Emphasis is placed on Pākehā ways of knowing and doing
Pākehā ways of knowing and doing are considered “normal”
Often mātauranga Māori has been introduced as separate, complementary, or additional
Pākehā views, values, and perspectives dominate
The marginalisation of Māori occurs as a result
Refresher: what is the purpose of MM in the NZC?
To turn this…
Mātauranga Pākehā
Mātauranga Māori
Refresher: what is the purpose of MM in the NZC?
To turn this… into this!
Mātauranga Pākehā
Mātauranga Māori
Mana orite
But how?
Good news and bad news
Good news!
This isn't a huge shift in pedagogical terms!
Bad news
This is a huge shift in philosophical terms!
Therefore, you may find yourself thinking:
“I already do that!”
“What's so different about that?”
“That sounds like nonsense”
The differences amount not to what we do but why, where it comes from
It doesn't matter what you do
It matters where that comes from
The major differences between Mātauranga Pākehā & Māori
Mātauranga Pākehā (MP) is atomistic
Atomistic: a theoretical approach that regards something as interpretable through analysis into distinct, separable, and independent elementary components
Mātauranga Māori (MM) is holistic
Holistic: characterised by the belief that the parts of something are interconnected and can be explained only by reference to the whole
Atomistic vs holistic view
Atomistic view
Focus is on discrete components
The skills (is separate from)
The outcome (is separate from)
The documentation
Impacts
Relevant implications seen as an annoying afterthought
Gathering requirements, feedback is a nuisance that isn't working on the outcome
“I just wanna code! I just wanna make!”
Holistic view
Focus is on the whole
What problem it solves
The needs of the people involved
The needs of the environment
Impacts
Requirements, feedback, and relationship with the end users is not just relevant, it's primordial
Relevant vs Primordial
Considerations for “fitness for purpose”, “appropriateness”, and “relevant implications” are made in view of:
The outcome's purpose
The outcome's end users
The outcome's context
They happen at the start of the project and come back at the end
In a holistic view, these considerations are primordial
They are integral to every single aspect of the project
Rather than being considered only at the beginning, they should be examined and re-examined at every stage of the development process
Atomistic vs holistic course design
Atomistic course
Learn skills first (i.e. coding)
Skills for the sake of skills
No context for why these skills are important or necessary other than “for the assessment”
Holistic course
Start with an authentic context, not a made-up one
Think about the nature of the problem/opportunity
Skills are selected to match the needs of:
The context
The outcome
Although, day-to-day, you may do the same things, they come from such different places
But what to consider?
So far I've talked a lot about context and how it is as one with the skills, outcome, etc.
But what must be considered?
According to the Digital Technologies Learning Matrix (for Level 6), students will “understand how digital technologies impact on end users by considering the following mātāpono Māori”
Embed mātāpono Māori
Kotahitanga: unity, collaboration, and collective action
Whanaungatanga: a sense of relationship, connection, and belonging
Manaakitanga: the process of showing respect and care; reciprocity between people, living things, and places
Wairuatanga: spirituality
Kaitiakitanga: guardianship, stewardship for living things and resources
Tikanga: the system of values and practices that have developed over time and are deeply embedded in traditional and social context; the correct way of doing things
How to embed mātāpono Māori
Mātāpono Māori are values derived from te ao Māori and mātauranga Māori
They are a fantastic drop-in replacement for “relevant implications”
However, unlike relevant implications where students pick a couple, students should consider all of these at all times
For a fully holistic view
Let's start by using a whakatauki…
Kaua e rangiruatia te hāpai o te hoe
e kore tō tātou waka e ū ki uta
Don't paddle out of unison
Our canoe will never reach the shore
Kotahitanga
Unity, collaboration, and collective action
Kotahitanga means “oneness”
This describes togetherness, solidarity, and working together for a shared goal
This means looking at:
End user considerations
Secondary stakeholders
Local community needs
Iwi/hapu needs
Kotahitanga — Issues
If a digital technology outcome is not designed with stakeholders in mind, decisions will reflect the developer rather than the stakeholders
This means the outcome might not fulfil its purpose
It might also work in contradiction to the values of those affected by it
It's important the design process incorporates feedback from:
The people for whom the outcome is being designed and developed
Those who may be impacted (communities, iwi/hapu, etc.)
Do not dismiss opinions as invalid just because you disagree
Kotahitanga — Addressing issues
Be very clear about the purpose of the outcome right from the start
To inform
To educate
To entertain
To persuade
Be very clear about for whom the outcome is intended
Who are the primary end users?
Who are the secondary end users?
Who are the other stakeholders who benefit indirectly?
Clarity about purpose and users helps designers and developers steer the waka to the intended port
Whanaungatanga
A sense of relationship, connection, and belonging
Whanaungatanga refers to connectedness and relationships
The outcome integrates with and follows the norms of the societies and cultures in which it is located
The outcome treats those communities and their people inclusively, with respect
Whanaungatanga — Issues
If an outcome is not designed to integrate within its society, users may feel put off or discriminated against
Failure to integrate can include:
Non-inclusive design or discriminatory content
Not following social norms (too formal, too much slang, etc.)
Unusual use of colours or icons, contrary to users' expectations
Language learned from the internet can be insensitive, ableist, racist, xenophobic, sexist, or bigoted without realising
But anything you can learn, you can also un-learn
It's important we work together with all kinds of people
Whanaungatanga — Addressing issues
Avoid content or design that alienates, excludes, or disparages people across:
Nationalities and cultures
Belief systems
Sexualities and gender identity
Physical and mental ability
Do tone checks, sensitivity checks, and consult with groups who may be affected
Trial the outcome with end users during development to ensure it meets expectations
Inclusive outcomes ensure nobody is left outside the waka
Manaakitanga
Showing respect and care
Reciprocity between people, living things, and places
Manaakitanga refers to caring for others and their wellbeing, to elevate their mana
Prioritise design and outcomes that show respect and care
Design with accessibility in mind so it's usable by everybody
Overlap with whanaungatanga
Manaakitanga — Issues
If an outcome is not easy to operate, end users will not achieve their goals
This defeats the purpose of the outcome
Usability principles can make programs and websites work in the service of all
Consider the needs of people with:
Low vision, colour blindness, etc.
Hearing loss or deafness
Dyslexia, autism, or other processing difficulties
Manaakitanga — Addressing issues
Evaluate your design and outcome against Nielsen's 10 Usability Heuristics
Use accessibility tools such as:
Contrast checkers
Screen readers
Writing checkers
Collect feedback from people affected by conditions such as:
Low vision or blindness
Hearing loss or deafness
Dyslexia, autism, or other processing difficulties
Ensuring everybody can use the outcome helps all move together
Kaitiakitanga
Guardianship and stewardship for living things and resources
Kaitiakitanga means “guardianship”
Ensure the outcome minimises harm to the environment
Where harm cannot be avoided: what do we give back? How do we heal?
Ensure the outcome does not cause people physical or mental harm
Kaitiakitanga — Issues
If an outcome does not account for environmental impact, it could cause harm
Inefficient programs use more CPU and therefore more energy
Requiring the latest devices can treat older machines as e-waste
Outcomes should take care not to damage the user's computer
Kaitiakitanga — Addressing issues
Prioritise less intensive technologies
Avoid unnecessary JavaScript
Choose efficient algorithms
Measure energy impact using resource monitors and debugging tools
Design and develop outcomes that operate well on more than just the latest devices
We ride the waves, we respect the winds; those who don't, their waka capsizes
Tikanga
Values and practices deeply embedded in traditional and social context
The correct way of doing things
Tikanga means “the correct way of doing things”
Ensure the outcome embodies the values of the societies in which it's used
The outcome must not break the law in the places it's used
Respect intellectual property and copyright
Law is a kind of tikanga
Tikanga — Issues
Failing to embody ethical values risks alienating users or promoting harmful views
Not abiding by laws (IP, copyright, privacy) can create liability
Intellectual property and copyright mean respecting:
Other people's designs
Inventions
Patents and copyrights
Privacy means:
Treating private information with respect
Not sharing with unauthorised parties
Taking responsibility for leaked data
Tikanga — Addressing issues
Be aware of relevant laws and regulations, namely:
Privacy laws
Harmful digital communications laws
Intellectual property laws
We all row the waka together; remember who else is holding the paddle
Other challenges
Much of digital technologies teaching comes from overseas (favouring kaupapa Pākehā)
How can we embed kaupapa Māori without:
Adding unnecessarily to the documentation workload of students?
Confusing students about what is “correct” — KM or KP?
Allowing non-Māori students to continue to see themselves in learning and assessment?
A. Adding to the workload for students
Students should consider the mātāpono at every stage in the project
Does that mean writing about them at each stage?
In each iteration?
For every component?
You don't need to record this evidence
If you want to, use alternative evidence such as video/audio interviews
Example prompt: “How do you feel your work this sprint reflects manaakitanga?”
B. Confusing students as to what is “correct” — KM or KP?
For our curriculum area, “correct” vs “incorrect” is the wrong framing
It's not a zero sum game
For MM to be right, MP doesn't have to be wrong
MP is not the bad guy
They should have mana orite — they are equal
Be up front with your students
Don't try to “hide” it
“We are using MM as our framework”
“We are doing so for these reasons…”
“It is different from MP in these ways…”
“They are similar in these ways…”
C. Allowing non-Māori students to continue to see themselves
Make it crystal clear: using MM as a framework does not inherently mean MP is out
Encourage students to find the connections
Discuss what is valuable about both approaches
Depending on the context, explicitly looking at other approaches (e.g., Pasifika) may be appropriate
These can still be related back to MM
Bridging Pasifika ways of thinking to MM should be fairly easy
