Section navigation
Underlying concepts
The concepts that underly this resource include three generic concepts and two concepts relating to teachers and school leaders (the intended audience).
Generic concepts
Three generic concepts underpin the identified themes on this website. Many researchers and commentators refer to them as ‘Ako’, ‘Culture counts’, and ‘Productive partnerships’. These concepts are also at the heart of Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success.
Ako
Ako describes “a teaching and learning relationship where the educator is also learning from the student...Ako is grounded in the principle of reciprocity” (Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success, p. 20). As such, it emphasises the importance of the knowledge that the student already has and suggests a shift of power relationships in the classroom (where the teacher has traditionally been the holder and dispenser of all knowledge). Both parties co-construct meaning as they learn from each other.
Ako also recognises the family/whānau and iwi as significant contributors to learner engagement and achievement. Family/whānau and iwi members may work productively not only with their tamariki but also with teachers, as the teachers become more culturally responsive. Teaching and learning becomes a three-way process, recognising that all parties co-construct meaning as they learn from each other.
Ako is intrinsically linked to the concepts ‘Culture counts’ and ‘Productive partnerships’.
Culture counts
A key message of Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success is that “culture and education are inextricably interwoven” (ibid., p. 20).
In her 2003 report to the Ministry of Education, Adrienne Alton-Lee says that “quality teaching respects and affirms cultural identity…and optimises educational opportunities”. She adds that “student experiences of instruction have known relationships to other cultural contexts in which the students have been/are socialized … [This means that] student diversity is utilized effectively as a pedagogical resource” (Quality Teaching for Diverse Students in Schooling: Best Evidence Synthesis Iteration, p. vii).
Effective teachers understand this message and work actively to know, respect, and value ‘who students are’ and ‘where they come from’. They understand that students’ cultural backgrounds matter, they appreciate students as culturally-located beings, and they are culturally responsive in their interactions with students. They understand, for example, that teachers’ recognition of students’ prior knowledge and experience, their selection of learning contexts and content, and their strategic use of teaching strategies can have a significant affect on student engagement and achievement. Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success states that “Māori children and students are more likely to achieve when they see themselves, their whānau, hapū, and iwi in the teaching content and environment and are able to be ‘Māori’ in all learning contexts” (on p. 20).
In “Kaupapa Messages for the Mainstream” (Bishop and Glynn, 1999), the authors conclude (on p. 5) that “Culture counts – [effective] classrooms are places where students can bring ‘who they are’ to the learner interactions in complete safety, and where their knowledges are ‘acceptable’ and ‘legitimate’ ”.
Productive partnerships
Considerable research evidence indicates that student outcomes are enhanced when schools work closely and productively with families/whānau and iwi. Adrienne Alton-Lee cites a wide range of evidence to show that “particularly strong and sustained gains in student achievement [are] made when schools and families develop partnerships to support student achievement at school” (Alton-Lee, 2003, p. 38).
In School Leadership and Student Outcomes: Identifying What Works and Why Best Evidence SynthesisIteration (2009), Viviane Robinson, Margie Hohepa, and Claire Lloyd conclude (on p. 8) that “when community funds of knowledge are effectively used to strengthen teaching, there are large achievement gains, decreased disparities across different curriculum areas, and enhanced student identity”.
Bishop and his colleagues express the same conclusion very succinctly in their Te Kotahitanga report. They assert (on p. 13) that “where parents are incorporated into the education of their children … children do better at school” (Bishop et al., 2003).
This links to the premise that Māori students are best served by schools when they are regarded as members of a whānau. In other words, when a Māori student stands before the teacher, there is a whānau, hapū, iwi and their tīpuna behind them. In his opening address for Te Hui Taumata Matauranga, 2001, Mason Durie alluded to this concept when he discussed the principle of integrated action: “The principle of integrated action recognises the multiple players in education. Success or failure is the result of many forces acting together – school and community; teachers and parents; students and their peers; and Māori and the State.”
Concepts relating to teachers and school leaders
The content of this website is underpinned by the conviction that what teachers and school leaders do makes a difference for their students.
What teachers believe, know, and do makes a difference.
A wide range of evidence about the key role of teachers is cited in the Quality Teaching BES and leads to the conclusions that “Quality teaching … is the most influential point of leverage on student outcomes” (Alton-Lee, 2003, p. 2) and high achievement for diverse groups of students is “an outcome of the skilled and cumulative pedagogical actions of a teacher in creating and optimising an effective learning environment” (ibid., p. 1).
What school leaders believe, know, and do makes a difference.
A wide range of evidence about the key role of school leaders is cited in the School Leadership BES and leads to the conclusions that “school leaders can indeed make a difference to student achievement and well-being” (Robinson et al., 2009, p. 35) and “effective leadership can play an influential role in countering the marked disparities that characterise New Zealand’s performance in literacy, and accelerating the learning of the lowest achievers in the schools” (ibid., p. 52).