Negotiating Indigenous Higher Education Policy Analysis at the Cultural Interface in the Northern Territory, Australia
Saved in:
| Title: | Negotiating Indigenous Higher Education Policy Analysis at the Cultural Interface in the Northern Territory, Australia |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Street, C. (ORCID |
| Source: | Critical Studies in Education. 2023 64(3):250-266. |
| Availability: | Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 17 |
| Publication Date: | 2023 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Evaluative |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Foreign Countries, Geographic Regions, Educational Policy, Policy Analysis, Cultural Influences, Indigenous Populations, Indigenous Knowledge, Cultural Differences, Power Structure, Personal Narratives, Researchers, College Faculty, Interpersonal Relationship, Race, Accountability, Safety, Governance |
| Geographic Terms: | Australia |
| DOI: | 10.1080/17508487.2022.2083647 |
| ISSN: | 1750-8487 1750-8495 |
| Abstract: | Policy analysis can be useful for learning about 'what works' in policy. Contemporary policy studies literature highlight that such learning is influenced by power relations in government that shape our ways of knowing the world. This paper offers a critically reflexive narrative account of power relations present during Indigenous higher education policy analysis research conducted in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia to shed light on how to effectively negotiate policy analysis. We reflect on tensions that arose by applying Nakata's concept of the 'cultural interface', which accounts for the complexity of meaning making across diverse knowledge spaces. Narratives from an Indigenous Project Reference Group member are included to provide a perspective on these tensions from an Indigenous standpoint. The paper concludes by describing enabling conditions and strategies that were necessary for effective policy analysis, and considers implications for Indigenous higher education policy analysis in the NT. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2023 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1393433 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFVy6giVlie7fuRTBqqAzQjAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDF8QFdF3TpENKJAzOgIBEICBmpuYPDerwgNUheX0KjEOVa8ngYrgomcy9h9l48j-uvN3Cd_a4movFjdEvoSAb1Z6ihmFfQeuGKMqKcF46w_VOuCmun1ugEFmHzDdQFdUi0WCUIq7tmJGmnhxZnvw3lOMKxmC4mGcrgX-IbTTUedUkf8MK2gVReAafOZoSbIsN9MCQCe0nRa_HJ0W3vAbnmy-khoS5vAYd_Ikwfw= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0164871750;[30nj]01aug.23;2023Jul14.05:57;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0164871750-1">Negotiating Indigenous higher education policy analysis at the cultural interface in the Northern Territory, Australia </title> <p>Policy analysis can be useful for learning about 'what works' in policy. Contemporary policy studies literature highlight that such learning is influenced by power relations in government that shape our ways of knowing the world. This paper offers a critically reflexive narrative account of power relations present during Indigenous higher education policy analysis research conducted in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia to shed light on how to effectively negotiate policy analysis. We reflect on tensions that arose by applying Nakata's concept of the 'cultural interface', which accounts for the complexity of meaning making across diverse knowledge spaces. Narratives from an Indigenous Project Reference Group member are included to provide a perspective on these tensions from an Indigenous standpoint. The paper concludes by describing enabling conditions and strategies that were necessary for effective policy analysis, and considers implications for Indigenous higher education policy analysis in the NT.</p> <p>Keywords: Educational policy; evaluation; higher education; Indigenous issues; race</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-2">Introduction</hd> <p>In the Northern Territory (NT) of Australia, Indigenous[<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>] people do not enrol in and complete higher education degrees at the same rates as non-Indigenous people (Department of Education Skills and Employment, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref2">20</reflink>]). As a result, there have been increased calls for greater use of research and evaluation to inform policy development. For example, a key recommendation in the 2012 <emph>Review of Higher Education Access and Outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People</emph>, the most recent review of Indigenous higher education, was the development of a monitoring and evaluation framework for evaluating outcomes (Behrendt et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref3">5</reflink>]). The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Advisory Council (ATSIHEAC), prior to its disbandment in 2015, also suggested the development of a performance framework for Indigenous higher education (ATSIHEAC, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref4">2</reflink>]). A 2018 report then detailed the essential components of such a performance framework, which included enhancing the use of qualitative methodologies and focusing on shared accountability (J. Smith et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref5">66</reflink>]). These calls have been echoed in the national Indigenous Affairs setting more broadly (Australian National Audit Office, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref6">3</reflink>]; Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref7">21</reflink>]; Productivity Commission, [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref8">59</reflink>]), with a 2016 report demonstrating the lack of quality evaluation of Indigenous programs (Hudson, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref9">30</reflink>]). The Productivity Commission has since released its Indigenous Evaluation Strategy ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref10">60</reflink>]) to guide evaluations of policies and programs that affect Indigenous people. Although improved evaluation of Indigenous higher education can assist in our knowledge about the effectiveness of policies, more and better data do not necessarily give us all the answers we need (Møller, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref11">45</reflink>]). Møller ([<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref12">45</reflink>]) contends that policy analysis researcher should promote awareness about power structures that continue to shape education policy.</p> <p>Indigenous scholars have long argued that the perspectives of Indigenous people must underpin policy and research that impacts their lives to counteract such power dynamics and make genuine advancements in Indigenous struggles (Foley, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref13">23</reflink>]; Moreton-Robinson, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref14">46</reflink>]; Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref15">49</reflink>]; Rigney, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref16">62</reflink>]). This has seen the emergence of the Indigenous data sovereignty agenda, which asserts the rights of Indigenous people to the collection, ownership and use of data for policies that affect their people, communities and lands (Kukutai &amp; Taylor, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref17">35</reflink>]; Walter et al., [<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref18">74</reflink>]). Concerns have been raised about power associated with the use of statistics, which are often deficit based, in this context (Walter, [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref19">73</reflink>]). We are now seeing some welcome increases in awareness about the importance of Indigenous participation in measuring and analysing policy success (Biddle et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref20">8</reflink>]). For example, the recent Closing the Gap (CTG) refresh involved the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) signing a partnership with Aboriginal peak organisations across Australia. In addition, Universities Australia's <emph>Indigenous Strategy 2017–2020</emph> was developed in collaboration with the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Higher Education Consortium (NATSIHEC; Universities Australia, [<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref21">70</reflink>]).</p> <p>But scant literature in the NT or national Indigenous higher education setting has engaged with the complex intersections between Indigenous and non Indigenous knowledge systems outside curriculum design and delivery (Carey &amp; Prince, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref22">13</reflink>]). Through this paper we endeavoured to make sense of the challenges associated with power when Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges come together at the 'cultural interface', which is a contested space mediated by social relations that surround us (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref23">48</reflink>]). Importantly, Nakata's ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref24">48</reflink>]) concept of the 'cultural interface' is yet to be applied in the policy analysis setting. A majority of literature intending to apply Nakata's theory of the cultural interface oversimplifies the complexity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge systems and the space in which they operate (Carey &amp; Prince, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref25">13</reflink>]). To avoid doing this, we considered the challenges experienced in a policy analysis process as a shared resource for understanding knowledge and policy (Ozga, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref26">55</reflink>]). The aim of this paper is to understand how Indigenous higher education policy analysis can be negotiated in a way that is sensitive to power relations. The intent is to consider who benefits from historical and current education policy arrangements in this context, and what alternatives may be possible.</p> <p>This paper is written in the context of a broader research project aiming to explore definitions of success in Indigenous higher education policy in the NT. While preliminary research was undertaken in 2017, in 2018 the lead author decided to continue investigating this particular topic as part of her Doctoral studies. Comprising just one component of this research project, the list below specifies the research questions that informed this paper.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How has 'success' in Indigenous higher education policy in the NT since the 1960s been defined a) within policy frameworks and b) by Indigenous higher education experts?</item> <p></p> <item> How are these definitions similar or different?</item> <p></p> <item> What considerations relating to power and race can account for these similarities and differences?</item> <p></p> <item> What impact has this had on Indigenous higher education policy enactment and outcomes?</item> <p></p> <item> What is the value of understanding this? For Indigenous people and for policy development processes?</item> <p></p> <item> What are the lessons for Indigenous policy more broadly?</item> </ulist> <p>The research was led by a non-Indigenous researcher who was guided by a predominantly Indigenous Project Reference Group (PRG) throughout the design and analysis process, including for the preliminary research conducted in 2017. Approval was provided by the PRG and participants to proceed with utilising the data from the preliminary research for the lead author's Doctoral studies.</p> <p>The structure of this paper is as follows. We firstly explain how Indigenous and non-Indigenous standpoints were included within the paper, then introduce the Indigenous PRG and key theories drawn upon. We reflect on some tensions that were experienced, including the power relations that were at play during the analysis process as part of this research. The second author, 'KR', then provides a narrative in relation to navigating these tensions from an Indigenous standpoint. Finally, we summarise solutions for negotiating these tensions and propose implications for NT Indigenous policy analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-3">Walking the walk: the role of Indigenous and non-Indigenous standpoints in our research</hd> <p>This paper is written in first person plural as an account of the process 'we' as co-authors participated in. Co-authors include Indigenous and non-Indigenous individuals who are Project Reference Group (PRG) members and project team members. The lead author is non-Indigenous and writes from a position of relative white and socio-economic privilege. However, it was appropriate to speak from a collective viewpoint in the name of valuing the contributions of co-authors with respect to issues around power that this paper attends to. The account of tensions experienced during this research below also contains narrative contributions from the Indigenous second author (KR) who is a PRG member, researcher and higher education professional. KR's perspectives are written in first person singular and provide a platform for understanding how the lived experience of a research process can be experienced differently by an Indigenous person who has been subject to historical influences of power misuse.</p> <p>Relationships had been established between several members of the PRG and the lead author during other projects since 2015. The PRG was critical to making sure that Indigenous people had access to, and control over, knowledge that was created through the research (Bunda et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref27">11</reflink>]; Kovach, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref28">34</reflink>]; L. Smith, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref29">65</reflink>]; Walter, [<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref30">72</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref31">73</reflink>]). The group consists of nine people who have experience in Indigenous higher education policy development and implementation as teachers, educators, researchers, analysts, leaders or students. Eight out of nine members identified as Indigenous.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-4">Poststructuralism and Foucault's power/knowledge</hd> <p>Given the strengthening calls for analyses of power in policy, we are compelled to consider poststructuralism and Foucault's concepts of knowledge and power for this research. Poststructuralism is a school of thought that understands the self, and corresponding notions of truth and identity, as being produced within a set of discourses and practices that shape how we think, feel and act (Peters, [<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref32">57</reflink>]). Subscribing to poststructuralism, Michel Foucault theorised 'government' as the 'codes of conduct' that are put in place by agencies, institutions and other 'regimes of practices' (Foucault, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref33">24</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref34">25</reflink>]; Gordon, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref35">27</reflink>]). His work conceives that systematic and deliberate attempts to regulate the way that we think 'cannot be seen as the expression of a neutral rationality, but it is the expression of knowledge as power' (John, [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref36">32</reflink>], p. 165). Policy analysis and research are part of what forms these discourses and practices through creation of ideas (Ozga, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref37">54</reflink>]). Through this lens, we orient this paper towards the critical links between power and production of knowledge through policy analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-5">The cultural interface</hd> <p>Nakata ([<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref38">48</reflink>]) theorized the 'cultural interface' as the 'very complicated and contested space' between Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledge systems that exist within a set of social practices that shape how we 'do' knowledge (p. 8). Nakata et al. ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref39">50</reflink>]) caution against positioning Indigenous worldviews as the undeniable basis of Indigenous resistance and authority that function in opposition to Western ways. Refraining from thinking about Indigenous-non-Indigenous knowledges in this way encourages production of more diverse and politically savvy scholarship that moves beyond binary categorizations and encourages more of a focus on 'the social relations within which we as "knowers" know' (Pohlhaus, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref40">58</reflink>], p. 287).</p> <p>The concepts of power and knowledge were applied throughout our analysis of the tensions that arose while considering the broader research aims of understanding the concept of NT Indigenous higher education policy 'success'. This required cognisance of the complexity of Indigenous and non-Indigenous positions and the significance of lived experience of structural power inequities by Indigenous members of the PRG. The space in which we conducted our analysis was 'a layered and very complex entanglement of concepts, theories and sets of meanings' (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref41">47</reflink>], p. 272). This space was also positioned within the corpus of historical and ongoing knowledge that is produced about Indigenous people within and across institutional practices through mechanisms of power (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref42">49</reflink>]). We will return to our conceptual framework later in this paper.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-6">Exploring tensions at 'the cultural interface'</hd> <p>We will now outline some tensions that arose through interactions within the PRG. These are thematically reported in relation to notions of relationships, voice, accountability and authorship. Included under each theme is a narrative from 'KR' as mentioned above.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-7">Relationships</hd> <p>Shared goals for the research provided strong foundations in the preliminary stages of the research. However, the lead author felt nervous about engaging with senior Indigenous academics and Elders, being aware that she was pursuing a relationship with them to progress her own academic aspirations. She was conscious of Indigenous peoples' suspicion of research due to its historical role in colonization and also of the potential for her own professional relationships to be compromised if she became complicit in these historical practices through her own research.</p> <p>Once the lead author enrolled in her PhD, she was required to be especially cognisant of non-verbal cues that signified the interest of PRG members in continuing to stay involved (Cass et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref43">14</reflink>]). She initially felt reluctant to question the opinions of these individuals, as she was aware of their positions of seniority in the Indigenous education context. By doing so, she was inadvertently 'Othering' her colleagues' by considering their perspectives within a binary framework of who is able to know, thereby reinforcing colonial discourses (McConaghy, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref44">41</reflink>]). This reluctance gradually faded as her relationships with her colleagues strengthened, enabling her to feel comfortable with feeling vulnerable. She also became more comfortable to ask difficult questions. For example, she had honest discussions with remote Indigenous PRG members regarding the identity politics that these PRG members had, on occasion, succumbed to. This discussion was held in the context of trust that had been developed over a period of six years and the outcome was mutual agreement about the influence of policy discourses on our realities.</p> <p>She also knew that her Indigenous colleagues would have been experiencing 'contradictions and tensions' that she was not privy to (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref45">48</reflink>], p. 10). For example, some Indigenous PRG members on a daily basis were required to perform their professional duties within organisational systems that did not have appropriate Indigenous governance. This conflicted with their obligations to support Indigenous self-determination, yet was largely outside of their control. The lead author, in contrast, became aware of this tension but could not experience the inherent sense of responsibility for Indigenous futures that her colleagues carried in this sense.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-8">KR: a personal perspective</hd> <p>Having worked effectively with the lead researcher on earlier projects, I came to this PRG with a positive sense of our relationship, and the potential to draw on it to support the research. The researcher approached a number of Indigenous academics, leaders and professionals to join the PRG, some with whom I had established collegial relationships with. Perhaps because of our pre-existing working relationship, the researcher was quite open with me about her uneasiness in calling on the expertise of Aboriginal people, in particular, Elders and/or senior academics who she acknowledged would have many demands on their time already. The researcher also expressed concern that whilst we were developing open communication protocols and creating the space for critical reflection, the idea of intellectually interrogating a senior Aboriginal person (whether in the group or individually) caused her dread. My assurance to the researcher was to accept that there is uncertainty in all relationships, but that Aboriginal people, particularly those volunteering to be on the PRG, are very astute when it comes to navigating such professional relationships. I reminded the researcher that these members were choosing to stay engaged with the process, attending scheduled meetings, and contributing feedback, and these cues demonstrated their commitment. The working relationships with individuals and the PRG responded to respect and nurturing. It is also important for non-Indigenous researchers not to continually over-analyse relationships or pre-empt behaviours, thereby contributing to 'othering'. This could lead to becoming immobilized by fear and have the counter effect of jeopardizing the progress of the project.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-9">Voice</hd> <p>Considering whose voice counted within research outputs was a site of particular sensitivity as the institutional setting where we conducted the research prioritizes the knowledge systems of the dominant culture (Bunda et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref46">11</reflink>]). This is experienced by Indigenous people as epistemological racism (Bodkin-Andrews &amp; Carlson, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref47">9</reflink>]). To mitigate the effects of this, the research team decided that the research must be overseen by a predominantly Indigenous PRG. This required reflexivity amongst the group in relation to various points, such as discussing the complexities associated with the term 'parity' being used as a measure for success through the Behrendt Review. It was considered that this was one definition of success as determined by Indigenous standpoints of those who led the Review. In contrast, Indigenous members of the PRG recounted alternative accounts of what 'success' could mean, such as an epistemologically inclusive education system. What mattered here was not that 'as a member of the Indigenous community, what I say counts. It is more the case, that what is said must be able to be accounted for' (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref48">48</reflink>], p. 11).</p> <p>Mindfulness of the effects of 'intersectionality' was important in this process (Crenshaw, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref49">17</reflink>]). Within her relationship with the PRG were overlapping, coexistent systems of oppression and privilege that were salient to individuals in different contexts (Reyes, [<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref50">61</reflink>]). For example, while she came from a position of relative white privilege her gender meant that she, too, was subjected to particular types of structural discrimination (Crenshaw, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref51">16</reflink>]). Her remote Indigenous PRG members who spoke English as an additional language experienced marginalization in urban contexts where Western-centric knowledge paradigms reign supreme. Yet, in remote communities a majority of the population speak an Indigenous language at home (ABS Census of Population and Housing, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref52">1</reflink>]), where their traditional language literacies and localised cultural knowledges places them in a position of power. In this context, power and place are given new meanings and white people become instruments of Indigenous agency (Guenther et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref53">29</reflink>]). Reducing the diverse range of experiences of PRG members to a single Indigenous identity would have been conforming to historical assimilationist practices. We made a conscious effort to integrate a range of social identities to avoid essentializing the voices of Indigenous PRG members (Ladson-Billings, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref54">36</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-10">KR: a personal perspective</hd> <p>Bringing any team of professionals together in a reference group capacity holds its challenges. When that group is formed with the purpose of providing Indigenous guidance to a non-Indigenous research project, complex tensions around the primacy of voice will be inherent. Membership of the PRG included diverse Aboriginal experiences, both professionally and culturally, meaning that a range of nuanced protocols were constantly at play, and expressed within the interactions between the PRG and the non-Indigenous researcher. The carefully managed role of the Indigenous PRG Chairperson, along with the explicit willingness of the non-Indigenous researcher to respect diverse Aboriginal voices and communications styles, methods and preferences, facilitated constructive dialogue to guide this research.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-11">Accountability</hd> <p>A third tension emerged in relation to being accountable to both the expectations of PRG members, and to the requirements of institutional systems. The formal ethics approval process governed by the university's Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC), for example, is systematic, evidence informed and rigorous. Yet, its processes appears to be somewhat linear in comparison to standards of conduct that are acceptable to Indigenous communities (Benveniste &amp; King, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref55">6</reflink>]; Minnieson et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref56">44</reflink>]). Formal HREC procedures are developed in line with Western managerial practices for accountability of the practices that will be undertaken. They are underpinned by altruistic intentions, aiming to ensure that researchers have considered ethical issues that may arise. The ethics process felt, at times, incongruous with our attempts to navigate the cultural interface because of its positioning within institutional managerial practices. To remedy this, the group collaboratively developed a Consent Procedure. This was an agreed process to be followed for seeking informed consent of participants that met requirements of both the HREC and the PRG. This was an example of where Indigenous PRG members were required to navigate a sense of 'push-pull' between Indigenous and non-Indigenous positions (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref57">48</reflink>], p. 12).</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-12">KR: a personal perspective</hd> <p>As an Aboriginal researcher and a professional with a career history in both the public sector and the higher education sector, I am regularly challenged by managing the interplay between prioritizing institutional compliance (explicit or implicit) and Indigenous protocols for self-determination agendas. This is a constant tension for any Indigenous person who works within established institutions founded on historical values which can be incongruent with our own world views. Working with the non-Indigenous researcher, it was evident that this 'push-pull' experience was less familiar to her. The researcher demonstrated her willingness and capability to recognize, negotiate and construct a tailored response to this tension through the development of the Consent Procedure. This process in turn, brought to the front her accountability to, and respect for, the PRG. This extra step in the process provided a platform for the PRG to more openly discuss research priorities in a safer and more transparent environment.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-13">Authorship</hd> <p>Given the lead author was benefiting from the research, authorship presented particular dilemmas. It is standard for universities to have institutional authorship policies (Charles Darwin University, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref58">15</reflink>]). The lead author realized that her default position was to place more significance on contributions to research outputs in a Eurocentric way, such as the writing process. As a non-Indigenous researcher, this was another example of her ways of knowing and doing being consistent with those of the dominant culture. It was pointed out to her in the early stages of her research by a PRG member that the authors who she had cited on a conference presentation were only those who had made written contributions. She then realised this conditioned behaviour failed to adequately acknowledge equally-as poignant informal discussions with individual Indigenous PRG members and collaborative PRG discussions. Her response was to thank her colleague who brought this to her attention and then to email the PRG notifying them of her misstep, apologise, and propose a plan of action to avoid such a mistake in the future. The group collaboratively developed a formalized Authorship Procedure to follow from that point onwards.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-14">KR: a personal perspective</hd> <p>I witnessed the researcher making extensive notes during both the PRG meetings, and importantly, during our discussions in smaller groups or individually. This informed the development of the Authorship Procedure but also demonstrated the attention to detail that the researcher was willing to enact to ensure respectful attribution to her learnings and writings. This level of commitment to genuine attribution is commonly overlooked by non-Indigenous researchers, even when their research topic is primarily <emph>about</emph> Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander peoples and cultures. In contrast, the researcher exhibited a cognizance about undertaking research <emph>with</emph> Aboriginal people and <emph>for</emph> Aboriginal interests. This was evident when the researcher readily took instruction from the PRG members in relation to the representation of data – both that which had been collated from other sources to share with the group, and the data being created from within the group dialogues. Visual diagrams, tables and schemata were iteratively developed to enhance and clarify PRG member perspectives and craft new directions for the research gaze.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-15">Negotiating tensions at the cultural interface</hd> <p>We will now summarise the enabling conditions and strategies put in place that allowed for more productive conversations while negotiating the tensions outlined above.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-16">Relationships</hd> <p>Our policy analysis process was reliant on establishment of strong relationships (Benveniste &amp; King, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref59">6</reflink>]). The uncertainties experienced by the lead author during relationship development demonstrated that she had adopted an appropriate attitude. Jones and Jenkins ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref60">33</reflink>]) posit that non-Indigenous people working with Indigenous people in research should orientate their efforts towards creating mutual understanding with the colonized, rather than towards learning about those who are colonized. This is because non-Indigenous researchers who search for opportunities to learn <emph>about</emph> Indigenous people can merely reinforce power relationships. In romanticized efforts to learn about Indigenous ways of knowing the world, knowledge is accessed and can be exploited. This is not conducive to building trusting relationships. The lead author needed to avoid speaking for Indigenous experiences but be confident in stating her opinion and welcoming critique. This was initially daunting because of her intent to avoid paternalistic approaches that have erased or misrepresented historical Indigenous policy (Rudolph, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref61">63</reflink>]), but she later came to understand that this was essential for relationship development. These anxieties were a sign that she had an appropriate attitude, as when non-Indigenous researchers avoid the uncomfortable this can perpetuate the past (Benveniste &amp; King, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref62">6</reflink>]). Additionally, demonstrating transparency about her motivations for pursuing the research as part of doctoral studies – as well as for supporting Indigenous struggles – assisted in relationship development.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-17">A safe environment</hd> <p>It is difficult to hold constructive conversations about power and race under racist conditions (Land, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref63">37</reflink>]), therefore a safe environment was essential. We discussed the frustrations that people experienced as a result of embedded power relations while attempting to remain conscious of such power relations on our own analysis process. Regular use of the term 'outcomes' – a phrase tied to success measures embedded in neoliberal education approaches – by the PRG was one example of this (Street et al., [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref64">68</reflink>]). The PRG reflected on past policies they had observed come into place over time that held grand intentions for change, while failing to acknowledge the role of government in perpetuating inequality. A current example is seen in Wilson's <emph>A Share in the Future: Review of Indigenous Education in the Northern Territory</emph>, which aspires to 'raise the level of achievement of the majority of its Indigenous students so that they can participate more effectively in society and the economy' (Wilson, [<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref65">75</reflink>], p. 1). This rhetoric places the onus on Indigenous people for their lack of socio-economic participation, rather than acknowledging the historic and continuing effects of power in such discourses (Olssen et al., [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref66">53</reflink>]). It is critical to create safe spaces in which honest and open dialogue can be held, and in which people feel comfortable to reflect, share ideas and disagree when they feel it is warranted.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-18">Indigenous governance</hd> <p>A final enabling condition for an effective policy analysis process is Indigenous governance mechanisms that operate flexibly across notions of culture with respect to power, authority, institutions and relationships (Hunt et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref67">31</reflink>]). It was established that the purpose of the PRG was not to develop mutual understanding nor to oversimplify notions of what is 'Indigenous' and what is 'Western' (Carey &amp; Prince, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref68">13</reflink>]). Rather, its purpose was to engage with the tension of difference. We did this by valuing diverse approaches to 'doing knowledge' so that all participants could interpret and recontextualize their experiences of policy in a way that suited them (Ball, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref69">4</reflink>]). For example, some PRG members maintained a preference for telling stories ('yarning') to be able to make meaning of, and express thoughts about their experience with particular policy initiatives (Bessarab &amp; Ng'andu, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref70">7</reflink>]). This was not the only mode of communication, but it did provide flexibility around communication to ensure individual needs were catered for. This was particularly important for those who did not speak English as their first language. The flexible approach adopted to Indigenous research oversight also included allowing as much time as required for reflection, making adjustments to PRG processes in an iterative manner, constant reflection on power and authority, and prioritizing professional relationships.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-19">Accountability structures</hd> <p>Given the general lack of awareness of privilege amongst those who have it (Pease, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref71">56</reflink>]), accountability structures are an effective way to facilitate conversations around power (Land, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref72">37</reflink>]). The Terms of Reference (ToRs) of the PRG outlined its responsibilities, functions and procedures. These ToRs ensured intersectionality was considered through representation of various social identities within its membership. They ensured the researcher remained accountable to the group by specifying reporting expectations. Finally, they described a process for resolution of disagreements. The aim was to achieve consensus through a consultative process. Where this could not be achieved, the Chair held a deliberative, casting vote. Despite this procedure being agreed to, there was not one occasion where the Chair made a deliberative decision. This signifies that members of the PRG were generally in agreement throughout the research design and analysis process about what was going to be of value.</p> <p>The Consent Procedure was another example of an accountability structure developed in response to tensions around the consent process. This document, developed collaboratively, prescribed an iterative approach to consent while still ensuring that the HREC requirements were met. Noteworthy as an example of the power that is caught up within education institutions, HREC processes were mandated whereas following the advice of the PRG was an ethical and moral choice. This is another example of the 'push-pull' between Indigenous and non-Indigenous positions that Indigenous people experience everyday (Nakata, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref73">48</reflink>]). As this experience was familiar to them, the Indigenous members of the PRG were adept at going back and forth between such positions. The lead researcher, on the other hand, had to maintain an astute awareness of this issue so as to fulfil the needs of both Indigenous people and HREC requirements. The Consent Procedure made the non-Indigenous lead researchers challengeable for potential differing opinions. As new tensions surfaced in response to how the research was playing out, adjustments were made. They represented seeking of a solution, rather than putting forward rhetoric that does not contribute to meaningful change (Lea, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref74">38</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-20">Reflexivity</hd> <p>Reflexivity involved maintaining awareness about the forms of power that the lead author held (Nicholls, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref75">51</reflink>]). This involved locating herself and being clear on the uses and limitations of her knowledges (Olsen, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref76">52</reflink>]), while retaining confidence in her own abilities (McGloin, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref77">42</reflink>]). While she experienced some forms of privilege such as being white and well educated, she was an early career female researcher and also caught up in valued and devalued social statuses (Pease, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref78">56</reflink>]). Group understanding must also exist about the social relations that inform our knowledge (Pohlhaus, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref79">58</reflink>]). Where discussions of a policy analysis nature do not take into account power and its impacts on how we have been conditioned to think, the risk is that Indigenous knowledge systems are represented as a single and homogenous state of being (Nakata et al., [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref80">50</reflink>]). This can lead to what Maldonado-Torres ([<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref81">40</reflink>]) calls 'epistemic closure' (p. 4). This state of being is intended to progress emancipatory goals but instead prioritizes immediate political action above epistemic debate. Instead, a more fruitful approach is to engage with the multifaceted and dynamic nature of knowledge (Caretta, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref82">12</reflink>]). In practice this means not confining opinions to those of the strictly Indigenous or non-Indigenous, but recognizing the complexity of sharing knowledge at the cultural interface. Non-Indigenous researchers engaging in this space must develop reflexivity skills and embrace discomfort in what their experience of relative privilege does not allow them to know (Leibowitz et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref83">39</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-21">Reckoning with complicity</hd> <p>The lead researcher was required to reckon with her own privilege. This included putting concerted effort towards developing self-understanding and mitigating risks associated with reproducing power dynamics (Land, [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref84">37</reflink>]). Questioning historically racial assumptions within policy analysis, such as assumptions relating to who should drive, be prioritized in and benefit from policy, assisted to redress issues of race (Gillborn, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref85">26</reflink>]). As much as possible, Indigenous epistemological approaches to knowledge were privileged, as Indigenous people are better placed to ask questions in relation to power and race because of their experiential knowledge (Rigney, [<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref86">62</reflink>]). This allowed for re-centering marginalized perspectives and challenging of dominant ones in order to disrupt racist practices (Bradbury, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref87">10</reflink>]; Delgado &amp; Stefancic, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref88">19</reflink>]). The PRG were engaged in iterative discussions and were requested to provide feedback on and approve the scope, methodology and analysis. Our research was consistently shared in English language and through mediums such as peer-reviewed journals which are grounded in the epistemologies of the dominant culture. Nevertheless, we aimed to create as much flexibility as possible in how various approaches to knowledge could be acknowledged in the research so as to re-center marginalized perspectives of the PRG.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-22">Towards a power-informed view of policy 'success'</hd> <p>We now return to our research questions to consider how our analysis may be useful for policy review and development. According to Foucault, practices of government deliberately shape the way we think and therefore are an expression of power (Dean, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref89">18</reflink>]; Foucault, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref90">24</reflink>]). We therefore contend that the policy process itself not only enables or constrains, but indeed <emph>shapes</emph> how we view the 'success' of NT Indigenous higher education policy (Street et al., [<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref91">69</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib68" id="ref92">68</reflink>]). Historic failure to engage with power relations at the interface in the policy process has constrained progress towards success in its various forms for Indigenous higher education students. We have highlighted that certain conditions and strategies need to be in place to create a critical understanding of what 'success' means in the NT Indigenous higher education context to contribute to the redress of power (McGloin, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref93">42</reflink>]). Critical opportunities to reach understanding about who currently benefits from current policy arrangements, and how to reduce ongoing inequities, lie within the policy analysis process. We cannot expect determinations of 'what works' in higher education policy to improve the lives of Indigenous people without shifting the focus from the role of individuals to the role of the system in enabling such improvements (Donnor &amp; Ladson-Billings,; Guenther et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref94">28</reflink>]). This necessitates honest conversations about how we can all contribute to such a change in approach.</p> <p>There are many challenges in implementing the enabling conditions and strategies for productive policy analysis that we have outlined above. Yet, these can also be viewed as strengths and opportunities. We encourage those embarking on policy analysis in Indigenous higher education settings to take up the challenge of learning ways of conducting policy analysis that engage with the tensions at the cultural interface. Such new forms of analysis should avoid reproducing power structures and instead contribute to global understandings of power and knowledge through an epistemologically inclusive approach (Singh &amp; Major, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref95">64</reflink>]). This will serve to increase awareness of the effects of power in the policy process. Indeed, this is also relevant to the national context.</p> <p>Considering the practicalities of enabling what is outlined above, the disbandment of Indigenous education policy governance mechanisms in the NT over the past few decades is a concern (Street et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref96">67</reflink>]). An absence of Indigenous policy governance restricts (or completely negates) all of the factors outlined above that are essential for effective policy analysis at the interface. It means a lack of a platform to critically engage with the tensions that arise and an absence of a platform for the lived experience of race and power relations of Indigenous people to inform policy analyses. This applies beyond the Indigenous higher education context, as the violences of colonization have reproduced experiences of trauma and exclusion in ways that apply to diverse Indigenous circumstances (McKinley &amp; Smith, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref97">43</reflink>]; Vass &amp; Hogarth, [<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref98">71</reflink>]). We call upon the Indigenous policy and research community to continue advocating for re-establishment of Indigenous policy governance mechanisms in the NT and nationally (Street et al., [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref99">67</reflink>]). Further, we fully support the advancement of critical Indigenous methodologies to continue to develop, enabling more robust critique of the power and race relations that are embedded within current policy and research processes.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-23">Conclusion</hd> <p>This paper aimed to understand the key features of an effective policy analysis process at the cultural interface. We have highlighted some of the tensions that arose in the face of a non-Indigenous lead researcher working with a predominantly Indigenous PRG in a policy analysis research project, explored the power mechanisms that were at play and outlined enabling conditions and strategies that were essential. We ultimately proposed that when working in such a space, epistemological and ontological differences should be reflected upon and valued (Jones &amp; Jenkins, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref100">33</reflink>]). Indeed, it is the process of consciously engaging with these tensions, creating enabling conditions and putting strategies that respond to such tensions in place that results in more fruitful conversations about solutions to complex policy challenges. In the context of our research, we have elucidated the benefits that can be gained through doing so in Indigenous higher education policy processes, and in the broader Indigenous policy context. Increased awareness of the politics of knowledge construction will assist with reframing policy issues so that they assist in redressing the historically discriminatory and socially unjust practices of government. We hope that this paper will be useful to those engage in policy analysis discussions at the cultural interface so that they may contribute to counteracting ongoing cycles of power and privilege. Finally, we hope that our analysis provides further impetus for proponents of strengthened Indigenous governance mechanisms in the NT and national Indigenous higher education setting.</p> <hd id="AN0164871750-24">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0164871750-25"> <title> Note </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> 1. In this paper the term 'Indigenous' refers to Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and/or First Nations people. These terms are used interchangeably.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0164871750-26"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibtext> ABS Census of Population and Housing. (2018). Characteristics of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. ABS Retrieved December 14, from https://<ulink href="http://www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-peoples/census-population-and-housing-characteristics-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-australians/latest-release">www.abs.gov.au/statistics/people/aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-peoples/census-population-and-housing-characteristics-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-australians/latest-release</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref4" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> ATSIHEAC. (2015). ATSIHEAC recommendations: Accelerating the page of change in Indigenous higher education. Final advice from ATSIHEAC to the Australian Government. Department of Education and Training.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref6" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Australian National Audit Office. (2017). Administration of Youth Allowance (student) and ABSTUDY – ANAO Report 51, 2016-2017. Australian Government.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref69" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Ball, S. (1994). Education reform - A Critical and Post-structural Approach. Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref3" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Behrendt, L., Larkin, S., Griew, R., &amp; Kelly, P. (2012). Review of higher education access and outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander People: Final Report. Department of Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education. https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/review_final_report_2012.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref55" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Benveniste, T., &amp; King, L. (2018). Researching together: Reflections on ethical research in remote Aboriginal communities. Learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts [Special Issue: Ethical Relationships, Ethical Research in Aboriginal Contexts: Perspectives from Central Australia],, 3(1), 37 – 50. doi: 10.18793/LCJ2018.23.05.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref70" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Bessarab, D., &amp; Ng'andu, B. (2010). Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous research. International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, 3 (1), 37 – 50. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.v3i1.57</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref20" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Biddle, N., Gray, M., &amp; Schwab, J. (2017). Measuring and analysing success for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians. CEAPR Working Paper No. 122/2017. Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research. <ulink href="http://caepr.cass.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/Working%5fPaper%5f122%5f2017.pdf">http://caepr.cass.anu.edu.au/sites/default/files/docs/Working%5fPaper%5f122%5f2017.pdf</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref47" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Bodkin-Andrews, G., &amp; Carlson, B. (2016). The legacy of racism and Indigenous Australian identity within education. Race Ethnicity and Education, 19 (4), 784 – 807. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2014.969224</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bradbury, A. (2019). A critical race theory framework for education policy analysis: The case of bilingual learners and assessment policy in England. Race Ethnicity and Education, 23(2),1 – 20. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2019.1599338</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bunda, T., Zipin, L., &amp; Brennan, M. (2012). Negotiating university 'equity' from Indigenous standpoints: A shaky bridge. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16 (9), 941 – 957. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2010.523907</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Caretta, M. (2015). Situated knowledge in cross-cultural, cross-language research: A collaborative reflexive analysis of researcher, assistant and participant subjectivities. Qualitative Research, 15 (4), 489 – 505. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794114543404</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carey, M., &amp; Prince, M. (2015). Designing an Australian Indigenous Studies curriculum for the twenty-first century: Nakata's 'cultural interface', standpoints and working beyond binaries. Higher Education Research &amp; Development, 34 (2), 270 – 283. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.956691</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cass, A., Lowell, A., Christie, M., Snelling, P. L., Flack, M., Marrnganyin, B., &amp; Brown, I. (2002). Sharing the true stories: Improving communication between Aboriginal patients and healthcare workers. Medical Journal of Australia, 176 (10), 466 – 470. https://doi.org/10.5694/j.1326-5377.2002.tb04517.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Charles Darwin University. (2017). Authorship of research output procedures.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43 (6), 1241 – 1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw, K. (2017). On intersectionality: Essential writings. The New Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dean, M. (2010). Governmentality: Power and rule in modern society (2nd ed.). SAGE.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Delgado, R., &amp; Stefancic, J. (2017). Critical race theory: An Introduction (3rd Edn.). New York University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department of Education Skills and Employment. (2019). Section 11 Equity Groups. Australian Government. Retrieved July 28 from https://<ulink href="http://www.dese.gov.au/higher-education-statistics/resources/2019-section-11-equity-groups">www.dese.gov.au/higher-education-statistics/resources/2019-section-11-equity-groups</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet. (2018). Indigenous advancement strategy evaluation framework. Australian Government.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Donnor, J.K. &amp; Ladson-Billings, G. (2017). In N. Denzin, &amp; Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp.195-213). Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foley, G. (2003). Indigenous epistemology and Indigenous standpoint theory. Social Alternatives, 22 (1), 44 – 52. doi: 10.3316/ielapa.200305132.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foucault, M. (1982). The Subject and Power. In H. Dreyfus &amp; P. Rabinow (Eds.), Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (pp. 208 – 226). Harvester.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Foucault, M. (2007). Security, territory. Palgrave.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gillborn, D. (2005). Education policy as an act of white supremacy: Whiteness, critical race theory and education reform. Journal of Education Policy, 20 (4), 485 – 505. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500132346</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gordon, C. (1991). Government rationality: An introduction. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, &amp; P. Miller (Eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality. University of Chicago Press 1 – 52.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guenther, J., Disbray, S., &amp; Osborne, S. (2016). Red dirt education: A compilation of learnings from the Remote Education Systems project. Ninti One Limited. https://nintione.com.au/resource/RedDirtEducation_CompilationLearningsRES_EBook.pdf</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guenther, J., McRae-Williams, E., Osborne, S., &amp; Williams, E. (2018). Decolonising colonial education researchers in 'near remote' parts of Australia. In G. Vass, J. Maxwell, S. Rudolph, &amp; K. Gulson (Eds.), The relationality of race in education research (pp. 108 – 119). Taylor &amp; Francis.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hudson, S. (2016). Mapping the Indigenous program and funding maze - Research Report 18. Centre for Independent Studies.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hunt, J., Smith, D., Garling, S., &amp; Sanders, W. (2008). Contested governance: Culture, power and institutions in Indigenous Australia. CAEPR Research Monograph No. 29. The Australian National University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> John, P. (1998). Analyzing public policy. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jones, A., &amp; Jenkins, K. (2008). Rethinking collaboration: Working the Indigene-Colonizer hyphen. In N. Denzin, Y. Lincoln, &amp; L. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and Indigenous methodologies. SAGE Publications 471 – 486.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kovach, M. (2010). Indigenous research methods and interpretation. In M. Kovach (Ed.), Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations and contexts (pp. 121 – 140). University of Toronto Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kukutai, T., &amp; Taylor, J. (2016). Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward an agenda. ANU Press and the Centre for Aboriginal Economic Policy Research.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ladson-Billings, G. (2013). Critical Race Theory - What it is Not! In M. Lynn &amp; A. Dixson (Eds.), Handbook of critical race theory in education. Routledge 34 – 47.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Land, C. (2015). Decolonizing solidarity: Dilemmas and directions for supporters of indigenous struggles. Zed Books Ltd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lea, T. (2008). Bureaucrats and bleeding hearts: Indigenous health in Northern Australia. unsw Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leibowitz, B., Bozalek, V., Rohleder, P., Carolissen, R., &amp; Swartz, L. (2010). 'Ah, but the whiteys love to talk about themselves': Discomfort as a pedagogy for change. Race Ethnicity and Education, 13 (1), 83 – 100. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613320903364523</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Maldonado-Torres, N. (2011). Thinking through the decolonial turn: Post-continental interventions in theory, philosophy, and critique—An introduction. Transmodernity: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World, 1 (2), 1 – 15. https://doi.org/10.5070/T412011805</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McConaghy, C. (2000). Rethinking Indigenous education: Culturalism, colonialism and the politics of knowing. Post Pressed.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McGloin, C. (2009). Considering the work of Martin Nakata's "Cultural Interface": A reflection of theory and practice by a non-Indigenous academic. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 38 (1), 36 – 41. https://doi.org/10.1375/S1326011100000570</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> McKinley, E., &amp; Smith, L. T. (2019). Towards self-determination in Indigenous education research: An introduction. In E. McKinley &amp; L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of Indigenous education. Springer 1 – 15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Minnieson, D., Franks, N., &amp; Heffernan, M. (2007). Indigenous research: Three researchers reflect on their experiences at the interface. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 36 (S1), 23 – 31. https://doi.org/10.1017/S132601110000466X</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Møller, J. (2017). Leading education beyond what works. European Educational Research Journal, 16 (4), 375 – 385. https://doi.org/10.1177/1474904117705487</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moreton-Robinson, A. (2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous Women's Standpoint Theory. Australian Feminist Studies, 28 (78), 331 – 347 doi: 10.1080/08164649.2013.876664.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nakata, M. (2006). Australian Indigenous studies: A question of discipline. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 17 (3), 265 – 275. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1835-9310.2006.tb00063.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nakata, M. (2007a). The cultural interface. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 36 (S1), 7 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1326011100004646</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nakata, M. (2007b). An Indigenous Standpoint Theory. In M. Nakata (Ed.), Disciplining the savages, savaging the disciplines (pp. 346 – 353). Aboriginal Studies Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nakata, M., Nakata, V., Keech, S., &amp; Rueben, B. (2012). Decolonial goals and pedagogies for Indigenous studies. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education &amp; Society, 1 (1), 120 – 140.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicholls, R. (2009). Research and Indigenous participation: Critical reflexive methods. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 12 (2), 117 – 126. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645570902727698</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Olsen, T. (2017). Privilege, decentring and the challenge of being (Non-) Indigenous in the Study of Indigenous Issues. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 1-10, 206 – 215. https://doi.org/10.1017/jie.2017.1016</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Olssen, M., Codd, J., &amp; O'Neill, A. (2004). Critical policy analysis: A Foucauldian Approach. In M. Olssen, J. Codd, &amp; A. O'Neill (Eds.), Education policy: Globalization, citizenship and democracy. Sage.39 – 58.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ozga, J. (2000). Policy research in educational settings: Contested terrain. Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ozga, J. (2011). Researching the powerful: Seeking knowledge about policy. European Educational Research Journal, 10 (2), 218 – 224. https://doi.org/10.2304/eerj.2011.10.2.218</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pease, B. (2010). Undoing privilege: Unearner advantage in a divided world. Zed Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Peters, M. (2005). Education, poststructuralism and the politics of difference. Policy Futures in Education, 3 (4), 436 – 445. https://doi.org/10.2304/pfie.2005.3.4.436</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pohlhaus, G. (2002). Knowing communities: An investigation of Harding's standpoint epistemology. Social Epistemology, 16 (3), 283 – 293. https://doi.org/10.1080/0269172022000025633</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Productivity Commission. (2013). Better Indigenous policies: The role of evaluation. Roundtable proceedings, 22-23 October 2012. Productivity Commission.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Productivity Commission. (2020). Indigenous Evaluation Strategy. Australian Government.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reyes, N. (2014). The multiplicity and intersectionality of indigenous identities. In D. Mitchell, C. Simmons, &amp; L. Greyerbiehl (Eds.), Intersectionality in higher education: theory, research and practice. Peter Lang 45 – 54.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rigney, L. (1999). Internationalization of an Indigenous anticolonial cultural critique of research methodologies: A guide to indigenist research methodology and its principles. Journal for Native American Studies, Wicazo Sa Review, 14 (2), 109 – 121. https://doi.org/10.2307/1409555</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rudolph, S. (2016). The logic of history in 'gap' discourse and related research. Australian Education Research, 43 (4), 437 – 451. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-016-0208-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Singh, M., &amp; Major, J. (2017). Conducting Indigenous research in Western knowledge spaces: Aligning theory and methodology. Australian Educational Researcher, 44 (1), 5 – 19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13384-017-0233-z</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, L. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd edn). Zed Books.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith, J., Pollard, K., Robertson, K., &amp; Shalley, F. (2018). Strengthening evaluation in Indigenous higher education contexts in Australia: 2017 equity fellowship report. National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Street, C., Guenther, J., Smith, J., Robertson, K., Motlap, S., Ludwig, W., Gillan, K., Woodroffe, T., &amp; Ober, R. (2017). The evolution of Indigenous higher education in the Northern Territory, Australia: A chronological review of policy. International Studies in Widening Participation, 4 (2), 32 – 51 https://novaojs.newcastle.edu.au/ceehe/index.php/iswp/article/view/80/99.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Street, C., Smith, J., Robertson, K., Guenther, J., Motlap, S., Ludwig, W., Woodroffe, T., Gillan, K., Ober, R., Larkin, S., Shannon, V., &amp; Hill, G. (2020). Exploring definitions of success in Northern Territory Indigenous higher education policy. Journal of Educational Administration and History, 52 (4), 1 – 21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220620.2020.1719391</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Street, C., Guenther, J., Smith, J., Robertson, K., Ludwig, W., Motlap, S., Woodroffe, T., Ober, R., Gillan, K., Larkin, S., Shannon, V., &amp; Maypilama, E. (2022). 'Success' in Indigenous higher education policy in the Northern Territory, Australia: Reclaiming purpose for power. Race, Ethnicity and Education. doi: 10.1080/13613324.2022.2047636.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Universities Australia. (2017). Indigenous Strategy 2017-2020.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vass, G., &amp; Hogarth, M. (2022). Can we keep up with the aspirations of Indigenous education? Critical Studies in Education, 63 (1), 1 – 14. https://doi.org/10.1080/17508487.2022.2031617</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walter, M. (2010). The politics of the data: How the Australian statistical indigene in constructed. International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, 3 (2), 45 – 56. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.v3i2.51</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walter, M. (2016). Data politics and Indigenous representation in Australian statistics. In T. Kukutai &amp; J. Taylor (Eds.), Indigenous data sovereignty: Toward and agenda (pp. 79 – 97). ANU Press. https://doi.org/10.22459/CAEPR38.11.2016.05</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Walter, M., Kukutai, T., Russo Carroll, S., &amp; Rodriguez-Lonebear, D. (2021). Indigenous data sovereignty and policy. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilson, B. (2014). A share in the future: Review of Indigenous Education in the Northern Territory. NT Department of Education. https://education.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/229016/A-Share-in-the-Future-The-Review-of-Indigenous-Education-in-the-Northern-Territory.pdf</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By C. Street; K. Robertson; J. Smith; J. Guenther; S. Larkin; S. Motlap; W. Ludwig; T. Woodroffe; K. Gillan; R. Ober; V. Shannon and E. Maypilama</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>C. Street is a PhD candidate at College of Indigenous Futures, Education &amp; the Arts at Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>K. Robertson is Director, First Nations Leadership at Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor – First Nations Leadership, Charles Darwin University, and PhD candidate at College of Indigenous Futures, Education and the Arts at Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>J. Smith is Deputy Dean, Rural and Remote Health and Professor of Health and Social Equity, Flinders University, Honorary Research Fellow, Wellbeing and Preventable Chronic Diseases Division, Menzies School of Health Research and Adjunct Professorial Fellow at National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education.</p> <p>J. Guenther is Research Leader at Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education.</p> <p>S. Larkin is Pro Vice-Chancellor Indigenous Engagement at University of Adelaide and Distinguished Fellow at Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor – Indigenous Leadership, Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>S. Motlap is Community Cultural Advisor at Tablelands Regional Council, Atherton, Australia.</p> <p>W. Ludwig is Honorary Doctorate, World Indigenous Nations University.</p> <p>T. Woodroffe is Lecturer – Indigenous Knowledges, College of Indigenous Futures, Education and the Arts at Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>K. Gillan is Adjunct Professor at College of Indigenous Futures, Education &amp; the Arts at Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>R. Ober is Research Fellow at Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary Education.</p> <p>V. Shannon is Honorary Research Fellow at Office of the Deputy Vice Chancellor – Indigenous Leadership at Charles Darwin University.</p> <p>E. Maypilama is Principal Research Fellow at College of Indigenous Futures, Education &amp; the Arts at Charles Darwin University.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref36"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref51"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref56"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref63"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib68" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref66"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref74"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref76"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref85"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref87"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref88"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref98"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1393433 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Negotiating Indigenous Higher Education Policy Analysis at the Cultural Interface in the Northern Territory, Australia – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Street%2C+C%2E%22">Street, C.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4408-7796">0000-0003-4408-7796</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Robertson%2C+K%2E%22">Robertson, K.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Smith%2C+J%2E%22">Smith, J.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Guenther%2C+J%2E%22">Guenther, J.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0080-1698">0000-0002-0080-1698</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Larkin%2C+S%2E%22">Larkin, S.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Motlap%2C+S%2E%22">Motlap, S.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ludwig%2C+W%2E%22">Ludwig, W.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Woodroffe%2C+T%2E%22">Woodroffe, T.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Gillan%2C+K%2E%22">Gillan, K.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Ober%2C+R%2E%22">Ober, R.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Shannon%2C+V%2E%22">Shannon, V.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Maypilama%2C+E%2E%22">Maypilama, E.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Critical+Studies+in+Education%22"><i>Critical Studies in Education</i></searchLink>. 2023 64(3):250-266. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 17 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2023 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Evaluative – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Geographic+Regions%22">Geographic Regions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Policy%22">Educational Policy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Policy+Analysis%22">Policy Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Influences%22">Cultural Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indigenous+Populations%22">Indigenous Populations</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Indigenous+Knowledge%22">Indigenous Knowledge</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cultural+Differences%22">Cultural Differences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Power+Structure%22">Power Structure</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personal+Narratives%22">Personal Narratives</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Researchers%22">Researchers</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Faculty%22">College Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interpersonal+Relationship%22">Interpersonal Relationship</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Race%22">Race</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Accountability%22">Accountability</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Safety%22">Safety</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Governance%22">Governance</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Geographic Terms Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1080/17508487.2022.2083647 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1750-8487<br />1750-8495 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Policy analysis can be useful for learning about 'what works' in policy. Contemporary policy studies literature highlight that such learning is influenced by power relations in government that shape our ways of knowing the world. This paper offers a critically reflexive narrative account of power relations present during Indigenous higher education policy analysis research conducted in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia to shed light on how to effectively negotiate policy analysis. We reflect on tensions that arose by applying Nakata's concept of the 'cultural interface', which accounts for the complexity of meaning making across diverse knowledge spaces. Narratives from an Indigenous Project Reference Group member are included to provide a perspective on these tensions from an Indigenous standpoint. The paper concludes by describing enabling conditions and strategies that were necessary for effective policy analysis, and considers implications for Indigenous higher education policy analysis in the NT. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2023 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1393433 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1393433 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1080/17508487.2022.2083647 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 17 StartPage: 250 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries Type: general – SubjectFull: Geographic Regions Type: general – SubjectFull: Educational Policy Type: general – SubjectFull: Policy Analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Cultural Influences Type: general – SubjectFull: Indigenous Populations Type: general – SubjectFull: Indigenous Knowledge Type: general – SubjectFull: Cultural Differences Type: general – SubjectFull: Power Structure Type: general – SubjectFull: Personal Narratives Type: general – SubjectFull: Researchers Type: general – SubjectFull: College Faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: Interpersonal Relationship Type: general – SubjectFull: Race Type: general – SubjectFull: Accountability Type: general – SubjectFull: Safety Type: general – SubjectFull: Governance Type: general – SubjectFull: Australia Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Negotiating Indigenous Higher Education Policy Analysis at the Cultural Interface in the Northern Territory, Australia Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Street, C. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Robertson, K. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Smith, J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Guenther, J. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Larkin, S. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Motlap, S. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ludwig, W. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Woodroffe, T. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Gillan, K. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Ober, R. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Shannon, V. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Maypilama, E. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 01 Type: published Y: 2023 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1750-8487 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 1750-8495 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 64 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: Critical Studies in Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
