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

which had also been examined from a Māori perspective by Heta-Lensen in 2005.
They were interested in discovering how whānau Māori were being encouraged to
participate in mainstream early childhood services and what strategies were used to
deliver Tiriti-based programmes (Ritchie & Rau, 2006a). Early childhood
professionals were invited to respond to website discussions and emails.
Additionally, over 30 individual and group interviews were conducted. Individual
and collective co-theorising hui were also employed (Ritchie & Rau, 2006b). This
collaborative research enabled Ritchie and Rau to identify the importance of
working in partnership with Māori families and that:
Educators needed to be fluent in te reo; able to model waiata and
pakiwaitara; demonstrate knowledge of local iwi tikanga and kawa; and
involve the centre in wider iwi community activities. They needed
support to enhance their competence in these areas. (p. 3)
For their second study together Ritchie and Rau (2008) built on
relationships developed with co-researchers during their previous research. After
an initial hui with these co-researchers from participating centres, potential
participant children and their families were identified and invited to share their
Tiriti-based experiences through a series of narrative interviews.
As can be seen from the above descriptions of early childhood Tiriti-based
research, interviews featured strongly as a preferred research procedure. Ritchie
and Rau noted that an effective approach to implementing Tiriti-based practice
involved having a team approach where a desirable requisite was that educators
“held a shared philosophy and commitment” (Ritchie & Rau, 2006b, p. 20).
However, I would assert this approach was not clearly demonstrated in their most
recent research contribution (2008). It seems that for at least two of the teaching
teams, members had to be persuaded to participate by the co-researcher. However,
by the end of that study, at least one of those teams indicated that they had
developed a shared commitment and philosophy. Whilst some co-researchers were
obviously working within teams, it did not appear that teams themselves were
specifically recruited to participate in the research, as has been the case in this
study.
It is, nevertheless gratifying to note that since my research started in 2004
the importance of research with teams has been more clearly recognised for Tiriti-
73