merit, while still playing a vital role in science education. However, the poli-
tics involved with such a move are overwhelming and highly unlikely to succeed in
finding a place in an already crowded curriculum, and may, in effect, result in
further exclusion of IK from schools.
Since ‘multiculturalist’ positions in science education are argued not only
from philosophical but also from political and moral grounds, there is a sense in
which this philosophical debate has been rather one-sided, in that to take a
strongly ‘universalist’ position is difficult without implying approval of the current
inequity between groups in society. Hence, much of the literature from ‘universal-
ist’ positions make some concessions regarding historically excluded knowledges,
such as IK, and people. However, even given this, many of the authors display
 230 E. MCKINLEY

little understanding of the complexity of the issues involved in colonization and

have difficulty in giving convincing responses and assurances to indigenous
peoples that things will be different.
While the debate in the literature is dominated by publications in favour of
multiculturalist approaches, teaching practices in science education have changed
little (Aikenhead 2000, Scantlebury et al. 2002). Classroom practice appears to
remain based on traditional, universalist views of the nature of science, and of
science education. The resistance of school curricula to reform efforts is well docu-
mented (Blades 1997, Hodson 1999). Critical pedagogy requires more than letting
students (or teachers for that matter) ‘see’ two different worldviews yet many science
education writers do not address the issue of changing very deep-seated views of the
culturally different (Pomeroy 1994). Unfortunately, the philosophy debates stop
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

short of their implications in government policy, curriculum, classroom practice and

addressing issues of power. One needs to ask – how might one ‘translate’ these ideals
into classroom curriculum? Some writers have been focusing on classroom practice.

Culture and pedagogy

The multicultural debates are linked to other prominent debates in science education
aimed at inclusion, such as the constructivism, ‘science for all’ and STS, that concern
ways pedagogical change can improve the learning and achievement in science of a
wider range of students. However, the failure of science education research during
these times was in not taking culture, language, ‘race’ or colonization as major factors
in any of the projects. Despite this, a number of indigenous writers have argued the
importance of connecting school science education to the students’ cultural back-
ground (Cajete 1995, Kawagley 1995, Kawagley and Barnhardt 1999, McKinley
1997). This argument can be divided into two strategies. The first is making science
‘relevant’ to the student, which usually involves teaching in culturally relevant
contexts or everyday science. The second strategy is aimed at improving indigenous
students’ learning through more appropriate teaching approaches and models, often
called culturally responsive teaching or culturally based pedagogy (see Bishop and
Glynn 1994, Ladson-Billings 1995).
Much has been argued in relation to connecting IK or native science to the
school science curriculum but little has been done to follow this through in any
substantial research project. Indigenous authors, Greg Cajete (1995, 2000) and
Oscar Kawagley (1995), have written substantial pieces on the recovery of the
indigenous voice and on models to use or principles to follow in teaching. Too
broad to attempt to examine here in any detail, both argue for increasing the use of
cultural examples, perspectives and fieldwork in science education. However, the
literature also identifies a persistence of cultural stereotypes in science education,
particularly but not exclusively through textbooks that attempt to ‘represent’ or
include indigenous science topics. Ninnes’ (2003) examination of science textbooks
in Australia and Canada revealed that there was often an absence of representations
of indigenous ideas and identities, or representations presented in a stereotypical,
historical and fixed manner. Resources that connect culture with science and a
teacher’s ability to facilitate such resources through competent teaching have been
found to be problematic (Davidson and Miller 1998, Loving and de Montellano
2003, McKinley 1996, Rogers 2003, Rowland and Adkins 2003). Many teachers in
schools have been through a teacher education system that did not consider cultural
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 231

differences in classrooms as part of pedagogy, or saw the issue of indigenous

student ‘underachievement’ as a deficit in the culture or the person. Furthermore,
the vast majority of teachers in front of indigenous students are from a European/
white background and few have positive personal resources with regard to indige-
nous peoples to call on in order to make the necessary changes to their classroom
practice.
A number of strategies have been advanced in relation to improving science
education for indigenous learners that have mainly been drawn from wider litera-
ture. Some of the literature argues for teaching approaches that are associated with
indigenous students’ ‘learning styles’, such as oral work (such as cooperative learn-
ing, group work and problem solving), practical experience (also known as hands-
on or experiential), visual learning, and the use of integrated or thematic
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

approaches (for example, see Rowland and Adkins 2003 for Native American
Indian literature, McKinley et al. 2004a for Maori research). However, there is also
literature that adds a note of caution for teachers using this approach. Dukepo
(2001) argues that learning styles can become stereotypical and that Indian
students have accommodated different styles of learning for thousands of years. In
addition, York et al. (1995) concluded in their literature study on learning styles
and diverse students that they do not predict potential achievement and that a
repertoire of teaching approaches tailored to the learning styles of students will not
assure student achievement.
There are also models of culturally based pedagogy for science education. For
example, Jegede’s (1995, 1996) ‘collateral learning’ of both Western and traditional
concepts. The argument is that successful border crossing between home and school
science can occur through a process which allows non-Western students to
construct Western and traditional meanings of a simple concept that can exist side
by side with minimal, if any, interference. Such knowledge can be stored in long-
term memory for strategic use in either a Western or traditional environment.
However, it is essential, argues Jegede, that African curricula in science education
are guided by African imperatives. Another example is Aikenhead’s (1996) teachers
as ‘culture brokers’ who assist students to master repeated ‘border crossings’
between their own life world and that of the science classroom. Aikenhead has gone
on to develop cross-cultural science and technology units with six Aboriginal teach-
ers in Northern Saskatchewan. Both models suggest that a ‘gap’ exists between
home and school science and that it can be particularly wide for many indigenous
students, and as such it may prevent them from learning science in a meaningful
manner.
Whilst there is other literature addressing teacher expectations, attitudes and
beliefs of students from different cultures, there is little that addresses indigenous
students specifically (see Atwater and Crockett 2003, Bryan and Atwater 2002).
The work tends to have a broad curriculum scope and very few comments are
derived from studies in school contexts. Of importance in the literature is identifica-
tion of what is called ‘deficit models’ where teachers believe the reason for students
from some cultures performing poorly in schools is as a result of the cultural values,
including the home and/or the student themselves, such as not making enough effort
to learn the work (see Carter et al. 2003, McKinley 1996). In a New Zealand study
(see Hill and Hawk 2000) done in multicultural schools in low socioeconomic
communities it was found that successful teachers in these schools shared a positivity
that translated into their setting high standards for themselves and their students.
 232 E. MCKINLEY

While there are a number of articles that look at the characteristics of successful
teachers, they are not based on the aims and objectives of an education from indig-
enous communities’ perspectives and, hence, do not address those ends.

Summary of literature
The international literature suggests a number of ways to improve science education
for indigenous students: changes in teaching strategies such as cooperative, ‘hands-
on’ and visual learning; raising student, parent and teacher expectation; changing
attitudes and beliefs of teachers; and changing curriculum by making connections
with the learner’s culture. However, much of the literature is not strongly based on
studies in indigenous communities and/or with indigenous learners. This is a major
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

weakness in the field. However, the factor missing from this literature, which is signif-
icant for educational and cultural reasons, is indigenous languages. While language
(English or similar) is inherent in the arguments surrounding WMS it is resoundingly
absent from debates on TEK and IK. TEK and IK were not developed in a void
absent of language, nor were they developed in English language necessarily.
Furthermore, for indigenous peoples protecting, enhancing and revitalizing indige-
nous languages are the prime challenges of education this century. The absence of
literature addressing indigenous languages, culture and science education – both
knowledge and pedagogy – is a significant omission in our field and an area I turn to
in the next section.

Language, culture and science education

The preserving of indigenous knowledge systems – local worldviews, languages and
environments – in the face of ‘cognitive imperialism’ (Battiste and Henderson
2000:12) are global issues. When taken together, indigenous ways of life and ‘being’
represent diversity at its fullest, yet many countries are unwilling to provide the
support to these local ways of knowing in order for them to survive and thrive. The
recovery of our indigenous histories, knowledges, experiences and identity is inex-
tricably linked to the recovery of our languages because languages are our view of
the world. In order to understand the imperative of keeping indigenous languages,
there is a need to move away from viewing language as a technical tool of commu-
nication and viewing language as encompassing our existence.
The introduction of indigenous languages and culture into science education in
schools is an attempt to sustain indigenous knowledge and heritage. However, how
this is done, and the extent to which it is done, is important. The curriculum devel-
opments and texts that make use of contexts and words will only ever represent
indigenous peoples as ‘fixed’ in some past, as Ninnes (2001) found. In a recent study
in Aotearoa New Zealand we found the science teachers in English medium schools
mentioned the same ‘Maori contexts’ despite being separated by large distances
(McKinley et al. 2004a). They included either units of work or activities on the
hangi (a form of cooking), kowhaiwhai and taniko patterns (Maori design patterns),
Papatuanuku (Mother Earth), rongoa (Maori medicine), and names of native plants
and the planets and constellations. These ‘objects’ are some of the more easily visi-
ble and identifiable aspects of the Maori language culture. However, it was these
ideas that constituted for most of the teachers Maori knowledge and cultural values
in the high school science classroom. Furthermore, most of the resources to support
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 233

these topics were gleaned from textbooks or from other paper sources that circulate
among teachers and can be found in ‘departmental resource boxes’.
However, one cannot understand a worldview in a language when one separates
the culture from the language and only uses language as a technical tool. The teach-
ing of contexts in school programmes, including where language is used to only
name objects, does nothing for the revitalization of language and continues to sepa-
rate culture and language. This technical and utilitarian approach to indigenous
knowledge, that is the use of cultural contexts in science classrooms in another
language, is where ‘language and culture are alienated, remaining in a nondialectical
relationship’ (Aoki 2005a: 237). The learner will only penetrate the other culture
with the interest of subordinating the knowledge into the scheme of his or her own
thought processes or language if necessary (for examination purposes). The cultural
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

knowledge has been drawn out at the expense of the language and, as a result, the
contexts are required to carry an extraordinary symbolic load for the culture. The
trap for teaching and learning science is that this approach means the culture is
deontologized – it becomes an object, an artefact.
The role of education in the development and restoration of endangered
languages is non-negotiable among many, but not all, indigenous populations.
However, language revitalization needs wider support. Governments need to
perceive indigenous languages as value rather than a ‘problem’. Many see them as
being uneconomic – they are not widespread or have global usage, such as English,
Spanish or French – learning them will not have the same immediate economic
payoff that people generally see with learning other languages, such as Chinese
languages in today’s global markets. The number of people using any indigenous
language is often small and to introduce schooling in these languages means
committing to resources and support, and governments are worried that the
demands will be for the same amount of resource as majority language speakers get
in schools. This costs money to develop, governments tend to reject such demands,
and the vast majority of indigenous peoples wanting to school in their language are
left with producing their own resources (see Zepeda 2001). Aotearoa New Zealand
has begun some initiatives in education, including science, to restore and develop te
reo Maori (Maori language). Some jobs are now appearing in advertisements that
require Maori language and cultural knowledge, such as Maori language radio and
television, cultural jobs in institutions and international diplomatic service. In addi-
tion, the revitalization of the Maori language and culture has had unexpected bene-
fits. For example, Maori language has become an integral part of New Zealand
English such that there are significant numbers of Maori words that every New
Zealander will know. In addition, it has helped to establish our sense of place or
uniqueness in the world, and to celebrate every New Zealander’s dual heritage.
However, this is not enough for sustaining Maori.
Support can come internationally as well as internal to a country, such as
governments and institutions. For example, there are United Nations human rights
covenants that recognize the rights of indigenous peoples to keep their languages
(Battiste and Henderson 2000). In addition, the USA has the Native American
Languages Act (1990) and Native American Languages Act (1992) (Zepeda 2001). In
New Zealand the Maori Language Act (1987) guarantees Maori language use in
government institutions (such as law courts and schools) and the establishment and
operation of a government funded commission to help revitalize Maori language.
While such acts do not ‘save’ language themselves, they are necessary to support
 234 E. MCKINLEY

other initiatives. Unfortunately, it appears that Canada has yet to reach a commit-
ment in this area. In Canada it is reported that all 53 indigenous languages are
endangered, and only three – Cree, Ojibway and Inuktitut – are thought to be able
to survive this century (Battiste and Henderson 2000). The recovery of our
languages is closely tied to the recovery of our knowledges and in establishing our
identities.
Hence, as languages carry with them views of the world the use of language and
culture is particularly important for science education. When Europeans settled in
or invaded indigenous communities there was a meeting of divergent worldviews.
Aoki (2005b) argues that the ideology of a culture directs the gathering and creating
of information and knowledge, and determines the method and purpose of knowing.
Research suggests that these different peoples gathered and attained knowledge that
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

was different in nature and purpose (see for example, Aikenhead 1997). These
differences manifest themselves in both language and culture. There is a general
movement of a wider acceptance of differing worldviews. In science education
Masakata Ogawa, Ken Kawasaki, Glen Aikenhead, Oscar Kawagley, June George,
Greg Cajete and others are working on establishing these worldviews in Japan,
Canada, Trinidad and Tobago, and the USA among other countries. A major differ-
ence between Aboriginal knowledge and Western knowledge, as outlined by Ermine
(1995), is that of physical presence or objective reality. Ermine argues there is more
emphasis on the isolated individual in Western culture whereas Aboriginal cultures
support inclusiveness and connectedness through a life force in all things.
So we need to ask ourselves, ‘what do we lose when a language is gone?’ The
answer is everything. We lose diversity – one less view of the world for every
language lost – and as the global society loses one language it suggests we are too
late to save many others. How many before we find value in what we are losing?
Inherent in language is a people’s relationship with the world. But most importantly,
language is a wellspring of life or source of inspiration for a people and for our views
on the world. Culture cannot stand by itself and thrive, therefore the contexts used
in science education classrooms without language will wither and petrify both the
knowledge and the people it comes from. The essence of language is not only
linguistic it is also the very existence of people. Hence it becomes an issue of identity
for without it ‘difference’ will become manifested in the physical attributes of a
person.

Language and science education initiatives in

Aotearoa New Zealand
Increasing Maori achievement in science and science education is advocated by a
number of researchers in order to further develop an economic base for Maori, to
provide better access to professions and occupations that require a strong scientific
ability, and assist New Zealand’s ability to compete internationally (Herewini 1998,
Kent 1996, McKinley 1996, 1999, Rikihana 1996, Trinick 1993, Waiti and
Hipkins 2002). Increased success in science is seen within the context of broader
development, economic as well as cultural. An approach to development that draws
heavily on a Maori knowledge base allows Maori to retain ‘a sense of continuity in
an otherwise fragmented world’ (Durie 1996: 3). However, in differing from some
of the international literature, Maori scholars reject the notion that WMS is a threat
to indigenous cultures and suggest that arguments surrounding conflict between
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 235

physical and metaphysical conceptions of truth are overstated as explaining cogni-

tive conflict arising from the differences between home and school cultures. At the
same time they advocate science education that meets Maori cultural as well as
economic needs. This cultural imperative raises the issue of language of instruction
for cultural as well as cognitive reasons.
As with other indigenous populations, recent investigations have revealed
consistent patterns of underachievement by Maori in comparison with other
students in Aotearoa New Zealand (Crooks and Flockton 2000, 2001, Garden
1997, Ministry of Education 2002). McKinley et al. (2004a) report that the percent-
age of school students who identify as Maori has continued to increase over the last
decade – from 15% in 1990 to over 21% in 2003. However, despite this relative
increase in the number of Maori students at school there was a significant and steady
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

decrease of Maori students entering qualification examinations at all levels in the

sciences over the same period of time. Figures for all subjects show a significant and
consistent differential or gap over the period 1997–2001 between the participation
and achievement rate for Maori students compared against the overall population.
There is a literature that argues strongly that Maori participation and performance
in science education is undermined through low teacher efficacy and expectations,
low student self-expectations, inadequate teacher subject, pedagogic and cultural
knowledge, and a rigid curriculum framework that creates little space for Maori
determined pedagogy (Hill and Hawk 2000, Holt 2001, McKinley 1996).
While Maori responses to Maori educational underachievement have taken
place within the context of a state-controlled closed education market, and there are
limits to what Maori themselves can change, two research sites are being pursued.
Some Maori researchers see the need to work in English medium classes, where vast
numbers of Maori students still attend school, in order for the schools and mainly
Pakeha (New Zealanders of British descent) teachers to improve their interactions
with Maori students (see for example, Bishop et al. 2003). Other Maori researchers
believe that Kaupapa Maori (Maori determined) educational initiatives based on the
notion that language is the key to accessing the culture and together language and
culture are the keys to socio-political interventions (Dewes 1993, Rogers 2003,
Smith 1999,). In an international context there has been little research on the effects
of native languages on learning science. With Aotearoa New Zealand initiatives in
this area becoming more established, this is the area in which we can offer the most.
In the early 1990s Aotearoa New Zealand developed a national science curric-
ulum in te reo Maori (Maori language) in order to cater for schools teaching through
the medium of te reo Maori. There were a number of difficulties in the development
of the Maori science curriculum that have been elaborated elsewhere (Barker 1999,
McKinley 1995, 1996). The major difficulty faced by the curriculum developers was
the official pressure for it to parallel the English documents. As such, there was little
room for Maori knowledge structures or epistemologies, and that as the Maori
science curriculum is basically an English translation with some minor organiza-
tional alterations and some superficial additions. There is a need for a more coher-
ently articulated Maori epistemology than is available currently to underpin the
document in order to reconceptualize science education for Maori children in te reo
Maori, and until that time Maori cultural knowledge is unlikely to make it into the
science curriculum except to support the existing science education paradigm
(McKinley 1996). In Aotearoa New Zealand we still need to resolve issues of tino
rangatiratanga (Maori self-determination) with respect to curriculum in te reo
 236 E. MCKINLEY

Maori (Maori language). Nevertheless, Maori curriculum developers believe it is a

‘first step’ in the process of creating a modern and recognizably science curriculum
while remaining in tune with Maori culture. Furthermore, Te Runanga o Te Kura
Kaupapa Maori (a body representing Maori immersion schooling) is negotiating
with the government curriculum changes for Maori immersion schools. These
debates are essential, need to be ongoing and flow into national curriculum changes.
The use of Maori language as the language of instruction in science is another
area in which Aotearoa New Zealand differs from much of the literature in the field.
An argument advanced in favour of teaching in Maori language is that students
acquire te reo Maori (Maori language) as they learn the subject area, thus diverting
the anxiety of learning a second language, while providing the subject with a Maori
identity (Fairhall 1993). The inability to recruit Maori teachers, however, who are
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

fluent in Maori language, have good cultural knowledge, and are competent in the
teaching of science, has been identified as critical in the development of the science
potential of children learning in kura kaupapa (Maori immersion schools) (McKinley
et al. 2004a). Research in bilingual classes attributes the relative lack of Maori
success in science to negative self-esteem and attitudes towards study, yet also points
to the effects of inadequate teacher knowledge on classroom practice. A study of
mathematics teachers in Kura Kaupapa Maori (Maori immersion schooling) has
identified inadequate professional development as a significant barrier to the
improvement of Maori teacher knowledge (Rogers 2003). A recent study suggests
the same may also apply in science education (McKinley et al. 2004a).
Some indigenous researchers state that the diverse indigenous ways of life and
being can only be fully learned and understood by means of the pedagogy tradition-
ally employed by the indigenous peoples themselves (Battiste and Henderson 2000).
Traditional Maori pedagogy has been described as reflecting the interconnectedness
between all aspects of Maori existence, with the learning process viewed as a
co-operative venture, lifelong and intergenerational (Hemara 2000). It has been
argued that many characteristics of traditional Maori education are still relevant for
Maori learners (Skill New Zealand 2001). Thus it has been claimed that schools
with a kaupapa Maori base enable Maori students, while schools without a kaupapa
Maori base disable them (Dewes 1993). For prominent Maori academic and elder
Mason Durie (1996), the essence is a positive approach to Maori human develop-
ment, which requires an integrated Maori focus to reinforce Maori cultural identity.
In Aotearoa New Zealand we have reached another important point in our
endeavours to teach science in Maori language as the wider science community has
begun to turn its attention to Maori issues. Consultative processes with Maori
communities by the Ministry of Research, Science and Technology (1994, 1995)
revealed a number of key themes in Maori aspirations in terms of what they want
from science. These included economic development, particularly forestry and fish-
eries; maintaining kaitiakitanga (guardianship) status for Maori; having equitable
access to the science system, including active input into decision making at all levels;
helping retain traditional knowledge; and to address issues relating to the interface
between science knowledge and matauranga Maori (Maori knowledge) (Ministry of
Research, Science and Technology 1995: 20). The importance for science education
is to help facilitate these aspirations for and with the community. While science
education initiatives have moved towards achieving this in New Zealand (see
McKinley 1997), far more needs to be done. A number of university programmes
have been established over the years that include being able to learn te reo Maori
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 237

(Maori language) and take science studies simultaneously. In addition, there have
been a number of courses, particularly in the environmental area, that have included
some Maori knowledge and Maori student support programmes operating in science
faculties. It is only more recently that initiatives have included Maori knowledge and
language together. For example, in a recent research project (see McKinley et al.
2004b) we explored the collaborative initiative between Maori groups and science
research institutes in Aotearoa New Zealand. With a growing number of Maori scien-
tists and Maori organizations employing science research in the development of their
resources there are a number of collaborative projects currently operating. Our
research was to explore the collaborative research projects as possible sites for the
professional development of teachers in Maori science education. We found that the
sites are not only suitable for curriculum use, teacher education and student involve-
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

ment, but also some projects had already produced bilingual websites that schools
could access. Such collaborative projects address wider support, provide contempo-
rary contexts for Maori science education and begin to target deep-seated views of
Maori. Another initiative involves a newly established Maori university, teaching
indigenous science studies, which promises to be an exciting development and future
research site.

Conclusions
The current international literature in the area of indigenous students and science
education continues to debate the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ of different worldviews –
traditional ecological knowledge (TEK), indigenous knowledge (IK), and Western
modern science (WMS) – and their place in curricula. Further literature suggests
the ‘underachievement’ of indigenous students in science education is due to
several factors including: cultural conflict between home and classroom, low
teacher efficacy and expectation, low student self-expectation, inadequate teacher
subject, cultural and pedagogic knowledge, and a rigid curriculum framework with
little space for culturally based pedagogy. The literature also suggests the
effectiveness of classroom practice can be undermined by deep-seated cultural
stereotypes that often go unrecognised and are difficult to shift. While there is an
emerging international literature on effective classroom practice for ethnic minori-
ties, there is still a need for substantial research on successful classroom practice
specifically for indigenous students. Such research might consider effective class-
room practice in the context of language, culture, traditional indigenous knowl-
edge, teacher knowledge and expectation, student expectation, cognitive conflict
and indigenous community needs and aspirations. In addition, a more detailed
focus on the persistence of cultural stereotypes in science classrooms, and how
they can be changed, needs further attention. For language-based initiatives,
particular attention needs to be paid to teacher education programmes in indige-
nous languages, and student cognition and language learning.
Another related issue with no literature is research that involves indigenous
communities in the science education of their children. No reports were found
regarding schools working with local indigenous communities – collaborating and
consulting with them over what science education they want for their children, how
best that they as parents could support this, and how this can be achieved together.
Science education generally needs some case studies on collaborations between
schools and communities. The inclusion of local indigenous communities in their
 238 E. MCKINLEY

children’s science education, beyond acting as a local resource when the teacher or
school determines input, has the potential to be a site of transformation for school
science and the community.
However, most important is the language imperative for indigenous peoples.
The continuation of teaching cultural contexts in English medium science education
is not enough on all levels. The dialectal relationship between culture and language
must be occurring such that it can flow out from its own space into others. In addi-
tion, the use of indigenous languages as a means of science instruction is essential to
develop the culture and language to go beyond conversational and technocratic
levels of language to an academic capability. However, how this is done is also
important. As Maori academic Mason Durie (1996: 6) writes, ‘Western thought
with Maori words … will erode the essence of the Maori language’. Such a sentiment
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

requires the global process of focusing on local languages and knowledge. Revising
educational policy and curricula to incorporate and respect the traditions and
languages of indigenous people is vital. Curricula, as the organized portion of educa-
tion, have been used as the ‘silencing tool’ of Western education of local peoples for
too long.

Acknowledgements
I wish to acknowledge Nga Pae o te Maramatanga/The National Institute of
Research Excellence for Mäori Development and Advancement for funding two
projects from which parts of this paper is drawn. I also wish to acknowledge the work
of Maori research associates who have worked on these projects including Dr Jackie
Aislabie, Dr Dominic O’Sullivan, Parehau Richards, Georgina Stewart and Pauline
Waiti. I also wish to thank the Cultural Studies in Science Education (CSSE) Group
for comments on a previous draft of this paper.

References
AIKENHEAD, G. (2000). Renegotiating the culture of school science. In R. Millar, J. Leach and
J. Osborne (Eds.) Improving Science Education – the Contribution of Research (Buckingham:
Open University Press), 245–264.
AIKENHEAD, G.S. (1996). Science education: Border crossing into the subculture of science.
Science Education, 27, 1–52.
AIKENHEAD, G.S. (1997). Towards a First Nations cross-cultural science and technology
curriculum. Science Education, 81, 217–238.
AOKI, T. (2005a). The dialectic of mother language to second language: a curriculum exploration.
In W. Pinar and R. Irwin (Eds.) Curriculum in a new key: the collected works of Ted T. Aoki
(Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates), 235–245.
AOKI, T. (2005b). Language, culture, and curriculum … In W. Pinar and R. Irwin (Eds.)
Curriculum in a new key: the collected works of Ted T. Aoki (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates), 321–329.
ATWATER, M. and CROCKETT, D. (2003). Prospective teachers’ education worldview and teacher
education programs: through the eyes of culture, ethnicity, and class. In S.M. Hines (Ed.)
Multicultural Science Education: Theory, Practice, and Promise (New York: Peter Lang).
BARKER, M. (1999). The Maori language science curriculum in Aotearoa/New Zealand: A
contribution to sustainable development. Waikato Journal of Education, 5, 51–60.
BATTISTE, M. and HENDERSON, J.Y. (2000). Protecting indigenous knowledges and heritages
(Saskatoon: Purich Publishing).
BISHOP, R. and GLYNN, T. (1994) Culture Counts: Changing Power Relations in Education (Palmerston
North: Dunmore Press).
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 239

BISHOP, R., BERRYMAN, M., TIAKIWAI, S. and RICHARDSON, C. (2003). Te Kotahitanga: the
experiences of Year 9 & 10 Maori students in mainstream classrooms. Report to the Ministry
of Education (Wellington: Ministry of Education).
BLADES, D.W. (1997). Procedures of Power and Curriculum Change: Foucault and the Quest for
Possibilities in Science Education (New York: Peter Lang).
BRYAN, L. and ATWATER, M. (2002). Teacher beliefs and cultural models: a challenge for science
teacher preparation programmes. Science Teacher Education, 86(6), 821.
CAJETE, G. (1995). Look to the mountain: an ecology of indigenous education (Durango, CO: Kivaki
Press).
CAJETE, G. (2000). Native science: natural law of interdependence (Sante Fe, NM: Clearlight
Publishing).
CARTER, N.P., LARKE, P.J., TAYLOR, G.S., and SANTOS, E. (2003). Multicultural science educa-
tion: moving beyond tradition. In S.M. Hines (Ed.) Multicultural Science Education: Theory,
Practice. and Promise (New York: Peter Lang).
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

COBERN, M.W. and LOVING, C.C. (2000). Defining science in a multicultural world: Implications
for science education. Science Education, 85, 50–67.
CORSIGLIA, J and SNIVELY, G. (2001). Rejoinder: Infusing indigenous science into western
modern science for a sustainable future. Science Education, 85, 82–86.
CROOKS, T and FLOCKTON, L. (2000). Graphs, Tables and Maps: Assessment Results 1999 (Dunedin:
The University of Otago).
CROOKS, T and FLOCKTON, L. (2001). Mathematics: Assessment Results 2001 (Dunedin: The
University of Otago).
DAVIDSON, D.M. and MILLER, K.W. (1998). An ethnoscience approach to curriculum issues for
American Indian students. School Science and Mathematics, 98(5), 260.
DEI, G. (2000). African development: the relevance and implications of ‘indigenousness’. In
G. Dei, B. Hall and D. Rosenberg (Eds.) Indigenous knowledges in global contexts: multiple
readings of our world (Toronto: University of Toronto Press).
DEWES, C. (1993). Mathematics education for Maori. Pangarau Mäori Mathematics and Education
(Wellington: Te Puni Kokiri).
DUKEPO, F. (2001). The native American honor society: challenging Indian students to achieve.
In K. James (ed.) Science and Native American Communities: Legacies of Pain, Visions of
Promise (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press).
DURIE, M.H. (1996). Maori science, and Maori development. People and Performance, 4(3), 20–25.
ERMINE, W. (1995). Aboriginal epistemology. In M. Battiste and J. Barman (Eds.) First Nations
education in Canada: The circle unfolds (Vancouver: University of British Columbia), 101–112.
FAIRHALL, U. (1993). Mathematics as a vehicle for the acquisition of Maori. Pangarau – Mäori
Mathematics and Education (Wellington, Te Puni Kökiri).
GARDEN, R.A. (1997). Mathematics and Science Performance in Middle Primary School. Results from
New Zealand’s Participation in the Third International Mathematics and Science Study
(Wellington: Ministry of Education).
GOES IN CENTER, J. (2001). Land, people and culture: using Geographic Information Systems to
build community capacity. In K. James (Ed.) Science and Native American communities: lega-
cies of pain, visions of promise (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press).
HEMARA, W. (2000). Maori Pedagogies – a view from the Literature (Wellington: NZCER).
HEREWINI, L. (1998). Maori mathematics education: the challenge of providing immersion
programmes for pre-service Maori primary teachers. Reprinted from Vol. 1 Teaching
Mathematics in New Times. MERGA 21: 21st Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education
Research Group of Australasia Incorporated. Proceedings, Gold Coast.
HILL, J. and HAWK, K. (2000). Making a Difference in the Classroom: Effective Teaching Practice in
Low Decile, Multicultural Schools (Wellington: Ministry of Education).
HODSON, D. (1999). Critical multiculturalism in science and technology education. In S. May
(Ed.) Critical Multiculturalism: Rethinking Multicultural and Antiracist Education (New York:
Falmer Press), 216–244.
HOLT, G. (2001). Mathematics education for Maori students in mainstream classrooms. ACE
Papers: Working Papers from the Auckland College of Educational Studies in Mathematics,
11(Nov), 18–29.
IRZIK, G. (2001). Universalism, multicultralism and science education. Science Education, 85,
71–73.
 240 E. MCKINLEY

JEGEDE, O. (1995). Collateral learning and the eco-cultural paradigm in science and mathematics
education in Africa. Studies in Science Education, 25, 97–137.
JEGEDE, O. (1996). Worldview presuppositions and science and technology education. Science,
Technology Education, and Ethnicity: an Aotearoa/New Zealand Perspective (Wellington: The
Royal Society of New Zealand).
KAWAGLEY, A.O. and BARNHARDT, R. (1999). Education indigenous to place: Western science
meets native reality. In G. Smith and D. Williams (Eds.) Ecological education in action: on
weaving education, culture, and the environment (Albany, NY: State University of New York
Press), 117–140.
KAWAGLEY, A.O. (1995). A Yupiak worldview: a pathway to ecology and spirit (Prospect Heights,
IL: Waveland Press).
KENT, L. (1996). Assessment for Maori students in science within a bilingual unit. In B. Webber
(Ed.) He Paepae Korero. Research Perspectives in Maori Education (Wellington: New Zealand
Council for Educational Research).
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

KUHN, T.S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago, IL, The University of Chicago
Press).
LADSON-BILLINGS, G. (1995). Multicultural teacher education: research, practice and policy. In
J. Banks (Ed.) Handbook of multicultural education (New York, Macmillan).
LEWIS, B.F. and AIKENHEAD, G. (2001). Shifting perspectives from universalism to cross-
culturalism, Science Education, 85(1), 4–5.
LOMAX, T. (1996). Maori science revisited. Science Monthly, 12–13.
LOVING, C.C. (1995). Comment on ‘Multiculturalism, universalism, and science education’,
Science Education, 79(3), 341–348.
LOVING, C.C. and DE MONTELLANO, B.R.O. (2003). Multicultural Science Education: Theory,
Practice, and Promise (New York, Peter Lang).
MCGOVERN, S. (1999). Education, Modern Development, and Indigenous Knowledge: An Analysis of
Academic Knowledge Production (New York, Garland Press).
MCKINLEY, E. (1995). A power/knowledge nexus: Writing a science curriculum in Mäori. Science
Education (Hamilton: University of Waikato).
MCKINLEY, E. (1996). Towards an indigenous science curriculum, Research in Science Education,
26(2), 155–167.
MCKINLEY, E. (1997). Maori and science education: participation, aspirations and school curricula.
In B. Bell and R. Baker (Eds.) Developing the science curriculum in Aotearoa New Zealand
(Auckland: Longman).
MCKINLEY, E. (1999). Maori Science Education: The Urgent Need for Research. Exploring Issues in
Science Education: Research Seminar on Science Education in Primary Schools (Wellington:
Wellington College of Education, Ministry of Education).
MCKINLEY, E. (2003). Brown Bodies, White Coats: Postcolonialism, Maori Women and Science.
Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy thesis, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New
Zealand.
MCKINLEY, E., STEWART, G. and RICHARDS, P. (2004a). Maori knowledge, language and participation
in mathematics and science education. Final Report for Nga Pae o te Maramatanga/The
National Institute of Research Excellence for Mäori Development and Advancement,
University of Auckland, Auckland.
MCKINLEY, E., WAITI, P. & BELL, B. (1992). Languge, culture and science education. International
Journal of Science Education, 14(5), 579–595.
MCKINLEY, E., WAITI, P. and AISLABIE, J. (2004b). Science, matauranga Maori and schools.
Final Report for Nga Pae o te Maramatanga/The National Institute of Research
Excellence for Mäori Development and Advancement, University of Auckland,
Auckland.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION (2002). Curriculum, Learning and Effective Pedagogy: A Literature Review
in Science Education (Wellington, Ministry of Education).
MINISTRY OF RESEARCH, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (1994). Science and Technology: The Way
Forward 1996–2001 (Wellington, Ministry of Research, Science and Technology).
MINISTRY OF RESEARCH, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (1995). Priorities for 2001: Public good
science investment (Wellington, Ministry of Research, Science and Technology).
NINNES, P. (2001). Writing multicultural science textbooks: perspectives, problems, possibilities
and power. Australian Science Teachers Journal, 47(4), 18.
 CULTURE, LANGUAGE AND SCIENCE EDUCATION 241

NINNES, P. (2003). Rethinking multicultural science textbooks: Perspectives, problems,

possibilities, and power. In S.M. Hines (Ed.) Multicultural Science Education: Theory, Prac-
tice, and Promise (New York, Peter Lang).
POMEROY, D. (1994) Science education and cultural diversity: mapping the field. Studies in
Science Education, 24, 49–73.
POODRY, C. (2001). How to get what Indian communities need from science. In K. James (Ed.)
Science and Native American Communities: Legacies of Pain, Visions of Promise (Lincoln, NE:
University of Nebraska Press).
RIKIHANA, T. (1996). Te Matauranga Putaiao Hangarau me ngä Momo Tikanga-a-iwi he Tirohanga
no Aotearoa. Science, Technology Education, and Ethnicity: An Aotearoa/New Zealand
Perspective (Wellington: The Royal Society of New Zealand).
ROBERTS, M. (1996). Indigenous Knowledge and Western Science: Perspectives from the Pacific.
Science, Technology Education, and Ethnicity: An Aotearoa/New Zealand Perspective
(Wellington: The Royal Society of New Zealand).
Downloaded by [National Dong Hwa University] at 09:55 04 November 2017

ROGERS, N. (2003). Kia Whakapakari ngä Kaiako Pängarau ki roto i Tetahi Wharekura Kaupapa
Mäori: Professional Development of Mathematics Teachers in a Mäori Immersion School
(Hamilton: The University of Waikato).
ROWLAND, P.M. and ADKINS, C.R. (2003). Native American science education and its implications
for multicultural science education. In S.M. Hines (Ed.) Multicultural Science Education:
Theory, Practice, and Promise (New York: Peter Lang).
SCANTLEBURY, K., MCKINLEY, E. and JESSON, J. (2002). Imperial knowledge: Science, education
and equity. In B.E. Hernandez-Truyol (Ed.) Moral Imperialism – A Critical Anthology (New
York: New York University Press), 229–240.
SEMALI, L. M. and KINCHELOE, J.L. (1999). What is Indigenous Knowledge? Voices from the Academy
(New York: Falmer Press).
SKILL NEW ZEALAND (2001). Mäori education: lessons from the literature. Sharing for Success:
Good Practice and Issues for Maori Education (Wellington: Skill New Zealand).
SMITH, L.T. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies (Dunedin: Otago University Press).
SNIVELY, G. and CORSIGLIA, J. (2001). Discovering indigenous science: implications for science
education, Science Education, 85(1), 6–34.
STANLEY, W. and BRICKHOUSE, B. (2001). Teaching sciences: The multicultural question revisited.
Science Education, 85, 35–49.
TRINICK, T. (1993). Resource development for the teaching of mathematics in Maori. Pangarau
– Maori Mathematics and Education (Wellington, Te Puni Kokiri).
WAITI, P. and HIPKINS, R. (2002). Cultural Issues that Challenge Traditional Science Teaching.
Third Annual New Zealand Science Education Symposium, Wellington.
YORK, J., IRVINE, J. and DARLENE, E. (1995). Learning styles and culturally diverse students: a
literature review. In J.A. Banks and C.A. McGhee Banks (Eds.) Handbook of research on
multicultural education (New York: Macmillan).
ZASLAVSKY, C. (1994). ‘Africa counts’ and ethnomathematics. For the Learning of Mathematics,
14(2), 3–8.
ZEPEDA, O. (2001). Rebuilding languages to revitalize communities and cultures. In K. James
(Ed.) Science and Native American Communities: Legacies of Pain, Visions of Promise (Lincoln,
NE: University of Nebraska Press).