El público y la recepción

The study aimed to investigate the teachers’ journey toward cultural competence, and to explore key factors of that process, through the prism of participants’ experience in culturally different

classrooms. The theoretical framework of the study is detailed in later sections; however, a brief outline of the participant selection criteria now follows.

4.3.1.1. Assumed knowledge and accreditation

All teacher participants held full registration with the Teacher Registration Board of the Northern Territory (TRB NT), indicating that each had completed the appropriate professional development and qualifications expected for quality teaching (NSW Education Standards Authority, 2018; Teacher Registration Board of the Northern Territory, 2011, 2019) and were considered proficient in their profession according to the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers:

Proficient teachers meet the requirements for full registration through demonstrating

achievement of the seven Standards at this level. These teachers create effective teaching and learning experiences for their students … know the unique backgrounds of their students and adjust their teaching to meet their individual needs and diverse cultural, social and linguistic characteristics … develop safe, positive and productive learning environments … work collaboratively with colleagues … communicate effectively with their students, colleagues, parents/carers and community members. They behave professionally and ethically in all forums. (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2020a, p. 7)

As revealed in the next chapter, no graduate teachers were involved in the study, due to the School’s policy of not allocating teachers in their first year of teaching to Aboriginal Education classrooms. This student-wellbeing-oriented policy ensured that only teachers with an appropriate level of cultural knowledge and pedagogical experience were placed in classrooms comprised of Aboriginal students.

4.3.1.2. Informed consent

All participants held Ochre Cards (Working with Children and Vulnerable Persons). Potential participants, identified through criterion sampling, were invited to participate by personal

communication or email using work contacts provided by the gatekeepers. If an individual expressed interest in participating, a meeting was held, at a time of their choosing, to discuss the study and the anticipated extent of their contribution. Potential participants were provided with a Participant Information Letter (see Appendix A) and an Informed Consent Document approved by the ECU Human Research Ethics Committee. The purpose of the study, requirements and processes for

participation, confidentiality and privacy of data and ethical considerations, including data storage and sharing results were detailed and explained verbally. Participants were given opportunities to ask questions and clarify the extent of their involvement and level of commitment required. Contact details for the researcher and university were provided. Participants were asked to return a signed Informed Consent Document prior to inclusion in the study.

4.3.1.3. Participant selection criteria

In phenomenology and ethnography, purposeful sampling allows for the deliberate selection of participants using a precise set of parameters for inclusion and exclusion. Criterion sampling limits the selection of participants to individuals with experience of the phenomenon (Creswell, 1998, p. 112). In the study, this was considered to be an effective method for refining a broader group of potential participants, generated by theoretical sampling, into a concise set of sub-groups wherein identified school positions were well-placed to provide an insider’s perspective of the phenomenon. As ethnographic elements were applied in the study, the researcher was entitled to “rely on their [her] judgement” and make decisions on the selection of individuals for each sub-group “based on their

[her] research questions” (Creswell, 1998, p. 120). Teachers and boarding staff were invited to participate in the study if their current role at the School included a direct pedagogical involvement with Aboriginal students.

4.3.1.4. Participant sub-groups

In a phenomenological inquiry, data collection occurs largely through interviews of between five and twenty-five individuals (Creswell, 1998). In total, eighteen participants provided permission for their voices to be transcribed as sources of data and included for analysis in the study. While the study’s focus was on the teachers’ journey to cultural competence, a rich description of the phenomenon required a holistic view of the School and therefore, boarding staff and executive staff were needed to provide their perspectives on the phenomenon.

Participants in the study comprised two groups, Teachers and Boarding staff, within which there were four sub-groups:

1. Proficient or Lead Teachers with varying levels of cultural awareness and professional expertise, currently teaching Aboriginal Education classes at the research site;

2. Provisional or Graduate Teachers with varying levels of cultural awareness and teaching experience, currently teaching Aboriginal Education classes at the research site;

3. Boarding Staff: qualified youth workers and graduates of cultural awareness training, currently employed in a paraprofessional capacity in Boarding at the research site; and, 4. Executive Staff in senior leadership and middle management roles, with experience in

engaging with Aboriginal students, parents and communities.

The above sub-groups included individuals from different hierarchical strata within the School. As outlined in Chapter 3 Context, the structure of the School was complex and the relationship between management, classroom and boarding is illustrated in Appendix I. For brevity, the boarding hierarchy is indicated in Figure 1 below. This hierarchical structure may be explanatory of differences between participant Sub-groups 3 and 4 regarding their preferred method of contributing their voices to the study. The Executive Staff, the Head of Boarding and Assistant Head of Boarding preferred to be interviewed only and to act as gatekeepers. They did not participate in focus groups, to ensure that staff would speak freely in the focus groups.

Thirteen participants (Sub-groups 1, 2 and 4) contributed to semi-structured interviews: the Principal, whose duties included a teaching role at the school; two Heads of Department, colloquially known as ‘HODs’, responsible for managing staff in a key learning area (KLA) in addition to a teaching role;

eight teachers with a current teaching load of Aboriginal Education classes; the Head of Boarding, and the Assistant Head of Boarding, jointly responsible for the operational management of boarding at the School, including staffing and the enrolment and engagement of Aboriginal students.

The Teachers focus group involved five proficient and lead teachers (Sub-group 1), including one current Head of Year, responsible for the wellbeing of a single year-level cohort (e.g., Year 7) of students. The Boarding focus group consisted solely of boarding staff (Sub-group 3), all Heads of House, each managing the wellbeing of students and staff within a single boarding house.

Figure 1. Boarding management structure

The Executive Staff (Sub-group 4) comprised the Principal, Assistant Principals, Head of Boarding and Assistant Head of Boarding who either participated in the interviews, as mentioned above, or acted as gatekeepers and key informants for the study, enabling entry to the research site and providing information and insights regarding the context (Creswell, 1998, p. 60). Within this sub- group, one staff member withheld permission for a recorded interview yet provided commentary and historical background to the School, which enhanced my contextualisation of the findings.

4.3.1.4.1. Modifications to proposed participant sub-groups

It was originally intended for Aboriginal Teacher Assistants (TAs) to be interviewed at the research site, to gather an alternative view of the classroom experiences described by teachers. However, on reflection and in situ, this did not answer the main focus of the study, that of investigating non- Aboriginal teachers’ experiences of the phenomenon and their journey toward cultural competence. Other studies have documented the influence of Aboriginal Education Officers on levels of

Aboriginal student engagement (e.g., Craven et al., 2014). Head of Boarding

Assistant Head of Boarding

Heads of House (3)

Youth Workers / House Parents

As described above, criterion sampling was applied in determining participation in the study, resulting in four participant sub-groups. These sub-groups incorporated non-Aboriginal teachers and boarding staff in a boarding school. With its strong phenomenological and ethnographic focus, the research design addressed ethical considerations for human research, specifically research related to Aboriginal people, and this is discussed in the next section.