supporting tiriti-based curriculum delivery in mainstream early ...

The implementation of Te Whāriki encountered difficulties, because a
philosophy by its very nature is not prescriptive. The “holistic and bicultural
approach to curriculum...was a challenge to staff more familiar with traditional
focus on play areas and activities” (May, 2001, p. 248). The Education Review
Office (ERO) (1998) were concerned that, in attempting to cater for diversity in
early childhood, the curriculum failed “to give clear direction or guidance about
what early childhood providers need to do to ensure that they are contributing
positively to young children‟s educational development” (ERO, 1998, p. 3). Duhn
(2006, p. 196) stated the position of the document clearly when she said that “as a
curriculum framework, Te Whāriki functions as a descriptive rather than a
prescriptive model”.
According to Nuttall (2003a), even when teachers have theoretical
knowledge “they may not know how to translate the ideas into everyday practice”
(p. 178). Te Whāriki requires teachers to take account of children‟s own context
and, as co-constructors of the curriculum, to “have a researching and reflective
attitude towards their own practice” (Broström, 2003, p. 219) and towards Te
Whāriki itself. This means that teachers not only have to take the circumstances of
children into account but they also have to be reflective about their own teaching.
Teachers need to bring to their practice, therefore, an understanding of
socio-cultural perspectives, the theory underpinning Te Whāriki, and an ability to
be able to weave a programme to suit the strengths, interests and abilities of each
child. In addition, teachers require knowledge and understanding of te reo Māori
me ōna tikanga at a sufficient level to interact with whānau Māori and iwi,
particularly with respect to Tiriti-based aspects of Te Whāriki.
Ritchie asserts that it is important to recognise that each partnership with
Māori will be unique “and particular to that local context and not transferable
across settings” (Ritchie, 2002b, p. 272). However, despite Ritchie‟s claim, there
is always some potential for transferability to occur. The important point is that the
integrity of individual contexts must be preserved although it always remains
desirable to learn from each context as it arises. That way a teacher can be better
informed for future settings. Thus, as teachers move to other centres they become
more able to take their already developed Tiriti-based knowledge into that next
67