Search results

Self-determination policies and the expansion of bilingual schooling across Australia's Northern Territory (NT) in the 1970s and 1980s provided opportunities for Aboriginal educators and communities to take control over schooling. This paper demonstrates how this occurred at Shepherdson College, a mission school turned government bilingual school, at Galiwin'ku on Elcho Island in North East, Arnhem Land, in the early years of the policies between 1972 and 1983. Yolŋu staff developed a syncretic vision for a Yolŋu-controlled space of education that prioritised Yolŋu knowledges and aimed to sustain Yolŋu existence.

This paper uses archival data as well as oral histories, focusing on those with a close involvement with Shepherdson College, to elucidate the development of a Yolŋu vision for schooling.

Many Yolŋu school staff and their supporters, encouraged by promises of the era, pushed for greater Yolŋu control over staffing, curriculum, school spaces and governance. The budgetary and administrative control of the NT and federal governments acted to hinder possibilities. Yet despite these bureaucratic challenges, by the time of the shift towards neoliberal constraints in the early 1980s, Yolŋu educators and their supporters had envisioned and achieved, in a nascent way, a Yolŋu schooling system.

Previous scholarship on bilingual schooling has not closely examined the potent link between self-determination and bilingual schooling, largely focusing on pedagogical debates. Instead, this paper argues that Yolŋu embraced the “way in” offered by bilingual schooling to develop a new vision for community control through control of schooling.

The Australian Government recognises an obligation to ensure that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders (Australia’s First Peoples) are included in the integration of genomics into the healthcare system. First Peoples inclusion in this area requires going beyond general principles for First Peoples health research. This extra need exists for historical reasons as well as the need to maintain connections between patients, participants and communities and between the bio-specimens and data contributing to the resources underpinning genomics. The National Centre for Indigenous Genomics (NCIG) at the Australian National University in Canberra, Australia, has developed a framework that addresses these requirements through its dedicated First Peoples governance and enduring community engagement processes relating to stored heritage materials, data management and culturally agreed terms for collection preservation and potential use into the future. This chapter incorporates a First Peoples perspective on the NCIG by describing the practical application of ‘doing the right thing’, proceeding at ‘the pace of trust’, obtaining informed consent as part of enduring relationships, acknowledging cultural perspectives, understanding diversity of views and cultural practices within and between communities and respecting the need for community ownership and self-determined mobilisation of First Peoples involvement with research. This culturally appropriate methodology has been developed in partnership with individuals, family groups and community leaders, who are directly involved in genomic research. It provides a model for First Peoples to play an invested and sustaining role in the future development of genome science and precision medicine.

This paper introduces key themes and debates in education and educational history that engage education's complicity in injustice and violence, as well as those that continue to position education as a vehicle for positive change and possibility. The paper introduces the papers that comprise the special issue “Challenges of Contested Spaces: Constructing Difference and its Legacies in Educational History”.

The paper canvasses pertinent historiographical, theoretical and methodological debates that shed light on education's dual capacity to empower and oppress.

Papers in this collection reveal the many ways that agendas justified in the name of education, training and reform have often invoked that name as justification for actions that harmed, discriminated or oppressed, and yet also, how despite this, education can still be imagined as a space of possibility and transformation.

The paper offers a summative introduction to the themes and papers of the special issue.