Culture, connection and contribution
The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) advocates strongly for children’s belonging, being and becoming. Outcome 2 states “Children are connected with and contribute to their world”. This raises important questions for all involved in the early education of Aboriginal children. Who determines what the pathway is for this belonging and becoming for an Aboriginal child? How can their pathway be best built and who travels with them on this pathway?
The answers to these questions lie in the contested fields of assumed expertise and advocacy for human rights. Teachers, policy and practice influencers urgently need to critically reflect on their professional practice, as this assumed expertise is directly eroding the right to self-determination for Aboriginal families and their children.
The EYLF implies that early years educators need to “teach” children, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children, Aboriginal perspectives and culture.
There are many different ways of knowing and incorporating learning, but far too often it’s business as usual when it comes to early childhood teaching and promoting a greater understanding of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing and being. The unconscious messaging here endorses the protectionist and saviourism approaches that have always been embedded in the education systems for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children.
What the current “white” systems and educators do not appreciate is that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children do not learn in isolation from their social and cultural relationships. An educator’s work is complex, and navigating the many pathways to align policy, curriculum, practice, resources, funding, training, law and Aboriginal lore and pedagogy requires deep thinking, research, and evidence of processes that promote and sustain Aboriginal identities, wellbeing and systemic success.
There is so much to unlearn and relearn. We have all been invaded either subconsciously or wilfully by the racist underpinnings of white privilege and power. It is hard to confront, challenge and accept that Australia has neglected to respect and uphold Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s cultural integrity as a standalone human and legitimate right.
I wonder how this framework has been interpreted in teaching, when policy and practice continue to allow the dominant decision makers to determine and implement systems from a deficit approach. I fear early learning teachers and educators are confused, compliant and potentially complicit in supporting models that position Aboriginal children as “vulnerable” and in need of intervention to succeed in later life.
Who is advantaged when teachers work in this way? Who is disadvantaged? Is this a strength-based approach or an assimilationist approach?
I can hear some saying: “What is the way forward then? What do we do now?”