The development of Māori (Indigenous New Zealanders) research capacity over the past 20 years now begs the question of how Māori and Tauiwi (non-Māori) researchers might authentically partner and undertake transdisciplinary research that upholds the integrity and aspirations of both parties. In this article, the notion of interstitial space is suggested as a middle ground whereby researchers can acknowledge their own worldviews and come together for fruitful transdisciplinary engagements. Seven community-up research values set an engagement context in which researchers are called upon to respect one another, share and listen, be cautious and humble, acknowledge ontological and epistemological differences and build commitment to the development of mutual understandings. A scale is proposed to encourage researcher self-reflection on their readiness to join a multicultural, transdisciplinary research group. The readiness of group members to appropriately engage has the potential to spark successful transdisciplinary research in order to provide strategic solutions to complex, real-life problems.

In New Zealand, Māori (indigenous New Zealanders) and Pacific students tend not to attain the same levels of educational success as Pākehā (New Zealanders of European descent). Addressing this problem is a particular challenge in the sciences. The kaupapa (values-base) of Te Rōpū Ā whina (Ā whina) is to produce Māori and Pacific professionals to contribute to Māori and Pacific development and leadership through the creation of an inclusive off-and on-campus whānau (extended family) environment where high expectations, aspirations and achievement, collective success, and reciprocity are normalised. This paper reviews theories and practices of recruitment and retention relevant to Māori and Pacific students at tertiary level, presents the rationale for Ā whina in the Faculties of Science and Architecture and Design at Victoria University of Wellington, and assesses the impact of the whānau. Based on analyses of quantitative measures of student achievement, and biennial surveys of student responses from the first 6 years of Ā whina, it is suggested that the results are consistent with improving Māori and Pacific graduate and postgraduate achievement and retention. Potential implications for efforts to reduce disparities in tertiary education in New Zealand and elsewhere are summarised.

This paper documents the beginning of a conversation about what it means to be Maori within a larger, mainstream research project. This larger project was conceived by a team of researchers that included a Maori principal investigator, and funding was gained from a funding agency that has established criteria for Maori responsiveness. The Maori component of the project was, however, not initially conceived of as separate from the non-Maori component. Discussions about this were initiated approximately one year into the project in response to Maori team members' desires to undertake Kaupapa Maori research. This effectively means that the Maori team collects and analyses the Maori research data prior to re-engaging with the full research team. While there is a level of uncertainty about how this process will play itself out, there is a commitment to continue a constructive conversation within the team and to journey together in good faith and trust.

No abstract

This paper uses the concept of 'ethicality' to analyse focus group conversations in New Zealand about biobanking and genetic testing. 'Ethicality' has been used by Arohia Durie, a Māori educationist, to highlight how ethical talk and practice is historically and socially positioned, situated within specific life-worlds, embedded within always partial communities, and articulated within individual life narratives. This situated ethicality is identified in the talk of Māori and non-Māori research participants. The authors (a moral philosopher, two sociologists and a kaupapa Māori social researcher) argue that serious consideration of ethicality presents significant challenges to the abstracted character of much expert ethical analysis, while also illustrating connections between 'ethics talk' and expert discourses.