Suchergebnisse

Source at https://doi.org/10.7577/fleks.2190. ; The purpose of this article is to discuss the concept of "indigenous education" in Norway and Aotearoa New Zealand. The point of departure is that both states face a common challenge with regard to indigenous education: Valuable resources are used on indigenous schools, but the majority of indigenous students attend mainstream schools. The article claims that the emphasis on indigenous schools has been necessary and important as part of the indigenous political movement. Nevertheless, in order to achieve culturally appropriate education for all indigenous pupils, this article argues that there is a need to indigenise mainstream education.

The release of 2001 Census data provides an opportunity to evaluate the Howard government's performance in Indigenous affairs in broad terms. One major policy shift has been the call for a more 'practical' reconciliation that attempts to address the immediate needs of Indigenous people in areas such as employment, health, housing and education. If practical reconciliation were a reality, then one would expect there to be some evidence of a convergence in the last two censuses in the economic and educational status of Indigenous and other Australians. Furthermore, enhancing Indigenous education is important in ensuring that Indigenous engagement with the mainstream economy is sustainable, especially in view of the skill bias evident in recent economic growth. This paper analyses recent trends in the engagement of Indigenous people with the Australian education system between 1986 and 2001. A cohort analysis of changes in educational participation is presented, along with an analysis of the differences between the level and type of educational qualifications of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians over the last four censuses. The main finding is that while there have been some absolute improvements in Indigenous educational outcomes over the period 1986 to 2001, these gains are less evident when measured relative to non-Indigenous outcomes. The lack of improvement relative to the non-Indigenous population is seen not only in the proportion of the population with post-secondary qualifications, but also in the proportion of Indigenous teenagers staying at school. By any measure the Indigenous population remains severely disadvantaged. Another finding is that for younger age groups the non-Indigenous population has a higher participation rate in postsecondary education than the Indigenous population. On a more positive note, older Indigenous people are actually more likely to be enrolled in a postsecondary course than their non-Indigenous counterparts—probably as a response to the history of disadvantage within the education sector.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) was created to give Indigenous peoples the right to determine their own educational system. In article 14 it is stated that, Indigenous peoples have the right to establish and control their educational systems and institutions, providing education in their own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning. Since the 56 years of independence, Orang Asli has never been neglected or excluded from the governments planning in ensuring their education development. Following Foucault analytical model, this paper discusses how knowledge that constitutes power highlights the way the governing systems work in Indigenous education policy. Furthermore, this paper also deliberates on participation by the Orang Asli and the power held by them to influence the creation of education policy through three main ideas; governmentality, power/knowledge and discourses which are analytical approaches by Foucault. Based on this discussion, we can get a clear picture and better understanding the possibility of improvements in Indigenous people educational opportunities and the possibility of a more all-inclusive education development policy.

Education for remote Indigenous students in Australia's Northern Territory (NT) has long been characterized by policy failure. In recent years, the 'solution' to this vexing policy problem has involved a deliberate, incremental shift towards 'mainstream' educational approaches. This includes an increased focus on testing regimes and structured English literacy and numeracy programs, and has led to increased bureaucratic oversight, broad-based 'benchmarking' of student achievement, and a problematic emphasis on statistical disparities between Indigenous and nonIndigenous student populations. In this paper we analyse the NT Government's latest review into Indigenous education - the A share in the future report - to challenge the normative social and cultural assumptions that permeate Indigenous educational discourses and pedagogic approaches. We argue that current notions about 'the way forward' can lead to the development of poor policy and actually serve to thwart Indigenous educational aspirations.

Education for remote Indigenous students in Australia's Northern Territory (NT) has long been characterized by policy failure. In recent years, the 'solution' to this vexing policy problem has involved a deliberate, incremental shift towards 'mainstream' educational approaches. This includes an increased focus on testing regimes and structured English literacy and numeracy programs, and has led to increased bureaucratic oversight, broad-based 'benchmarking' of student achievement, and a problematic emphasis on statistical disparities between Indigenous and nonIndigenous student populations. In this paper we analyse the NT Government's latest review into Indigenous education - the A share in the future report - to challenge the normative social and cultural assumptions that permeate Indigenous educational discourses and pedagogic approaches. We argue that current notions about 'the way forward' can lead to the development of poor policy and actually serve to thwart Indigenous educational aspirations.

Foreword -- Acknowledgments -- Contents -- Introduction -- The Current State of Education in Latin America -- The Contents of Indigenous Education Policy, Equity, and Intercultural Understanding in Latin America -- Part 1: Policy Changes and Education Quality -- Part 2: Intercultural Education in Practice -- Part 3: Intercultural Dialogue Beyond the Classroom -- Conclusions and Recommendations -- An Agenda for Future Research -- Contributors -- Part I: Policy Changes and Education Quality -- How to Improve Quality Education for Indigenous Children in Latin America -- Sources of Information about Intercultural Bilingual Education -- The Right to Intercultural Bilingual Education -- Intercultural Bilingual Education and Education Policy -- EIB in Numbers: Teachers and Students -- Pre-service Teacher Education for EIB -- In-Service Professional Development for EIB -- Developments in the Teaching and Learning of Indigenous Languages -- Intercultural Bilingual Education Achievements and Unmet Expectations -- Interculturalidad and the Learning of Indigenous Languages -- References -- Indigenous Student Learning Outcomes and Education Policies in Peru and Ecuador -- Education Outcomes for Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Students -- The Education Gap -- Trends in Student Outcomes: 2006 and 2013 -- School and Teacher Characteristics in Peru and Ecuador -- Comparative School Resources for Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Students -- Differences in Teacher Characteristics -- Education Policy Background 1990-2015 -- Education Policy for Indigenous-Language Students in Peru -- Education Policy for Indigenous-Language Students in Ecuador -- Conclusion -- References -- Part II: Intercultural Education in Practice -- Role-Play as a Pedagogical Tool for Intercultural Education -- The Indigenous Peoples in Latin America, Their Urban Migration, and the Triqui in Mexico