Ethical Challenges: The Possibility of Authentic Teaching Encounters with Indigenous Cross-Curriculum Content Assignment Sample

Introduction: Challenges of Integrating Indigenous Knowledge in National Education Systems

The study will be focused on the critical discussion of the current and possible curriculum developments majoring on the problems of ethical inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and the possible consequences of the national curriculum. This paper will discuss how these matters affect education, assortment, and polyarchy with the education construction.

Critical reflection

Comparing the two articles I can only state that the ideas presented are in many ways close to my set of values regarding education and curriculum in the context of diversity and globalization.

The first article on the ethical provocations of teaching Indigenous cross-curriculum content is engaging because it raises the question on a larger scale of addressing the minorities within education. I became aware in my childhood that some historical and cultural developments were twisted or omitted neglecting the Indigenous people’s versatile backgrounds. This exclusion was not only a loss of learning about those societies but also a continuation of a narrative that was implicitly expected to be sufficient. The points made by the author regarding the absence of legitimate knowledge about Indigenous peoples in curricula caused me to think about how essential it is to ensure education is the enabler of participation rather than the re-instating of prejudices. It was quite appealing to believe that, through integrating Indigenous knowledge, discrimination could be marginalized (Bullen & Roberts, 2021). I understood that education is one of the determinative factors of the outlook on a given society and that the absence of proper and appropriate efforts to integrate a true understanding of Indigenous peoples’ identity perpetuates their oppression. It was encouraging to learn that the teachers were interested in creating knowledge which pertains to Aboriginal and /or Torres Strait Islanders in a progressive manner which seeks to capture the correct representation of these people (Doyle & Hill, 2020). This accords with my pedagogy that education should not only be an exercise in transmitting content knowledge but also enriching one’s sensibility. The article made me reflect on the role of teachers as enablers and not merely informers but as change makers who in their own way can help change the status quo and make the world a better place. It was encouraging to learn that the teachers were interested in creating knowledge that pertains to Aboriginal and /or Torres Strait Islanders in a progressive manner which seeks to capture the correct representation of these people. This accords with my pedagogy that education should not only be an exercise in transmitting content knowledge but also enriching one’s sensibility. The article made me reflect on the role of teachers as enablers and not merely informers but as change makers who in their way can help change the status quo and make the world a better place (Harrison & Sellwood, 2019).

The second article that outlined some of the features of the national curriculum seemed to mirror my observations in terms of inequities in education systems. The thought of having a fixed curriculum that implements and maintains parity across the nation made me ponder on equality in education. I know how; the education curriculum may pose disparity in educational facilities in that, students in different regions or schools are rewarded different levels of education depending on the provisions and interests of the particular school. It is something very attractive to think that there is a national curriculum one could always point to and say to teachers this is what you should constantly teach and it is guaranteed that all the children in the country will be given the same education (Keddie, 2021). This has given me cause to reflect on the degree of independence that schools should have and the appropriate extent of control over national curriculums as opposed to local variations. On the one hand, I appreciate the freedom of the teachers to decide on the approaches to delivering their knowledge to their students, on the other hand, it is also important that each student gets the same quality of education. This article forced me to consider the following: Does the national curriculum represent a course that will suppress inequalities and give all students a chance to succeed at school with no reference to the place where they were born? However, the concept of the national curriculum also had some issues for me in my mind thought that it was impossible to have a universal method for educating People from different regions or with different cultural backgrounds to have the same results. The focus on consistency could cause indirectly, the underestimation of difficulties and assets of some specific groups such as Indigenous and marginalized populations. This is a conflict, which I experienced while being concerned with the subject of education; this article made me rethink, or rather, consider more thoroughly some aspects of this conflict (Phillips, 2022).

Engagement with literature

In consulting the two articles the critical analysis of curriculum, policies, and practices in the larger framework of educational context and scope of controversy as well as discussions gets revealed continuously. The first article that deals with teaching Indigenous cross-curriculum content unveils some of the ethical issues and shortcomings of current practices in addressing inclusion and representation in education. In the second article that addresses the idea of a national curriculum, the conflict between centralization and decentralization in the system of education is unleashed. As a whole, these articles signpost the constant consolidation/discursive specificity of curriculum making and its application for teaching and learning. The first article focuses on the calling for real teaching practices that involve indigenous materials and highlights the ethical imperative to teach indigenous knowledge and content. This is in line with the literature on the decolonisation of education where the barbarian calls for the dignification and inclusion of Indigenous knowledge systems as a way of combating the colonial curriculum (Battiste, 2013). The article shows that the modern approaches to education make it possible to have a rather limited and distorted view of Indigenous cultures, so the current practices are insufficient to accurately represent Indigenous communities. This goes in harmony with the complaint made by Ladson-Billings (1995) that the curriculum is in a way peddling ethnicity instead of providing for the interoperability of cultures. The discussion in the article about the structural incoherence in the process of integrating Indigenous knowledge into the curriculum describes some problems stated in the literature concerning the practice of culturally sensitive pedagogy. Many teachers face a dilemma between teaching what is required in the educational system and giving children education in line with their cultural background (Gay, 2010). This prospect is exacerbated by a shortage of resources and staff development concerning tools that could allow the teachers to incorporate Indigenous context in their teaching. Thus, the article’s response that we need the understanding and creation of pedagogies based on the Indigenous people’s epistemology is a positive step in the fight against these gaps, but it also raises questions about where the systems to support such calls are. The second article analysis focuses on the national curriculum of the UK and positions the discussion about the concerns of educational parity and homogenisation. The demand for a common curriculum across the country similarly inscribes the general policy concerns that advance for parity in the delivery of education across all regions for all students (Apple, 2004). However, this approach has also been denounced in the literature for its ability to parochialize the local and indigenous knowledge systems, thus continuing the hegemonizing of education on behalf of a monocultural outlook (Connell, 2009). The article thus, realizes this tension, by pointing to the importance of teachers in modifying the curriculum for the students. While reading these articles, the understanding emerges that the curriculum is not an objective or fixed phenomenon but an area where battles are being fought. These problems provide insight into how the attempts of the social actor to include indigenous content and the adoption of national curriculum and standards reflects the difficulty in mediating the opposition of interest groups’ demands for homogeneity and respect to cultures and for decentralization.
By integrating the two articles, it has enabled me to develop a critical perspective of curriculum as an area of struggle of different values and power. This has changed my perception of curriculum with regard to the direct medium for passing on instructional information. Previously, I considered multiculturalism as a process that has its endpoint in a certain end state that can be achieved through reaching a consensus and applying the appropriate predetermined approach whereas now, I regard it as a never-ending process, which implies a constant critical analysis of the situation and students’ needs and constant adaptation to those conditions. In terms of my own work in education, this understanding has profound consequences. Due to this, it becomes very essential for me to reflect on the textbook and other teaching aid I use in class and the cultural implication that it may have. It also makes me want to go out of my way to include diverse thinkers particularly the minority in my teaching.

Conclusion

Thus, the study captures the essence of curriculum development as a politicized and contextual process that is as rich and intricate as the societies and cultures it serves. Some of the things that one can learn from this source include the need to question, challenge, and analyse ‘knowledge’ as depicted in the curriculum document as well as fight for an education system that is fair to all students with special focus given to marginalized groups.