Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations

Abstract

Responding to the 2017 Universities Australia Indigenous Strategy, which aims for more inclusive educational practice, this study used a mixed methods including Indigenous standpoint and Yarran framework to investigate the inclusion of Indigenous science in Australian University curricula. In 2022, we found a total of 72 Indigenous science units taught across 23 of Australia’s 38 universities. Notably, 31 Indigenous science units were taught in the Faculty of Arts, followed by 20 in the Science faculties. Online questionnaires and interviews were conducted with unit convenors and a First Nations Elder, revealing the underrepresentation of Indigenous knowledges in science education and the need for more Indigenous educators at the university level. These findings demonstrated the need for policy-driven development of specific frameworks and funding to enable meaningful and respectful inclusion of Indigenous knowledges, pedagogical practice, and creation of suitable assessment tasks in University science curricula, underpinned by protocols for engagement of First Nations Communities in the development and delivery of content.

Keywords

decolonisation inclusive education Indigenous Community Engagement Indigenous Science Education Indigenous Standpoint Theory pedagogy

Introduction

Conceptual framework—Indigenist relational responsive standpoint

As the lead author I draw upon my standpoint as a Wiradjuri yinna (woman), and the positionality and relationality of my cultural identity as a researcher in this study. My position is informed by a collective consciousness of social and cultural knowledges, politics, and history (Menzel & Cameron, 2021). I conducted my research using a both-ways approach, which I introduce and describe as the Yarran cultural interface framework, where I have used western scientific survey techniques that are replicable and provide quantitative and qualitative data, in combination with Indigenous yarning methodology for Indigenous interview participants. To interpret the data, I drew on my Wiradjuri positionality and priorities with a focus on identifying ways that Australian University Indigenous science units could be improved to enhance Indigenous content, pedagogies, and assessments. As such, I took a relational responsive standpoint incorporating Indigenous philosophies, epistemology, ontology, and research methodologies in my research practice (Yunkaporta & Shillingsworth, 2020).

Using Indigenous methodologies provides an opportunity to challenge western scientific approaches to research from a focus on objects or subjects to the relationships between people and place (Tuck & McKenzie, 2015). This approach makes room for the inclusion of Indigenous cultural and spiritual ways of knowing to guide and shape research in rigorous ways (Wilson, 2008). I am a daughter, sister, mother, and aunty, and my research is always going to be from my perspective as a First Nations Woman. I consider my research as kin, incorporating the relationality of Country, kinship and story expressed through Indigenous ways of knowing (Bawaka et al., 2016; Martin, 2008; Tuck & McKenzie, 2015; Tynan, 2020; Wilson, 2008). I also draw on Aileen Moreton-Robinson’s (2013) Indigenous Women’s Standpoint theory, which identifies the intersecting oppressions of Indigeneity and womanhood. I acknowledge my non-Aboriginal family and understand how my mixed heritage has allowed me to walk within both worlds, at the cultural interface, as described by Martin Nakata (2002). Nakata (2002) described the cultural interface as “the place where we live, learn and are active agents in our own lives”, reiterating the interconnecting realities at the intersection of Indigenous and western knowledge systems and walking in both worlds (p. 28).

Cultural interface—Yarran (Red River Gum) analogy

I am a freshwater woman whose ancestors lived and thrived along the Milawa, the Murray River system, near Albury, NSW. The Milawa is the largest river system in Australia and is nestled in between the Yarran (Red River Gum, Eucalyptus camaldulensis) forests leading up to the meandering mountains and hills. The Yarran is a riparian tree growing along the riverbank; it has a wide trunk covered in smooth creamy coloured bark that extends to form numerous overhanging branches with long, curvaceous green leaves (Figure 1). During spring and summer, white yarrawulay bloom and produce sweet nectar that attracts many native birds and bees. If you were to walk by the river and sit under one of the old large Yarran, if you look closely, you will see the branches begin to sway and the leaves begin to rustle, dancing majestically in the wind like a choreographed performance. But if you listen deeply, you will hear the songs Yarran sing and the stories they tell.

Figure 1.

Yarran (Red River Gum) cultural interface theory demonstrates the intersection of First Nations Peoples knowledges and western science. Artist: Renee Cawthorne.

The bark from the Yarran was used by my ancestors to make murrin (canoes), gulaman’s (coolamons), gadyil (bowls), and marga (shields). This tree was not only used to make tools, it is also used for medicinal purposes: the leaves are soaked and steamed, and the vapour is inhaled to help relieve the symptoms of coughs and colds. The bark also produces a gum that contains antibacterial properties and is applied to heal bruises, cuts and wounds and to tan animal skins. Yarran also has other cultural significance through its connection to Country and its ecological and environmental importance for the health and vitality of Milawa.

In my research, I use Yarran as an analogy of the cultural interface: as a tree of knowledge where First Nations and western scientific knowledge systems interconnect to form new growth, new knowledge (Figure 1). First Nations knowledges are grounded through Indigenous ways of gulbhana (knowing), ngurruwigarra (seeing), gana (doing), and garra (being) and are the seeds of knowledge production. Knowledge is expressed in art, song, story, dance, law, lore, and our kinship structures which intertwine to form the root system of cultural knowledge. These knowledges are embodied through our social roles and responsibilities to care for Country (Land, Sea, and Sky) and one another and form the trunk of the tree. The trunk then narrows into an overhanging canopy of branches, which represent the way western science separates science into disciplines. The yarrawulay act as an ecological indicator for spring and symbolise where these two knowledge systems interconnect, representing the change, growth, and formation of new knowledge (Figure 1).

Yarran theory is grounded at the cultural interface, the intersection of western and Indigenous knowledge systems, and it is within this space that one can begin to deconstruct and reconstruct knowledges to develop a broader and deeper understanding and new, innovative practices that connect Indigenous and western epistemologies and ontologies (ways of knowing and doing). This is the space we worked through in this research.

Project standpoint

This research was conducted for a 1-year master’s research project by the lead author and two co-authors, who were supervisors and research advisors. The research was rooted in the lead author’s personal journey of coming to know: to know myself as a First Nations mother, daughter and aunty and as a cultural and science educator. As an Indigenous science educator, I am constantly working through the complexities of Indigenous and western knowledge systems and crossing the cultural interface to create a deeper understanding about the world around us for a shared and sustainable future. Underpinning this project is the right to quality education for First Nations Peoples, to create an appreciation of cultural diversity in science, and of First Nations Peoples’ contribution to sustainable development and science practices. More importantly, Indigenous education is vital for the continuance and celebration of First Nations Peoples’ knowledges and customary practices. As described in the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007) and Sustainable Development Goals (2015), this is founded in the rights to: self-determination; to express who we are, our knowledges, our histories and cultural sovereignty; to restore, maintain, develop, control, and protect First Nations Peoples’ cultural and intellectual property. Allowing or enabling these rights of Indigenous Peoples has also recently been identified as Priority three “Elevating Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge systems” in the Australian Government’s National Science Priorities (Department of Industry, Science and Resources, 2024) as well as the Closing the Gap Policy (Australian Government, 2017), Uluru Statement from the Heart (Lowitja Institute, 2022), and many Universities Indigenous Strategies and Reconciliation Action Plans (Universities Australia, 2017).

Indigenous Science in Australian University Science Curricula

There is a growing body of literature about the benefits and strategies for inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in the Australian university curricula (Anning, 2010; McLaughlin, 2013; Prehn et al., 2020). Much of the research on the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges stems from faculties outside faculties of science, such as the faculties and departments of education (Hair et al., 2012; McLaughlin, 2013; Peralta et al., 2016), health (Delbridge et al., 2022; Forsyth et al., 2020; Wolfe et al., 2018), geography (Delbridge et al., 2022; Nursey-Bray, 2019), mathematics (Hughes, 2021; Mousley & Matthews, 2018), and arts and humanities (Prehn et al., 2020; Williamson & Dalal, 2007). The literature tends to focus on the challenges academics face when including Indigenous knowledges in curricula and non-Indigenous people’s limited understanding of Indigenous knowledges as science (Green et al., 2007; Snively & Williams, 2016). McLaughlin and Whatman (2007) maintain that most universities accept that Indigenous (science) knowledges exist, but they have no idea how they relate to western scientific knowledge systems, and there is pushback from scientists who maintain the ignorant, hegemonic, elitist, and often racist view that Indigenous knowledges cannot be considered science (Black & Tylianakis, 2024). There is an emerging body of research focusing on the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in learning outcomes and graduate capabilities in compulsory university units to promote student cultural competence (Harvey & Russell-Mundine, 2018; McLaughlin and Whatman, 2007; Page et al., 2019; Rossingh & Dunbar, 2012). However, little research has been conducted on the methodological and pedagogical approaches educators use to include Indigenous knowledges in the university science curriculum as well as what Indigenous knowledges are taught, the learning outcomes and optimisation of assessments that demonstrate student understanding of Indigenous science knowledges. Furthermore, little of this research has been published by First Nations Peoples (however, see Bodkin-Andrews et al., 2013; Nakata, 2007; Rigney, 2001; Yunkaporta, 2009, 2012).

Research questions

The inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and perspectives in the Australian university science curriculum can provide opportunities for employment, partnerships, participation in two-way science transfer and is an important step in decolonising the curriculum. The present research aimed to provide a review of Indigenous science units in Australian universities and identify appropriate pedagogies for teaching First Nations Peoples’ scientific knowledges and perspectives. We explored the strengths, challenges, and opportunities of units that already exist. Ultimately, the aim of the research was to provide recommendations for curriculum developers and evidence for Indigenous educational policy development.

As such, the research questions were:

In which Faculties is Indigenous science taught across Australian universities?

What pedagogies are used to teach Indigenous science in Australian university science faculties?

What Indigenous science content is taught and how is it assessed in Indigenous science units of Australian university science faculties?

How are First Nations Peoples engaged in Indigenous science units?

What support and resources are needed for educators wanting to include Indigenous knowledges in their teaching?

Methods

This study focused on a comparative review of Australian University Indigenous science units to explore the content, pedagogies and challenges for teaching Indigenous science. A mixed method approach was taken to produce quantitative and qualitative data that aligned with an Indigenist relational responsive approach at the cultural interface (Yarran theory). Macquarie University Human Research Ethics approval was granted for this research (ref 11239). The research included four methods which are described in detail below:

Desktop review of Australian University Indigenous science units;

An online questionnaire with Indigenous science unit convenors from the faculties and departments of science;

Semi-structured interviews with unit convenors; and

Yarning to explore First Nations community’s involvement in the university partnerships.

Desktop review of university Indigenous science content

A list of Australian universities was obtained from the Universities Australia website. On each university webpage, the terms “Indigenous” AND “Science” were searched using Boolean search commands to identify Indigenous science units. Units were selected for further study based on the following criteria:

The unit was an undergraduate study unit taught in the Faculty of Science;

The unit contained Indigenous science content;

The Indigenous science content was not a component of the unit but made up the whole course.

The unit’s name, course code, Faculty/Department, and unit convenor were recorded.

Faculty of science Indigenous science unit convenor questionnaire

The questionnaire (Supplementary Material 1) was emailed to Indigenous science unit convenors from the Faculties/Departments of Science, as identified from the desktop review. Unit convenors were initially contacted via email to see if they would be interested in participating in the research. The questionnaire comprised of semi-structured open-ended questions and focused on unit content, design and delivery, engagement with First Nations community, challenges, and recommendations for incorporating Indigenous knowledges in the Australian university science curricula. The questionnaire was uploaded into Lime Survey, and a link was emailed to unit convenors. They were given 2 weeks to complete the survey, and a follow-up email was sent offering a second 2 weeks if convenors had not replied.

Interviews with unit convenors

At the end of the questionnaire, unit convenors were asked if they would be interested in participating in a more detailed interview about their unit. If they agreed, in accordance with human research ethics, the purpose and use of the interview was discussed with participants, and they were asked to provide written prior informed consent before being interviewed (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies, 2012). Questions were semi-structured and open-ended to allow the participants to elaborate on topics as required. The semi-structured interview questions focused on five areas: content or unit design and delivery, First Nations community engagement, Challenges, Outcomes, and Recommendations. Interview questions are provided in Supplementary Material 2.

Yarning with First Nations cultural knowledge holders

Indigenous yarning methodology is a communication technique used by First Nations Peoples to come together through strict protocols of respectful dialogue to discuss sensitive topics in a culturally safe space (Bin-Sallik, 2003). Collaborative yarning has been recognised as an emerging practice in research which provides an opportunity for engagement, the sharing of information and the exploration of different ideas, leading to the development of new concepts and deeper learning (Bessarab & Ng’andu, 2010). Interviews with First Nations participants were conducted through collaborative yarning using semi-structured and open-ended questions. The information collected during the yarning sessions was intended to provide insight into culturally appropriate and relevant educational pedagogy for incorporating Indigenous perspectives into university science curricula.

Data analysis

Desktop review of Australian University Indigenous science units

The Indigenous science units (or courses) were analysed and categorised into university faculty and department disciplines, and Australian state and territories. Frequency distribution graphs were constructed in excel.

Online questionnaire

Frequency distributions of the quantitative data (from Questions: 1, 3, 8) from the Lime Survey online questionnaire were constructed. The qualitative data (Questions: 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15) and the Interview transcripts were analysed in NVivo (version 12) using the autocode analysis to identify common themes, methods, and trends in the data. Auto-codes are autogenerated labels that highlight single words, phrases, or whole paragraphs in segments of interview transcripts that relate to a particular theme (Green et al., 2007). Sometimes, in this sorting process, a word, phrase or paragraph may be attributed to more than one code (Green et al., 2007). However, when autocode did not reveal the key themes, a manual thematic coding method was performed. To illustrate the topics covered in the Indigenous science units (From Question 6), the online programme word.art.com was used to produce a Word Art tree diagram, which allowed for the visual interpretation of information analogous to an “information tree” aligned to the Yarran tree concept as the foundation of this research.

Interviews and yarning

All interviews were recorded and automatically transcribed in zoom. The zoom text data was exported into Microsoft Word and manually edited for grammatical and syntax errors. Any information not relating to the research question was deleted. The transcripts were uploaded to NVivo, where key themes and ideas were manually identified. I also drew from an Indigenous standpoint to manually select data of interest.

Results

Desktop review of university Indigenous science content

In 2022, a search of the Universities Australia online database identified 72 Indigenous science units in 23 out of 38 universities in Australia (Figure 2). Most units or courses were offered in universities in New South Wales, followed by Victoria, and Western Australia. Despite having the same number of universities as Victoria, Queensland only had two Indigenous science units, whereas Victoria had five.

Figure 2.

Indigenous science units taught in each Australian State and Territory (dark blue) and the total number of Universities in each State and Territory (light blue).

The Indigenous science units were mainly offered through faculties and departments of arts and humanities, which collectively across Australia, offered 31 units relating to Indigenous science (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Indigenous science units across faculties/departments in Australian universities.

Surveys

The results of the three survey methods (Questionnaire, Interviews and yarning) were combined and are synthesised below under the following subheadings: Unit content, design and delivery; pedagogies; mechanics of Indigenous knowledge inclusion; types of knowledge; First Nations community engagement.

The online questionnaire was completed by 12 unit convenors of ten Indigenous science units in Australian universities in April 2022 (Table 1). Follow-up interviews were conducted with eight unit convenors in June 2022. Only one interview was conducted with a First Nations project partner, Dharawal Elder Aunty Fran Bodkin, in June 2022. Five of the unit convenors were First Nations Peoples (Heckenberg, Giles, Backhaus, Yasso, and Venables). Non-Indigenous academics had formed relationships with Backhaus and Yasso to develop Indigenous science units. Giles was a student at the university, Backhaus and Yasso were employed as academics, and Venables was not involved in the development of the unit and had only recently been hired as the unit convenor.

Table 1.

Summary of research participants and form of participation.

Participant	University	Unit code	First Nations	Q^a	I^b	Y^c
Bodkin	Western Sydney University	300,959.1	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Venables	Western Sydney University	300,959.1	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Ziebell	Monash University	SCI2030	No	Yes	Yes	No
Stacey	Charles Darwin University	ENVS317, ENVS517	No	Yes	Yes	No
Giles	Monash University	SCI2030	Yes	No	Yes	Yes
Backhaus	James Cook University	IA1012	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Yasso	Curtin University	NPSC1003	Yes	Yes	No	-
Rohl	Curtin University	NPSC1003	No	Yes	Yes	No
Hamacher	University of Melbourne	PHYC10010	No	Yes	Yes	No
Heckenberg	Curtin University	NPSC1003	Yes	Yes	No	-
McBurnie	Deakin University	SLE218	No	Yes	Yes	No
Prpic	Melbourne University	MULT30022	No	Yes	No	-
Thomlinson	Australian National University	INDG1002, ENVS2025	No	Yes	No	-
Kennedy	University of New England	ENSC220	Yes	Yes	No	-

The - indicates yarning was not used for non-indigenous participants or that participants did not complete the interviews.

Questionnaire, ^bInterview, ^cYarning.

Unit design, content and delivery

Eleven of the unit convenors participated in the online questionnaire. Participants were asked what discipline of science the unit was in, and they could select one or multiple options from the science disciplines as well as the interdisciplinary option. Eight unit convenors reported that their units were interdisciplinary, while six of the units were in the earth and environmental sciences, three of the units were from astronomy and two of the units were in biology, chemistry, and physics, respectively (Figure 4).

Figure 4.

Indigenous knowledge units in the science disciplines of Australian universities in 2022.

To understand the stage of development of the Indigenous science units, participants were asked how long the course had been running. Five units had been running for less than 5 years: one for 12 months, three for 2 years, and one for 3 years. Seven units had been running for more than 3 years: three for 4–6 years, two for 7 years, one for 8 years, and the longest had been running for 12 years. The longest-running course was originally from the University of New South Wales (UNSW) but was transferred to Monash University. It should be noted that the time the unit had been running did not necessarily reflect the development time, or if any redevelopment had occurred during this time.

Pedagogies

To understand how Indigenous knowledges were being taught in 2022, in the questionnaire, unit convenors were asked about the teaching pedagogies they used in the planning and development of the learning content and assessment tasks. The eight unit convenors reported using a variety of pedagogical approaches to teach Indigenous knowledges, including reflective praxis, peer learning, critical learning, hands-on learning, and active learning pedagogies. Half of the unit convenors mentioned using specific Indigenous pedagogies: decolonising, 8-ways of learning, learning on Country and yarning. Three of the eight unit convenors said that they used the cultural interface to teach Indigenous and western scientific knowledges, as Hamacher explained:

[If] Western science and Indigenous science were a Venn diagram. . . they are not going to fit perfectly over each other, they are not the same thing. There is a huge crossover between them, but they work in different ways, they often ask different questions and have different applications. But at the foundation, it’s about observation, deduction and trying to figure out how the world around us works and how to apply that knowledge and how it has a predicative purpose and passed down to successive generations. I have tried to focus on the space where they connect where they overlap.

A third of the unit convenors reported that learning on Country is a pedagogical technique that can create a deeper understanding of First Nations Peoples’ knowledges and customary practices. Convenors described “doing fieldwork components and going out on Country” (McBurnie) and “also using [the] campus as Country itself rather than going to a place” (Backhaus). This was reiterated by Indigenous Elder Aunty Fran Bodkin, who said:

So, I guess a good example would be when you walk with me through the Country, and I tell you the story. I think that’s the best part, rather than teaching. That’s the best way of allowing people to remember through story and place and then you run a couple of the lectures to deepen that understanding.

Backhaus mentioned using the trauma-informed pedagogy and explained this as:

[Getting] them unsettled and so that’s where we get into the trauma knowledge. The destruction of place to Country, people’s intergenerational trauma memories. So pedagogically we must shift and be a bit gentler in the ways that we guide, not only for Indigenous academics who are teaching, because they’re really having to relive that trauma, again, but also for the students, it may be first time that they’re being exposed to some of these things and so you must have moments of silence and safety which is built into the pedagogy. This is to ensure that as we move through very heavy stuff in here that there’s an acknowledgement of trauma on both sides.

Mechanics of Indigenous knowledge inclusion

Further from the pedagogy types, unit convenors were asked how they included Indigenous knowledges in the Indigenous science unit. A range of methods was described (Figure 5). Five of the 12 unit convenors consulted with First Nations Elders, knowledge holders, and community members to identify appropriate Indigenous knowledges. Four units had First Nations guest speakers to discuss topics from a First Nations perspective, and three convenors worked with Indigenous staff to develop the units. Three units reported using academic papers, and two used video resources that were written and produced by First Nations Peoples (Figure 5). Only one unit specifically mentioned learning in the Country as a specific pedagogical technique (field trips).

Figure 5.

Methods that university unit convenors used to include Indigenous science knowledges in their units.

Types of knowledge

To understand what form of Indigenous knowledges were being taught, unit convenors were asked about the topical content of the units. A word tree was produced from the questionnaire text and illustrates that the most common responses were: Indigenous Astronomy, Land, Country, Seasons and climate, Medicine, Sustainability, Oral use, Ecology and Plants (Figure 6).

Figure 6.

Word Art tree diagram illustrating the topics covered in Indigenous science units as identified through the online questionnaire of unit convenors.

First Nations community engagement

Unit convenors were asked about their engagement with First Nations Elders, community members or organisations to understand how they formed these relationships and how First Nations Peoples were involved in the development of the unit. In the questionnaire, many of the unit convenors said relationships were formed with First Nations Peoples through professional and personal relationships by tapping into existing community networks; First Nations academic’s networks; research partnerships; networking; and attending events and that First Nations Peoples contributed to the content and development in many ways.

Two convenors said relationships needed to be developed using clear communication to build trust and respect through reconciliation processes, promoting self-determination and providing remuneration for First Nations Peoples’ time and knowledge. This could also be done in other ways such as providing a payment or gift that supports an Indigenous business or enterprise. Others noted the importance of working with the right people in the community—the First Nations custodians and knowledge holders who have the authority and permission to share Indigenous Cultural and Intellectual Property (ICIP).

Recommendations

The most common recommendation provided by unit convenors regarding the learning content was the need for more First Nations academics and building relationships with First Nations Peoples. Giles said that “Institutions need to employ more Indigenous People to then help guide your institution in a way that is actually relevant to the community.”

In the interviews, unit convenors were asked what type of support was needed for educators to engage in Indigenous science. Two convenors commented that cultural competency training for educators and a cultural framework or protocols, such as my proposed Yarran cultural interface framework, for how to engage with Indigenous Peoples and Indigenous knowledges was of utmost importance. Backhaus provided recommendations for how and why the university system needs to include other ways of teaching and learning:

I think there’s a systemic issue and this is a design issue in the way we deliver content to students within university settings. We need to rethink the design of how we teach, engage with students. I’m hopeful that . . . it gets the university thinking about different ways of engaging, through supporting our knowledge contributors and thinking about those alternative ways of delivering. That may be through masterclasses, it may be on Country programs, or it may be actually having to do the hard work that we do in our Masters and PhD, to just rethink the design of how we deliver that content and maybe there’s something there that will emerge in the way we teach that next generation coming through, Indigenous and non-Indigenous.

This study provided several key recommendations for science education policy and practice, including

Undertaking of a national review to audit and evaluate current inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in Australian university curricula.

Development of a framework of practice that guides university teachers how to include Indigenous knowledges.

Development of a framework that guides teachers on how to teach Indigenous knowledges and perspectives, drawing on Indigenous pedagogies.

Resource guides to assist university teachers to develop and administer appropriate assessment tasks that reflect students understanding of Indigenous knowledges.

A national review of university student’s understanding of Indigenous science.

A national review of university staff participation in cultural awareness and cultural competency training.

Creation of university positions for First Nations Peoples in teaching, academia and research in all science areas.

Development of respectful and reciprocal relationships between universities and First Nations Peoples through knowledge and benefit sharing.

These recommendations demonstrate the need for the development of specific frameworks to support the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in the university science curricula. This requires changes in national science and educational policies and practices to recognise Indigenous ontology, epistemologies and Indigegogy through gulbhana, ngurruwigarra, gana, and garra to create a greater understanding of the world around us.

Discussion

This research revealed that despite the implementation of Indigenous Reconciliation Action Plans and Indigenous Strategies which call for the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and perspectives in the education curricula, just over half of Australian university faculties of science included Indigenous knowledges in their teaching in 2022. This study identified that most unit convenors struggled to identify appropriate Indigenous knowledges to include in their units, use culturally appropriate pedagogical practice and respectfully engage with local First Nations Communities in the development and delivery of content in their units. Furthermore, there was a clear recommendation to develop cultural awareness and competency training, protocols, and guidelines around community engagement, ICIP, and culturally appropriate pedagogical practice for educators wanting to include Indigenous knowledges in their teaching. There are currently no cultural frameworks or policies for how to include Indigenous knowledges in Australian university education curricula and there are very few guidelines developed by First Nations Peoples that provide recommendations on how to identify appropriate customary knowledges, what knowledges to include and more importantly what knowledge should not be shared. There is an emerging body of research that tends to focus on pedagogical practice and partnerships between education providers and First Nations Peoples (Fullan & Langworthy, 2014; Lloyd et al., 2015; Mellor & Corrigan, 2004); however, this research often fails to incorporate cultural protocols around the protection of ICIP.

Universities have generally adopted cultural awareness and cultural competency training for staff and developed policies and guidelines for community engagement, yet there is limited research about the implementation of these policies in Australian universities and their effectiveness. This raises questions about what content is actually taught in the training, the duration of the training, how many university staff have completed this training and how they apply this in their curricula, teaching and learning practice. Cultural awareness and competency training requires an ongoing process of personal reflection to reveal the inequitable structures of power and privilege of race, and to challenge the negative stereotypes and the individual and institutional racism and prejudices of white privilege (Behrendt et al., 2012; Curtis et al., 2019). This involves balancing the organisation’s priorities with that of the community, through a conscious awareness and constant evaluation and negotiation between the differing power relations (Clifford & Petrescu, 2012). Ma Rhea et al. (2012) reported that generic cultural competency training can provide superficial support for educators and has not improved educator’s confidence in including Indigenous knowledge in the curricula. This was supported by the convenors in this study, who highlighted the need for the development of a cultural framework to guide educators about how to include Indigenous knowledges in Australian university curricula. However, since the completion of this research in 2022, the Australian Deans Council of Science have created several resources for tertiary science educators to include Indigenous knowledges, pedagogies, and perspectives through respectful teaching practices and cultural awareness training (Australian Council of Deans of Science, 2024).

While there are challenges to Indigenous community engagement, it is imperative for the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in university curricula. However, this needs to be done in ways that promote cultural connection and support cultural safety, collaboration, capacity building, and benefit sharing by respecting the cultural protocols for the safeguarding of Indigenous knowledges and cultural intellectual property (Burgess et al., 2019; Janke & Sentina, 2017). Furthermore, Indigenous engagement in university curricula should also provide opportunities for First Nations Peoples, not just through involvement in the planning, development, and delivery of the unit content, but through the provision of employment opportunities and positions for representation on boards and committees to build effective governance and capacity for both First Nations Peoples and Universities.

Inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in the Australian university science curriculum is faced with many challenges from poor delivery and recognition of the value of Indigenous knowledge in science faculties. As noted by Burgess et al. (2019), we too recommend that universities pay concerted attention to the pedagogical methods used to teach Indigenous knowledges and necessitate meaningful Indigenous engagement in these processes. Inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in the science curriculum can provide an opportunity to celebrate Indigenous Australian history that pre-dates European colonisation and provide a foundation for innovative approaches to teaching and learning that promote social change for a shared and sustainable future for everyone.

Academics and educators wanting to teach Indigenous knowledges need to be open to considering other ways of investigating and understanding how knowledge is created. The cultural interface of Nakata (2007), which I have adapted through my proposed Yarran framework, although a complex and challenging space, provides a useful concept for understanding interconnections between Indigenous and western science and could leverage new knowledge and innovative practice, which is considered vital to address the challenges of environmental and climate change. However, to truly Indigenise the university curricula, Indigenous knowledges must be taught through Indigegogy—Indigenous ways of gulbhana, ngurruwigarra, gana, and garra—by the teachings of our Elders, knowledge holders and on and by Country. This study provided several recommendations that can inform the development of frameworks to support the inclusion of Indigenous knowledges in the university science curricula while maintaining high standards of cultural safety. This shift will need to be underpinned by changes in national science and educational policies and practices, to recognise Indigenous ontology, epistemologies and Indigegogy through gulbhana, ngurruwigarra, gana, and garra to create a greater understanding of the world around us.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 – Supplemental material for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations by Renee Cawthorne (Wiradjuri), Emilie Ens and Leanne Holt (Worimi-Biripi) in AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 – Supplemental material for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations by Renee Cawthorne (Wiradjuri), Emilie Ens and Leanne Holt (Worimi-Biripi) in AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-3-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 – Supplemental material for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-aln-10.1177_11771801251394713 for Indigenising the Australian University science curriculum: review and recommendations by Renee Cawthorne (Wiradjuri), Emilie Ens and Leanne Holt (Worimi-Biripi) in AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples

Footnotes

Authors’ note

Renee Cawthorne is a proud Wiradjuri woman and an Indigenous Fellow in the School of Natural Sciences at Macquarie University. She is currently undertaking a PhD in the Faculty of Science and Engineering, where her research and teaching focus on integrating Indigenous knowledge systems with Eurocentric scientific disciplines.

Associate Professor Emilie Ens is of Dutch-English Heritage and the first born on Australian soil from both sides of her family. Emilie’s research integrates Indigenous knowledges, perspectives and practices through collaboration with Indigenous communities across Australia, where she has been working with Australia’s First Nations communities since 2008. In 2018 she worked with Elders of south east Arnhem Land to establish the Wuyagiba Bush Uni. Emilie also leads the Cross-Cultural Ecology, Education, and Restoration Lab in the School of Natural Sciences, Macquarie University. Her team prioritises collaborative research and outreach projects that support biocultural conservation and restoration.

Professor Leanne Holt, a Worimi and Biripai woman, is the Deputy Vice-Chancellor Indigenous at UNSW and a leading national advocate for Indigenous higher education. She has nearly three decades of experience in higher education, including senior leadership, Indigenous student success, research and policy development. Professor Holt is the author of Talking Strong and has contributed extensively to national initiatives advancing Indigenous self-determination and Indigenous-led strategy across the tertiary sector. Her work focuses on strengthening community partnerships, embedding Indigenous knowledges across universities and creating transformative pathways for future generations.

ORCID iD

Renee Cawthorne

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship and publication of this article.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and publication of this article.

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Glossary

gadyil bowls

gana doing

garra being

gulaman coolamon

marga shields

Milawa Murray River

murrin canoes

ngurruwigarra seeing

gulbhana knowing

yarrawulay Red Gum blossom

yarran Eucalyptus camaldulensis

yinna woman

References

Anning

(2010). Embedding an Indigenous graduate attribute into University of Western Sydney’s courses. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 391, 40–52. https://doi.org/10.1375/S1326011100001125

Australian Council of Deans of Science (ACDS). (2024). A guide for curriculum development: First Nations Australians’ Science. [Link: ACDS website https://www.acds.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/A-guide-for-curriculum-development-First-Nations-Australians-Science-Online-v2.pdf]

Australian Government, Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (2017) Closing the Gap: Prime Minister’s Report 2017.

Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. (2012). Guidelines for ethical research in Indigenous studies. Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies.

Bawaka

Wright

Suchet-Pearson

Lloyd

Burarrwanga

Ganambarr

Sweeney

(2016). Co-becoming Bawaka: Towards a relational understanding of place/space. Progress in Human Geography, 40(4), 455–475.

Behrendt

Larkin

Griew

Kelly

(2012). Review of higher education access and outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people: Final report. Department of Education and Training. https://docs.education.gov.au/documents/review-higher-education-access-andoutcomes-aboriginal-and-torres-strait-islander-people-0

Bessarab

Ng’andu

(2010). Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous research. International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, 3(1), 37–50. https://doi.org/10.5204/ijcis.v3i1.57

Bin-Sallik

(2003). Cultural safety: Let’s name it! The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 32, 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1326011100003793

Black

Tylianakis

J. M.

(2024). Teach Indigenous knowledge alongside science. Science, 383(6683), 592–594.

10.

Bodkin-Andrews

G. H.

Denson

Bansel

(2013). Teacher racism, academic self-concept, and multiculturation: Investigating adaptive and maladaptive relations with academic disengagement and self-sabotage for Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australian students. Australian Psychologist, 48(3), 226–237.

11.

Burgess

Tennent

Vass

Guenther

Lowe

Moodie

(2019). A systematic review of pedagogies that support, engage and improve the educational outcomes of Aboriginal students. Australian Educational Researcher, 46(2), 297–318.

12.

Clifford

Petrescu

(2012). The keys to university-community engagement sustainability. Nonprofit Management and Leadership, 23(1), 77–91.

13.

Curtis

Jones

Tipene-Leach

Walker

Loring

Paine

S. J.

Reid

(2019). Why cultural safety rather than cultural competency is required to achieve health equity: A literature review and recommended definition. International Journal for Equity in Health, 18(1), 1–17.

14.

Delbridge

Garvey

Mackelprang

J. L.

Cassar

Ward-Pahl

Egan

Williams

(2022). Working at a cultural interface: Co-creating Aboriginal health curriculum for health professions. Higher Education Research & Development, 415, 1483–1498.

15.

Department of Industry, Science and Resources (2024). Australia’s National Science and Research Priorities. Australian Government. [https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/national-science-and-research-priorities-2024].

16.

Forsyth

Short

Gilroy

Tennant

Irving

(2020). An Indigenous cultural competence model for dentistry education. British Dental Journal, 228(9), 719–725.

17.

Fullan

Langworthy

(2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 152, 231–233.

18.

Green

Willis

Hughes

Small

Welch

Gibbs

Daly

(2007). Generating best evidence from qualitative research: The role of data analysis. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 31(6), 545–550.

19.

Hair

J. F.

Ringle

C. M.

Sarstedt

(2012). Partial least squares: The better approach to structural equation modelling? Long Range Planning, 45(5–6), 312–319.

20.

Harvey

Russell-Mundine

(2019). Decolonising the curriculum: Using graduate qualities to embed Indigenous knowledges at the academic cultural interface. Teaching in Higher Education, 246, 789–808. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2018.1508131

21.

Hughes

(2021). Positioning Indigenous knowledge systems within the Australian mathematics curriculum: Investigating transformative paradigms with Foucault. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 42(4), 487–498.

22.

Janke

Sentina

(2017). Indigenous knowledge: Issues for protection and management [Discussion paper]. IP Australia & Australian Government Department of Industry, Innovation and Science.

23.

Lloyd

N. J.

Lewthwaite

B. E.

Osborne

Boon

H. J.

(2015). Effective teaching practices for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students: A review of the literature. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 40(11).

24.

Lowitja Institute. (2022). Close the Gap Campaign Report 2022: Transforming power: Voices for generational change. Lowitja Institute.

25.

Ma Rhea

Anderson

P. J.

Atkinson

. (2012). Improving teaching in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander education: National professional standards for teachers standards focus areas 1.4 and 2.4. Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership.

26.

Martin

(2008). Please knock before you enter: Aboriginal regulation of outsiders and the implications for researchers. Post Press.

27.

McLaughlin

J. M.

(2013). “Crack in the pavement”: Pedagogy as political and moral practice for educating culturally competent professionals. International Education Journal: Comparative Perspectives, 12(1), 249–265.

28.

McLaughlin

J. M.

Whatman

S. L.

(2007). Embedding Indigenous perspectives in university teaching and learning: Lessons learnt and possibilities of reforming/decolonising curriculum. In Heber

R.W.

(Ed.), Proceedings 4th international conference on Indigenous education: Asia/ Pacific (pp. 123–146). Queensland University of Technology.

29.

Mellor

Corrigan

(2004). The case for change: A review of contemporary research on Indigenous education outcomes. Australian Council for Educational Research.

30.

Menzel

Cameron

(2021). A meeting of freshwater and saltwater: Opening the dialogue of Aboriginal concepts of culture within an academic space. In Indigenous knowledges, privileging our voices (pp. 117–146). https://brill.com/display/book/9789004461642/BP000008.xml

31.

Moreton-Robinson

(2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous women’s standpoint theory. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(78), 331–347.

32.

Mousley

J. A.

Matthews

(2018). AUSTRALIA: Mathematics and its teaching in Australia. Mathematics and Its Teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region, 15, Article 113.

33.

Nakata

(2002). Indigenous knowledge and the cultural interface. In Hickling-Hudson

Matthews

J. M.

Woods

(Eds.), Disrupting preconceptions: Postcolonialism and education (pp. 19–38). Post Press.

34.

Nakata

(2007). The cultural interface. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 36(5), 2–14.

35.

Nursey-Bray

(2019). Uncoupling binaries, unsettling narratives and enriching pedagogical practice: Lessons from a trial to Indigenize geography curricula at the University of Adelaide, Australia. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 43(3), 323–342.

36.

Page

Trudgett

Bodkin-Andrews

(2019). Creating a degree-focused pedagogical framework to guide Indigenous graduate attribute curriculum development. Higher Education, 78, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-018-0324-4

37.

Peralta

L. R.

O’Connor

Cotton

W. G.

Bennie

(2016). Pre-service physical education teachers’ Indigenous knowledge, cultural competency and pedagogy: A service learning intervention. Teaching Education, 27(3), 248–266.

38.

Prehn

Peacock

Guerzoni

M. A.

Walter

(2020). Virtual tours of Country: Creating and embedding resource-appropriate Aboriginal pedagogy at Australian universities. Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 3, 1–9.

39.

Rigney

L. I.

(2001, January). A first perspective of Indigenous Australian participation in science: Framing Indigenous research towards Indigenous Australian intellectual sovereignty [Conference session]. Second National Indigenous Researchers Forum, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

40.

Rossingh

Dunbar

(2012). Evaluating the effects of embedding Indigenous content: Evidence versus assumptions. In Australasian Evaluation Society 2012 international conference (pp. 1–10). Australasian Evaluation Society.

41.

Snively

Williams

W. L.

(2016). Knowing home: Braiding Indigenous science with Western science. University of Victoria.

42.

Tuck

McKenzie

(2015). Place in research: Theory, methodology, and methods. Routledge.

43.

Tynan

(2020). Thesis as kin: Living relationality with research. Alternative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 16(3), 163–170.

44.

United Nations General Assembly. (2007, October 2). United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: Resolution / adopted by the General Assembly (A/RES/61/295). http://www.refworld.org/docid/471355a82.html

45.

Universities Australia. (2017). Indigenous strategy 2017–2020.

46.

Wilson

(2008). Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood.

47.

Wolfe

Sheppard

Le Rossignol

Somerset

(2018). Uncomfortable curricula? A survey of academic practices and attitudes to delivering Indigenous content in health professional degrees. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(3), 649–662.

48.

Yunkaporta

(2009). Aboriginal pedagogies at the cultural interface [Doctoral dissertation]. James Cook University.

49.

Yunkaporta

(2012). 8 ways Aboriginal pedagogy from Western NSW. WNSW Department Education and Training.

50.

Yunkaporta

Shillingsworth

(2020). Relationally responsive standpoint. Journal of Indigenous Research: Full Circle: Returning Native Research to the People, 20, Article 4.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

0.01 MB