PASOS DE LA PLANEACIÓN

.

Interconnections between scholarship and colonialism became most evident during

the height of B ritish expansionism into the Paci fic in the late eighteenth and the nineteenth century. For Maori these interconnections were no more apparent than during the debates over the concept of sovereignty and the issues of people and property rights arising prior to and after the 1 840 signing of the Treaty of Waitangi. Colonial educational systems constructed first by the early missionaries to Aotearoa­ New Zealand, and then taken over by the emerging new colonial state, served to distort Maori positions and promote the political, economic and educational interests of colonialism. Maori learners in the new schooling systems were systematically conditioned to believe in the superiority of European forms of 'civilisation' , and to conceive of Maori as savage albeit sometimes portrayed as noble savages. By implication, all Maori needed to be 'civilised' and to be freed from their existing state through the benefits of colonial ism.

Paradoxically of course, the impact of colonialism on Maori was the loss of freedom, a freedom that Maori sti l l struggle to regain today. For Europe, and for Britain specifically, colonialism brought progress through the capture of resources and land for re- settlement. Pol itical, scientific and legal theories were constructed to support these colonial activities and gain popular support for the appropri ations of indigenous properties and the consequent loss of freedom and independence suffered by

indigenous pe?ples through colonisation practices executed under the banner of civilising primitive savages.

Discri minatory 1 9th century government practices undermined the social organ isation of Maori communities and deprived them of their economic base, reducing the majority of Maori to a subordinate economic, political and cultural position. Because Miiori were not perceived to have a conception of property rights in land or have conceptualised private property, only land they were settled upon was regarded as theirs. Unoccupied lands were classified as ' waste lands' , an ideological colonial construction that rational ised and facilitated occupation. Although not as dramatic as the 'terra nullius' doctrine used to appropriate the whole of Australia from the charge of the indigenous peoples there, the waste l and doctrine was a related and blatant form of land usurpation. Crow!1 sovereignty, a notion fraught with overtones of colonialism, was acquired in Australia und�r the notion of terra nullius, territory was treated as "desert, uninhabited country" (Stephenson, Ratnapala, 1 99 3 : 1 03).

The establishment of an English style colonial school system in Aotearoa-New Zealand outlawed the Maori language as the language of schooling and privileged the English language together with its cultural conceptual isations of the world. The colonial project in Aotearoa-New Zealand included the use of education as an assimilatory and domesticating force. Lord John Russell, Colonial Secretary in 1 840, issued an instruction to the first British Governor in Aotearoa-New Zealand, William Hobson, stating that

The education of the youth among the aborigines is of course indispensable to

.. the success of any measures for their ulti mate advancement in social arts, and in the scale of political existence. I apprehend however, that for the present this is a duty which could properly be undertaken only by the missionaries, or at least on some system to be formed in concurrence with them. (British Parliamentary Papers, 1 84 1 , (3 1 1 ) XV I I , p.28)

The colonial message of European progressiveness and indigenous backwardness was well entrenched in the British Colonial Office and its emissaries despite evidence to the contrary. The Confederation of the United Tribes of New Zealand had, in 1 835, already declared the country an independent Miiori nation. Maori independence had

Far from Maori ultimate advancement on the scale of political existence, the Treaty of Waitangi that followed the Declaration of Independence, was not what Maori had agreed to. Instead it led to the destruction of Maori advancement pol itically. Without the vote and without ratification of Article two of the Treaty, Maori political progress was brought to a resounding halt.

A lay missionary, John Gorst, epitomised the colonial servant with his observations of the Maori King Movement in the Waikato, when he noted that the King movement efforts to provide for itself, not only in education but also in its administration, were superior to the colonial version. Despite this; Gorst stil l saw the King movement as being segregative and therefore not acceptable, adding "we can govern the NHioris better than they can govern themselves". (cited in Daglish,N. 1 980: 1 37) heightening the role of education as a technique to undermine Miiori administrative competence and promote the acceptance of English 'civilisation' . Indigenous infrastructures for the production and transmission of know ledges and competencies were to be displaced by foreign forms of administrati ve provision even were these were known

to be inadequate. Maori scholars are challenging the perception that Maori

advancement has depended upon the dominating relationship of the Settler community with Maori; that without that relationship, Maori would somehow be

caught in a time warp unable to take ad vantage of 1 9th much less 20th century

knowledge and skills. Yet Maori abi lity to make good use of the technologies of the time demonstrate the fallacy of these arguments. It is l ikely that this very ability, the sight of Maori doing well was in part, responsible for Pakeha resentment and subsequent Government invasion of the King country, a fertile and productive region.

Critical or Critiqu e ?

Besides building Maori scholarship, Maori scholars have brought the work o f fel low scholars from a range of critical positions, in to play to critique taken-for-granted Western positions of theoretical dominance. Writers such as Said and Fanon, who write from the position of the colonised. inform the work of Maori writers in their engagement with the colonial project.

Although critical theory allows an abi lity to interrogate taken for granted theoretical and real positioning, Said makes reference to the body of writing dependant on what

appear to be "detached and .apol itical cultural disciplines, upon a quite sordid history of imperialist ideology and colonialist practice" ( l 993 :47). Crit.ical theory forms part of what Said refers to as "dominant discourses and disciplinary t�aditions in the main fields of scientific, social and cultural enquiry" pointing out that the paradigms have drawn from what are considered exclusively western sources (ibid: 47). Examples are the works of Foucault and of Raymond Williams, whom Said describes as formidable scholars, but in his opinion, for both, the imperial experience is quite irrelevant, a theoretical oversight that is the norm in Western cultural and scientific disciplines (ibid: 47).

Said observes the reinterpretation of the western cultural archive by non-western intellectuals, a shift that he describes as reading the archive contrapuntally rather than univocally, aware at once, of the history that is being narrated, and of the other h istories against which the dominating discourse acts (ibid:59).

As an Arab scholar, Said aligns himsel f w ith the growing n umber of wri ters and scholars from the formerly colonised world, who are engaged in disassembling the imperial ist model, raising new possibilities and conditions of knowledge, an example being his own seminal work Orientalism or, maybe, the study of Englishness or Frenchness.

Miiori writers have an affinity w ith the notion of disassembly of universalising and totalising codes; applying it readily to the growth of research and subsequent presumptions arising from flawed theoretical foundations. Miiori disassembly of the received versions of colonial history includes perceptions of research and assumptions of fact. Miiori collective experience of research in the past is of having not been meaningfully interpreted, sometimes to such an extent that they appear to have been actively misinterpreted.

Although Miiori nations cannot claim to be among those referred to as 'the formerly colonised world' , nonetheless Maori scholars and activists engage in the work of deconstruction of 'totalising codes' , exposing assimilative policies and processes for their underlying agenda. The agenda is read as the intention to maintain existing power relations for current beneficiaries and their progeny. Lack of educational

success among Maori is attributed to a range of convergent factors, but overarching all of these is the unmistakeable pressure of asymmetries of power in play.

Two opposing forces in Maori understanding of change that signal the growth or decline of individual and collective mana (standing, wellbeing) are tupu and mate, growth and decline. Each of these is associated with a Maori cultural identity, the spirit and reality of being Maori and what that means for those who claim to be Maori. Whereas much research about Maori in education has adopted a class generated approach, it has yet to motivate Miiori to action. Class-based reductionist analyses typically assume a direct correspondence between schooling and the relations of production, but Maori identity is not bound to workplace roles. Class based arguments reflect the realities of, in particular, struggles of the working class in B ritain, of Marxist theoretical claims on behalf of the proletariat, of class differentiation between the owners and the workers in the means of production and consequent differentiation in benefit. In Aotearoa-New Zealand, the union movements continue that struggle and there are Maori who work hard for the good of the union members, as there are Maori whose incomes suggest positioning as working class families, but for Maori learners in schools and their families, class differentiation is a somewhat sterile approach. That struggle may be at the heart of a working class Piikehii identity, but it is not the centre of a core Miiori being.

The Maori population hovers around the hal f m i llion mark so it is not large. Kinship and social ties connect Maori across a web of interrelated strands and even land itself is bound into Miiori identities. Miiori thought fosters the connections between people and the land, between temporal and spiritual worlds to form part of the same reality. There is not the divorce between the temporal and the spiritual as typifies modem Western thought. Miiori elders have always been aware of the distinction be,tween a secular approach to building knowledge about Maori and a Matauranga Maori approach to knowledge building and understanding. Joh n Rangihau addresses some of the contrasts in a discussion about Maori and knowledge. "I have been talking about such things as life force, aura, mystique, ethos, life style. All this is bound up with the spirituali ty of the Maori world and the force this exerts on Miiori things" ( 1 976: 1 3).

Despite arguments about likely dislocation of Maori learners in urban schools in regard to thei r ancestral marae, their lack of knowledge of the Maori world, the ethos that is Maori is stil l more l ikely to have an i mpact on the learners and on their families in a motivational sense, than a document that catalogues their failings and a framework that takes little account of being Maori at school. The everyday reality for Maori at school is that they are Maori and that generates a range of responses to Maori learners and from Maori learners within the learning environment. Against that scenario is the recognition that whatever Maori do, the reality is that the dominant group in Aotearoa-New Zealand is Pakeha, that l earning environments attended by most Maori are not defined by Maori, that decisions about resourcing Maori futures will too often l ie outside Miiori control.

The Gramscian distinction between 'arbitrary ideologies' and 'organic ideologies' is useful here as it is l ikely that Pllkehll in general do not see themselves as holding Maori futures hostage with their maintenance and support of the status quo in educational arrangements. The concept of ideology was developed upon the notion of 'organic ideologies' to the extent that it must be capable of 'organising human masses' of being pervasive and persuasive enough to bring about social action, "the

terrain .on which men move and acquire consciousness of their position and

struggle"(Gramsci, 1 97 1 :377).

For Maori, the Pakeha position equates with the concept of hegemony, of the use by the dominant group of its position to shape views of society through political, moral and intellectual leadership until consent is acquired. W ithout any obvious force, domination is assured. Policies for Maori education that do not foster Maori best interests; research that does not promote Maori, all contribute to restrain rather than advance Maori, and at the same time, contribute to a disabling construction of Maori in the public perception. As long as the focus in government policy direction for Maori education is solely on overcoming educational inequality, and c lass based arguments about Maori disadvantage are accepted, policies for the advancement of Maori education will be restrictive. The Maori challenge is more than simply to establ ish structural mechanisms that would allow greater Miiori access to education. The system itsel f has to be accountable at every level . If class is part of Piikeha realities, then Maori learners taught by Piikeha teachers for whom it is meaningful,

will feel the impact of that perception. Extensions of the concepts of agency and resistance as enunciated by Graham Smith ( 1 997) recognises the non-class formations of exclusion and domination. For S mith, a third variable, transformation, provides a means for Maori learners to rise above a restrictive one to one correspondence between school factors and Miiori performance. The Pakehaness of teachers for example, has not been investigated as a significant variable in the real isation of the aspirations of Maori learners, yet it is this difference that allowed some Pakeha teachers in a study conducted by Judith Simon, to discriminate against Maori pupils.

In treating all the children the same, Pakehii dominance was maintained by failing to cater for the needs of Miiori children in the expectation that the children had an obligation to comply with val ues of Pakehaness, therefore the teachers treated all the children the same. (Simon, 1 986:9) Underlying this approach is the colonial agenda of Europeanisation of Maori learners. Judith S imon does not go this far in her claims, but she does acknowledge the Pakeha cultural influence on schools in her statement that:

the fact that most schooling in New Zealand is conducted by Pakeha teachers according to Pakeha values and goals, means that Maori children are necessaril y subjected to a process of acculturation within the system. (ibid:9)

The values, attitudes and beliefs that are held by teachers of Maori students create reactions in the learners that can have positive or negative effects on their learning.

In a school culture that is reflective of 'Pakehaness' on a larger scaie, transitions for students who do not hold similar values, attitudes and beliefs will be a major effort if it is the learner who is expected to change and not either the teacher or the school when the educational needs of the learner are at stake. The freedom to go to school as Maori and not have cultural identity put at risk is still only fully possible in Kaupapa Maori schools. Teacher education programmes have made efforts to prepare pre service teacher education students to develop at least bicultural learning environments for learners if not multicultural learning environments, b ut these small initiatives compete with a monocu ltural ideological block to gain space in a crowded programme. Teaching for understanding should mean more than teacher knowledge of the curriculum, and pedagogy more than learning styles. That is not to say that

education and schooling as it is, cannot contribute ,to progressive change, to fostering

changes in schools and education that do contribute to Maori goals and aspirations.

What is problematic is the constant risk of cooption, o f takeover and of modification to allow for an ongoing colonial mission to Miiori rather than acknow ledgement of the messages of Miiori development.

On another front, Maori have different agendas. Miiori audiences respond to korero (talk) about the survival and maintenance of Te Reo Miiori, the Maori language, about Miiori self determination, Tino Rangatiratanga, about Miiori role models, about Miiori freedom, about Miiori control over Miiori matters, about Miiori aspirations and ach ievement, about Miiori identity, what it means to be Miiori and how that identity construction is played out in the many aspects of Miiori development, including growing up as Miiori and going to school as Miiori. Questions of the survival of a Miiori cultural identity are significant in ongoing discussions Miiori have about the role of the state. Rehearsals about the rights expected to flow to Miiori from the 1 840 Treaty of Waitangi agreement signed between the B ritish Crown and Miiori, form the basis of Miiori i nterpellation and interrogation of constitutional arrangements, of the role of democracy, and of the position of tangata whenua.

The breadth of korero Miiori (talking points) demonstrates the futility of class reductionism as a satisfactory explanation for Miiori performance in education. Even the i nterplay of class, gender and race as sources of domination does not reach Miiori concerns, for one of the key factors for Miiori, as it is for sim ilar indigenous peoples around the world, is the concept of indigeneity. At a Hui to discuss Miiori educational advancement, faci litated by the Tuwharetoa paramountcy on behalf of iwi Miiori and Government ministers and agencies, Mason Durie raised the issue of indigeneity as a principle for education, noting the conflict that can arise between democratic rights of all c itizens and the rights which Miiori assert by virtue of being tangata whenua in Aotearoa-New Zealand (200 1 :7). In his v iew, the Treaty of Waitangi does not embody the sum total of i ndigenous rights, nor do indigenous rights capture the uniqueness of the Treaty, noting that increasingly the S tate will need to be concerned about i ndigeneity as an issue that is related but not identical to the Treaty of Waitangi: and the language of indigeneity will need to be heard alongside the Treaty dialogue (ibid).

Class based research has a role in generating resourcirig for Maori education to overcome inequities in educational provision. It can form part of an overall strategy but in itself is an insufficient means to move Maori to ful fil their own educational