From Mainstream to Manaaki: Indigenising Our Approach to Immigration

Re-placing “Place” in Internationalised Higher Education: Reflections from Aotearoa New Zealand

“…Māori scholars are grossly under-represented in institutional decision-making positions, although relied upon for cultural leadership at public events (Kidman & Chu, 2017;McAllister et al, 2019). Kukutai and Rata (2017) note that in the area of immigration, Māori perspectives have been disregarded in policy development, although Māori vocabulary and images are used to "window dress" policy material. Similarly, the current International Education Strategy (New Zealand Government, 2018) features a title and subheadings in Māori and English, and an image of a carved wharenui or meeting house on its cover.…”

“…26-27). Kukutai and Rata (2017) argue that (immigration) policy grounded in real engagement with indigenous peoples and perspectives would raise important questions regarding who benefits from, and who is disadvantaged by, specific policy positions. We contend that their argument is relevant to the internationalisation of HE.…”

“…To Kukutai and Rata, immigration policy that takes seriously the Treaty of Waitangi (arguably, Aotearoa New Zealand's first immigration policy document) would recognise mana whenua -local Māori collectives -as "genuine authorities" on and "important contributors" to the development of contemporary society (p. 42). Such policy would also recognise manaakitanga as a value that guides interactions with tauiwi, or newcomers from elsewhere (Kukutai & Rata, 2017). In the remainder of this paper, we consider these ideas in relation to the internationalisation of HE.…”

“…Since kaitiakitanga is linked with whakapapa, or ancestral connection to place, attention to kaitiakitanga at a local level requires that policy is grounded in the aspirations of tangata whenua (indigneous people). Māori scholars note a lack of attention to Māori aspirations, knowledge and values in education (Bishop & Glynn, 1999), research (Smith, 1999), and immigration (Kukutai & Rata, 2017). Bishop & Glynn (1999, p. 131) suggest that, in order to contest "structural issues of power and control" in education, we must ask who initiates, benefits from, is represented in, and legitimises policy, and how relations of accountability recognise the unique position of tangata whenua or indigenous people.…”

“…Attention to kaitiakitanga also requires attention to the past and the future; or critical interrogation of educational institutions' role in promoting "discourses on progress" that erode or facilitate "whatever is caring and generous in our existence" (Hau'ofa, 2008, p. 71). In this sense, kaitiakitanga suggests a need to interrogate the asymmetries inherent in contemporary internationalisation arrangements, and to consider the long-term implications of educational arrangements, rather than focusing on short-term revenue generation (Kukutai & Rata, 2017) or brand recognition (Altbach & Knight, 2007). Internationalised education that reflects kaitiakitanga recognises the complex kinship ties (and associated violations) that led to contemporary educational relationships, and considers the outcomes of contemporary relationships on future generations (Madge et al, 2009).…”