Educator perspectives on embedding Acknowledgement to Country practices in early learning centres in Australia

Abstract

This article explores the practices of ‘Acknowledgement to Country’ in Australian early childhood education contexts. Acknowledgement is a process of seeking out and honouring local Aboriginal Country and knowledge and investing in local resources of language, art, stories, nature and songs. Twenty educators across six early learning centres participated in semi-structured interviews to explore the experience, processes and resources that supported the implementation of Acknowledgement practices. Acknowledgement practices were not limited to a daily protocol but embedded in each centre’s physical place and programming. Wanting to be respectful yet fearing offending Aboriginal people, most educators expressed feelings of uncertainty and under-confidence about what to do. Developing relationships with local Aboriginal people and identifying resources were also concerns. Acting from the heart with good intentions was regarded as a way forward together, with commitment, resources and a strong distributed pedagogical leadership culture, where educators felt supported to take small yet foundational steps.

Introduction

This project was undertaken by six non-Indigenous scholars and one Aboriginal scholar (sixth author). We offer our utmost respect to the Traditional Custodians of all Aboriginal Countries on which we work and live. We recognise that these lands were never ceded, always were and always will be Aboriginal land. Particularly, we acknowledge and pay our respects to the Elders, past and present, of the Dharug and Dharawal peoples on whose land we conducted this research.

In this paper, we use the terms Aboriginal and Indigenous. In our findings and discussion, we use the term Aboriginal because the educators at our research sites usually used this term, and the sites are on Aboriginal land. In the literature review and methodology, we reflect the usage of the authors we discuss and reference. We use the term Indigenous when we wish to include Torres Strait Islander people, or Indigenous people outside of Australia.

We recognise that Australian institutions have adapted long-established Indigenous practices of Acknowledging Country and Welcoming to Country. These practices have become customary at the beginning of government meetings, public events, in educational institutions and corporations (Ross et al., 2020). A Traditional Custodian of the local place offers a Welcome to Country, welcoming others to the land. Acknowledgement to Country is offered by someone who is not a Traditional Custodian who acknowledges the custodianship of local Aboriginal people and ‘expresses respect’ for the ‘Aboriginal knowledge system and its peoples … on that place’ (Locke, 2022a, p. 4). Martin (2016, p. 31) explains the Acknowledgement can be varied to suit the event:

letting the Country and the Ancestors know people have gathered for a purpose and this Acknowledgement is to set the tone so that the event may be purposeful, the work is done well, and people are reminded to behave in a way that they can be safe.

In offering an Acknowledgement to Country, non-Indigenous peoples have an opportunity to consider Country and their position on that Country. Indigenous worldviews (epistemologies and ontologies) may differ significantly from the non-Indigenous person’s beliefs and value systems. Thus, the practice of developing and offering a culturally respectful and relevant Acknowledgement to Country might create a space for non-Indigenous people to experience an Indigenous way of being and knowing, to experience and learn within Indigenous worldviews (Pérez & Saavedra, 2017). Because there are many different Indigenous cultures and communities in Australia, and navigating how Western and Aboriginal knowledges coexist and interact takes shape differently in different educational settings (Thraves et al., 2021), there are different ways of practicing Acknowledgement of Country.

Literature Review

Acknowledgement practices are emergent in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings. For example, in one preschool the Acknowledgement was offered as a welcome dance with the children using a pedagogy of ‘drumming, singing, dancing, rhythm’ developed and enacted by Aboriginal educator Narelle Twist (Somerville et al., 2019, p. 103). Twist used Aboriginal pedagogies to frame Acknowledgement practices into three categories: becoming animal; drumming, singing, dancing, rhythm; and artefacts and imaginative play. Twist created embodied learning experiences for children embedded in Indigenous worldviews, drawing on Country and Aboriginal protocols (Somerville et al., 2019). Adam Duncan, an Aboriginal educator, insists that children’s voices should be integral to developing Acknowledgement practices (2017). Suggested ways of achieving this include encouraging relationships between children and Elders and community members; developing a Physical Acknowledgement such as a sculpture; creating projects to revitalise Indigenous languages; and opportunities to reflect on these experiences.

Indigenous Ways of Knowing, Being and Doing, and the EYLF

Educator training often positions Western pedagogy and what counts as knowledge in a Western belief system as ‘normal and right’ (Kinzel, 2020, p. 21), where such knowledge is built on racist, colonialist foundations. Educators adopting critical pedagogies recognise knowledge as power-laden, and socially and contextually positioned (Kinzel, 2020). Applying this critical view enables educators to be reflexive about knowledge. Rather than working within any single system of knowledge, educators can join Pérez and Saavedra’s (2017) call for diversity of ways of knowing and being in early childhood to disrupt inequity.

The guiding framework for ECEC practitioners is the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) (Department of Education and Training [DET], 2022). The EYLF was designed to contribute to the Council of Australia Governments’ (COAG) aim of ‘improved outcomes for the majority of children but specifically Indigenous children’ (2009, p. 13). Whilst some alignment exists between Indigenous Ways of Knowing, Being and Doing and the EYLF’s concepts of Belonging, Becoming and Being, these are two very different epistemological and ontological worldviews, and they are not interchangeable (Locke, 2020). The original EYLF attempted to provide a conceptual framework for embedding Indigenous perspectives (DET, 2009) but was criticised for using the concept of educators' cultural competence (SNAICC, 2013). The revised EYLF requires embedding Indigenous perspectives in the philosophy and practices in ECEC (DET, 2022). This is addressed in the principles, practices and learning outcomes, and it is applicable whether Indigenous children are known to be present in the service or not. Cultural responsiveness has replaced cultural competence as a guiding concept.

The revised EYLF explicitly discusses the practice of Acknowledging Country, offering a feasible and meaningful way forward. A significant contributor to the growth in this practice in ECEC settings is the Reconciliation Action Plan (RAP) process. Specifically, the Narragunnawali platform supports early education settings and schools in developing their RAP activities (Reconciliation Australia, n.d.) offering a range of resources, including pedagogical activities explicitly linked to the EYLF. In this way, Acknowledgement practices can be understood to be integrated into the EYLF. It is important that this is not seen as being primarily for the wellbeing of Indigenous students and families but for the benefit of all educators, children and families.

Culturally Relevant Pedagogies

In dialogue with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander epistemologies, Morrison et al. (2019) reviewed a range of school-based educational pedagogies and argued for culturally responsive pedagogies to improve the educational experiences of Aboriginal, and all children. Although focused on schools, this and similar work offer guidance for implementing Acknowledging practices in ECEC settings. Harrison and Greenfield (2011) identified several quality practices where Aboriginal knowledges and perspectives were embedded in schools, including exemplars of highly contextualised ways of grounding knowledge; development of ‘serious and ongoing contact’ (p. 69) with local Aboriginal people; positioning Aboriginal people in the 21st century rather than linking Aboriginal knowledges to the history curriculum and past tense; involving local Elders in planning and designing the curriculum, with control over which local knowledges are taught; building outdoor classrooms with local Aboriginal communities; and talking with students about why we practice Acknowledgement to Country. Identity, relatedness, inclusiveness, reciprocity, nurturance and respect underpin Indigenous pedagogies (Biermann, 2008). Rigney (2020) offered several provocations as principles of culturally responsive pedagogies. He suggested constant dialogue between Indigenist epistemologies and other worldviews; the reconceptualisation of Aboriginal learners as competent with cultural and linguistic intelligences brought from home; and solidarity in collectivism for changing society.

The involvement of Indigenous educators provides a meaningful and effective way of developing and embedding Indigenous pedagogies (Locke, 2022b). Keddie (2014) terms this an ‘epistemology of relationality’ epitomised in Indigo House, a K-12 Indigenous school in Queensland. Restoring kinship and social networks for Indigenous children and families is a primary emphasis with firmly embedded involvement of Elders and the community in all aspects of the school, including as staff and liaison officers.

Many Aboriginal educators are committed to bringing their expert knowledges into ECEC settings, creating a complex intersection of their private and professional lives (Martin, 2016). Yet, most Indigenous children attend mainstream educational settings (Martin, 2017) where expertise is less accessible, with a shortage of Aboriginal educators. An over-reliance on the involvement of an Indigenous educator can result in shifting the responsibility back to Indigenous people (Phillips & Luke, 2017) or initiatives ceasing if this educator leaves (Harrison & Greenfield, 2011). Embedding culturally responsive pedagogies necessitates a richer understanding and exploration of meaningful ways to move forward; without over-relying on Indigenous educators or tokenistic representation of Indigenous knowledges and practices.

Fundamental to Indigenous worldviews is the meaning of Country. Using an approach that centres Country, Hamm (2015) encourages us to notice place and ‘to embed Aboriginal knowledges as the central frame’ in ECEC. Biermann (2008) provides an example of dialogue between worldviews in comparing Indigenous pedagogies with environmental education. He argues these transformative pedagogies have underlying and complementary principles, with commonalities in their tools of experiential learning, group dynamic learning through listening and contemplation and student-centred learning. Others caution that settler colonial understandings of place (rather than Country) and environmental education can erase and deny Indigenous worldviews (Somerville et al., 2019).

A way forward may lie in gaining a deeper understanding of the current practice of the Acknowledgement to Country in ECEC settings. Acknowledgement practices are a way of showing respect, yet they also offer an opportunity for educators who are not Indigenous to take responsibility for conducting these practices (Ross et al., 2020). They operate to open dialogue on social justice, a central concern of Indigenous methodologies (Kinzel, 2020; Rigney, 2020).

Increasingly, ECEC settings across Australia embed Acknowledgement to Country in routine practice, without insights into how those practices are enacted concerning contexts, processes and resources. Moreover, there is insufficient knowledge of educators’ experiences of nurturing children’s understandings of Indigenous ways of knowing and being through Acknowledgement to Country. Our study aims to explore Acknowledgement to Country practices in ECEC contexts, identify pedagogies, processes and resources that contribute to the implementation of Acknowledgement practices and explore educators' experiences of implementing Acknowledgement practices.

Methodology

As an Acknowledgement to Country is an Indigenous cultural protocol, it was the intention of the researchers to respectfully employ an Indigenous methodological approach. Indigenous scholars advise that Indigenous relatedness theory prescribes that all peoples and entities (plants, animals, waterways and sky) are connected and, as such, all peoples are expected to be respectful, responsible and accountable to one another and to all entities (Wilson, 2008). Koenpul scholar Moreton-Robinson (2017, p.71) explains:

[Relationality] informs our epistemological and ethical premise that social research should begin with an awareness of our proper relationships with the world we inhabit, and is conducted with respect, responsibility, generosity, obligation, and reciprocity.

In response, this paper explores and examines educator perspectives and experiences of implementing an Acknowledgement to Country in an early education setting through the relational lenses of respect, responsibility and reciprocity. These lenses guide us in our methodology and in our analysis. We were invited to do this research by a group of six early learning centres, each on a campus of our distributed University. Our University covers a wide suburban area of a major city. Some local communities are culturally heterogenous, with children and educators at the centres having a diversity of languages and countries of origin, while others are predominantly English-speaking. Many centres are in or near areas of lower socio-economic advantage. Centres comprise families of students and staff at the University and families from the local communities. All of the centres have introduced Acknowledgement of Country practices in a number of different ways, and they have been exploring these for a number of years. The educators are at different stages on their journeys and reflect with us based on their experiences.

A steering committee was established. It included members of the early learning leadership team as well as an Aboriginal early childhood educator and two Aboriginal advisors from the University. Our intention was to engage with the University Elders around this project; however, due to Health restrictions, researchers could not meet face-to-face with University Elders to understand their perspectives and priorities. Instead, researchers met formally with the Elders towards the end of the project to report on the project and its results. The intention in this presentation was twofold. Firstly, to respectfully seek the Elders' advice in interpreting the results, drawing conclusions and constructing recommendations, and secondly to offer our findings in a spirit of reciprocity, hoping that the research may be of use to their local community. Members of the steering committee also provided feedback on the analysis, findings and recommendations. Formal ethics approval was obtained from Western Sydney University (number H14181).

The sixth author on this paper is an Aboriginal member of the steering committee. Her engagement was sought out of respect for local Indigenous scholarship and to benefit our own learning. Through this paper, conference presentations, and in the development of learning resources for educators, we recognise the knowledge of our participants and advisors and reciprocate by passing this knowledge on, with the ultimate aim of making early learning services more welcoming for Aboriginal families and increasing the understanding and respect of non-Aboriginal children and families for the traditional owners of the lands on which we live, work and play.

The research process was introduced to centre staff through one-on-one or small group face-to-face conversations. One or two researchers visited each of the centres, to show respect, and build trust and relationships with the early learning service. Written consent was obtained from individual interview participants. Through hearing educators' perspectives in personal stories, we hoped to understand the motivations for conducting an Acknowledgement, the attributed meaning and significance of these practices and what enabled them to progress on their journey. Twenty educators shared their experiences in a total of sixteen interviews, with three educators from different centres identified as Aboriginal. Interviews were conducted face-to-face at the service or, responding to increasing health restrictions, online via Zoom. Four of the authors conducted the interviews; the lead author conducted all interviews to maintain continuity, with another author present when possible. In this paper, we have not identified which educators were Aboriginal. However, where the analysis needed to recognise a specific voice, ‘Aboriginal Educator’ is used without specifying the centre to safeguard confidentiality. When attributing quotes, participants are labelled by Centre A, B etc., followed by Educator 1, 2 etc.

Interviews were checked for transcription accuracy and coded by the lead author, assisted by NVivo software. Five other authors read or coded four or five interviews each. Initial themes were documented as a series of mind-maps by these coding authors, who then met twice to review, refine and validate these themes. Consultation occurred with Aboriginal people through the Steering committee, in writing this paper, and the interviews included Aboriginal voices. However, the analysis was developed by non-Aboriginal researchers from conversations with predominantly non-Aboriginal educators about their experiences and challenges in introducing and embedding Aboriginal knowledges and practices within their early learning centres.

Findings and Discussion

We found that an Acknowledgement to Country protocol was practised in all centres. The protocol took the form of children sitting in a circle or clustered on the mat for group time and reciting an Acknowledgement, often followed by a book reading or a song. Acknowledgement practices were, however, much more than this daily routine.

In keeping with Duncan (2017), Acknowledgement practices were embedded in the physical place and programming within each centre, transforming a simple protocol into meaningful opportunities for learning, and valuing Indigenous cultures and languages. These took various forms, including visual Acknowledgement in craft displays, flags, posters and artwork. Many centres had designed the outdoor space to incorporate bush tucker gardens, natural materials and local plants. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander songs, including local Aboriginal language, were woven into the program. Telling Aboriginal stories sparked conversations about Aboriginal ways of seeing the world. The importance of adapting Acknowledgement practice to children’s ages was also apparent. Rooms for babies and toddlers had Acknowledgement baskets with Aboriginal artefacts that they could explore.

We have organised our findings and discussion around four themes developed from our data: this land on which we play; confidence; the collective journey of knowledge seeking; and someone to ask. Taken together, these themes illuminate how Acknowledgement practices can be embedded in the physical space and programming, supported by appropriate pedagogies, processes and resources.

This Land on Which We Play

Acknowledgement to Country is specific to the local land of each centre. ‘Country’s the most important thing … respect the land and learn from the land’ (Centre F, Educator 1). Respecting Country required a process of seeking out and honouring local Aboriginal knowledge and investing in local resources of language, stories, plants and songs. A connection to the land was also interpreted as a connection to nature through nature-based play, spending time outdoors and working with natural materials: ‘my philosophy to the outdoors is like … the third teacher, the outdoor environment, because things are changing all the time.... when you think of Aboriginal, I think of nature straightaway’ (Centre D, Educators 1 and 2). Centres redesigned their outdoor spaces for children to enable a strengthened connection to the land and recognition of the Aboriginal land of the centre’s location. One educator explained how she told the children about Aboriginal stewardship of the land:

[Aboriginal people] go out with the fire brigade. And they all [back] burn together, as a community because they understand the land, and they know what’s going to happen. So that the bushfires don’t come and destroy things. (Centre A, Educator 4)

Here, the educator is using current events in Australia as an opportunity to talk about contemporary Aboriginal expertise in a concrete way, as Harrison and Greenfield (2011) recommended.

Educators used trusted sources like ABC Playschool, Narragunnawali and Koori curriculum, but resources were usually not local to the Countries of the centres. Educators told us that it was challenging to find resources specific to local Country, such as language, children’s books about cultural stories, totem animals and what was appropriate in the practices of teaching children about this cultural knowledge. Educators recognised the impact of colonisation on local cultural knowledge and the ongoing process of rebuilding it.

Confidence

Educators wanted to bring Aboriginal culture and practices into the service, but most expressed fears that they could offend Aboriginal people by doing something inappropriate. They recognised that this could be in the form of using a style of art or totem animal from another part of Australia, or mispronunciation of words, or using the wrong language. ‘I felt like I would get something wrong or be disrespectful or do something in the wrong way and I didn’t want to offend anybody’ (Centre C, Educators 1 and 2). This lack of confidence has been previously documented for primary school teachers (Morrison et al., 2019). Both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal educators expressed concerns with getting it right and knowing enough: ‘I want to be able to do it respectfully, and I suppose the right way, but it’s hard when it’s, that’s still something I’m learning myself’ (Aboriginal educator). Sometimes the effect of cultural training and an increase in knowledge led to increased feelings of hesitancy: [the training] ‘made me a bit more anxious' (Centre E, Educator 3).

Educators had philosophies that could help them overcome the fear of getting things wrong. Acting from the heart with good intentions, a capacity for self-reflection and learning from these actions were identified as ways forward. The most important consideration reported was the underlying intention. ‘We say, you know, Acknowledgement, original landowners, they are words, but do you really know where that is coming from within your heart?’ (Centre A, Educator 4).

Educators took comfort in the premise that good intentions would not offend Aboriginal people. ‘We’ve had to have a lot of discussions of like, you’re not doing the Acknowledgement wrong, as long as you’re trying’ (Centre B, Educator 1). Critically reflecting on this provided educators with reassurance that trying to Acknowledge Aboriginal cultures genuinely in programming was respectful, even if mistakes were made in the cultural detail. This intention is an excellent place to start from, but it needs to be followed up with effort to research and learn (Locke, 2022a).

Educators recognised the imperative to reflect and learn. Indeed, a second counter to the fear of getting it wrong was that it was essential to take the first step, then the next step and ‘start [a] little place here, and that little place can grow and grow’ (Centre A, Educator 4). The beginning was not easy; many educators shared, ‘I just didn’t know where to start’ (Centre C, Educators C1 and 2). Some of the educators had advice for others that, on the face of it, could be seen as contradictory. They advised that it was important to do some research, but too much may be overwhelming, and result in an inability to act. Although too much thinking hindered action, reflection on practice was identified as crucial. Mistakes made along the way were viewed as inevitable and the only way to learn and progress on the journey. This reflection connected to the familiar ground of the EYLF, ‘That’s what EYLF is about. Reflecting. Okay, this didn’t work. So how would I approach it a different way?’ (Centre A, Educator 4). Not doing anything was regarded as worse than doing the wrong thing, as there would be no learning from doing nothing.

Echoing the concept of ‘critical ambivalence’ (Charalambous et al., 2020, p.229), this tension between the need to act and the uncertainty of how is required by educators implementing reconciliation pedagogies. Our interviewees were undertaking a process of questioning their taken-for-granted knowledge and recognising the need to explore Aboriginal ways of knowing, being and doing, and the purpose of introducing these, as an educator, into the centre. Critical self-reflection is vital as the basis of educators' confidence in doing this work, and it is required to embed Aboriginal knowledge in a strength-based way (Phillips, 2021). Aunty Denise Proud and Ann Morgan (2021) propose educators must critically self-reflect on three key areas: their own cultural identity; the broader social and historical context that has shaped this identity; and the strength and resilience of Aboriginal cultures.

The Collective Journey of Knowledge Seeking

Acknowledgement to Country was viewed as both a personal and a collective journey of knowledge seeking. We found that a strong distributed pedagogical leadership culture, where educators felt supported to take small steps, was foundational. Acting alone was hard, ‘it just kind of got to a point where you were the only one, it was hard to maintain’ (Centre B, Educator 1). However, educators who teamed up with a colleague found a productive way to plan, act and reflect, ‘[My colleague] and I had a discussion on how we’re going to use those resources and how we’re going to work with the rest of the team to embed that into the centre’ (Centre C, Educators 1 and 2). Best of all was involving the whole team and ‘taking the team on that journey’ (Centre C, Educators 1 and 2). Full team involvement was necessary because ‘if you don’t have everybody else in that same conversation, it sort of dwindles off really fast’ (Centre E, Educator 4).

There was evidence that centres themselves were on a learning journey, an ongoing process where embedding Aboriginal cultural knowledge and practices ebbed and flowed. At one centre, Acknowledgement practices had been in place, but then ‘we kind of fell off the wagon a little bit with it’ (Centre E, Educator 1). In another centre there was a mural on a wall outside, which had reportedly been painted by an Aboriginal artist, but interviewees from that centre knew nothing more about it. In a third centre, one interviewee had found a guide to understanding Aboriginal pedagogical culture on the top shelf of a cupboard, which was useful to her learning and reflection journey. In a fourth centre, incoming staff found that there were numerous resources such as Aboriginal story books for children, but little knowledge at the centre about how to use these in programming. Identified factors that influenced changes in knowledge-sharing and practices were staff turnover, COVID interruptions and a cohort of older children moving on to school. This suggests that where the journey is a collective one, knowledge is less likely to be lost when individuals leave.

Educators spoke in a way that demonstrated that they were working in an environment of uncertainty, recognising a lack of clarity on the right way to do things. One educator explained: ‘there’s no wrong way, there’s no right way’ (Centre A, Educator 4). Educators are undertaking transformational practices in uncertain contexts, enhancing their own and others’ knowledge through risky but important practices. Several educators valued ‘being in a centre where it’s okay to make mistakes’ (Centre E, Educator 2). An environment where learning was encouraged, hand in hand with an acceptance that learning involves making mistakes, supported the introduction and improvement of Acknowledgement practices.

The fear of saying the wrong thing also presented a barrier to having collaborative conversations with colleagues. One educator found it hard to talk about how she might collaborate with her more junior Aboriginal colleague in implementing Aboriginal Knowledges:

Centre B, Educator 2: I don't know how to ... She doesn't share a lot about what she might know. I don't know if she knows a lot about her culture.

Interviewer: Okay.

Educator 2: But it's a touchy subject. I don't want to upset her either. So I don't push.

Interviewer: Okay.

Educator 2: Yeah, yeah. But when things do come up, like NAIDOC week or reconciliation, I guess I sort of sit back and wait to see what she incorporates into the program.

We can apply the lenses of respect, responsibility and reciprocity to this example. Although in the first half of this excerpt, Educator 2 is clearly uncomfortable and trying to respect her colleague by not having what she thinks might be a difficult conversation, or making her colleague responsible for Acknowledgement practices, there is also a lack of respect in doubting that the Aboriginal worker has any cultural knowledge, and ‘sitting back’ puts the responsibility back on to her Aboriginal colleague. Respect could be better demonstrated by creating a safe space to have a conversation about how they might work together, with joint responsibility for Acknowledgement practices. This would develop a reciprocal approach, where the junior colleague would benefit from professional development in their role as an educator and feel that their knowledge was valued; Educator 2 would also learn, and be comfortable in the relationship; the centre would benefit from pedagogical Acknowledgement practices; and the local Aboriginal community would benefit by having an early learning centre where it was safer to send their children. It is important to nurture trusting and safe workplaces where it is possible to reflect together about the intention that sits behind practices, and whether more could be done to ensure local relevance and accuracy.

Someone to Ask

Most educators thought that ‘when you do have an idea, being able to ask someone from the Indigenous culture’ (Centre A, Educator 3) helped establish what was appropriate and what was not. In many cases, people had someone to ask who was knowledgeable, although not necessarily Aboriginal. Educators identified this relationship with a trusted advisor, a colleague, an external professional or a family member. Educators and staff who had close connections to Aboriginal family, friends or community were an important source of knowledge in centres. While non-Aboriginal educators respected the knowledge of the Aboriginal educators, this could add to the responsibilities and expectations of Aboriginal educators: ‘sometimes it can be hard, managing all my roles, and leading that as well’ (Aboriginal educator). Aboriginal educators may not have the answers colleagues sought, or be able to speak on behalf of the local community. Managing these multiple roles meant finding ‘a balance between the personal and professional’ (Aboriginal educator). Balance was also essential in deciding how engaged their family and Aboriginal community would be in centre activities.

Aboriginal educators should be recognised as experts for their key role in embedding Aboriginal knowledge (Locke, 2022b). However, this undertaking should be a reciprocal collaboration between non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal educators (Locke, 2020). Educators sought to build relationships with Aboriginal community members to seek their advice and to support their Acknowledgement practices in other ways, understanding that this was culturally appropriate. However, educators reported challenges in developing relationships with local Aboriginal people. Educators recognised the high demand for local Elders' time and energy: ‘There are a billion of us, and not only childcare centres and there are local communities and schools and … we all want a piece of them’ (Centre E, Educator 4). Broadening out and developing multiple relationships with many Aboriginal people, including Elders, through staff connections, educators, professional advisors and attending families could reduce the demand for the time and energy of Elders and have the benefit of being advised by multiple Aboriginal voices and perspectives.

Relationships with families of Aboriginal children were rarely incorporated into the programming and philosophy of embedding Aboriginal knowledges in the centres. Some educators recognised this gap: ‘I think that’s something we could work on a little bit more, though, to get that family input’ (Centre A, Educator 3). This is an important insight, that relationships must be reciprocal, and centres have to put the work in to build trust for relationships to flourish. An example was given by one educator that a mother approached her, and said ‘I kind of feel more comfortable now that I’m here and I’ve been here a couple of months that I’ll add that [my child is Aboriginal] to his enrolment form’ (Centre C, Educators C1 and 2). Where Aboriginal families see that the service is taking responsibility to respect Aboriginal worldviews, this strengthens the relationship. Practices highlighting cultural knowledge and respect build trust relationships with Aboriginal families (Grace & Trudgett, 2012), which could lead to families collaborating in program activities.

An encounter between an educator and a grandfather led to an ongoing relationship:

One day, I was talking to a grandparent, you know, having a bit of a yarn. And he tells me, Oh, I'm from a mob. You know, like his mob. I said, are you? You're Aboriginal? He said yes … So Uncle [name] came and was doing yarning circles and telling stories to the children. Every week he came in, he loved it. (Centre A, Educator 4)

The co-construction of learning experiences by non-Aboriginal educators collaborating with Aboriginal Elders, community members, children and their families is an identified culturally responsive, strengths-based approach to embedding Aboriginal knowledge in pedagogy. This approach avoids potential misunderstandings of Aboriginal ways of knowing, being and doing (Armour & Miller, 2021). Developing strong relationships with Aboriginal families and children enriches curriculum and pedagogy, and this, in turn, further strengthens relationships (Exell & Gower, 2021). Whilst the example above is of a chance encounter, reaching out to families by providing regular, intentional opportunities to connect can also assist in building relationships in ECEC settings and reduce the risk of missing opportunities to recognise and value the cultural knowledge held by Aboriginal families (Gapany et al., 2021).

Aboriginal communities have processes and protocols around who are the knowledge holders, with authority to advise and support on how knowledge can be shared (Ross et al., 2020). In urban areas, like the area where we undertook this work, there may not be a distinct local community but a network of organisations and agencies (Phillips & Luke, 2017) making it more complex to identify who has knowledge and authority.

Conclusion

Embedding Acknowledgement practices is a journey. Showing respect by introducing a standard acknowledgement, with the intention of being respectful and coming from the heart, is the start of this journey. Over time, by taking responsibility for learning about Acknowledgement practices, the educators, children and families can develop this Acknowledgement into one that is much more specific and relevant for the centre, the local Country and the people connected to the centre. This effort creates a stronger sense of safety for Aboriginal families at the centre, who may then be more comfortable to disclose that they are Aboriginal. In this way, relationships can be built to inform and enrich the journey of practicing Acknowledgement at the centre. This in turn results in reciprocity, in giving back to Aboriginal community, by creating a welcoming centre, and educating families who are not Aboriginal.

Our research demonstrates that Acknowledgement to Country in early learning centres is a collection of practices that embed Aboriginal ways of knowing, being and doing in centre practices and the physical environment. Commitment and strength were shown by centres who incorporated Country into program activities in the ways identified by Coff (2021), for example, through outside activities, use of natural materials and gardens.

Respect for Aboriginal people is demonstrated by the visible existence of Acknowledgement practices at the centre, like flags at reception and books on the shelf. Centres can take responsibility for reflecting on, researching and developing Acknowledgement practices over time. By educating non-Aboriginal families, they are taking responsibility for working towards social justice. This brings a reciprocity through making centres more welcoming to Aboriginal people, which will build relationships that will continue to enrich and develop Acknowledgement practices at the centres.

Most educators lacked confidence in how to embed acknowledging practices respectfully. Our research indicates that making a start is essential, even in the face of the possibility of getting it wrong or offending Aboriginal people. Acting from the heart, seeking knowledge, collaborating with others and reflecting and learning on the journey are required. What educators found most challenging, particularly in an environment subject to COVID-19 restrictions, was building relationships with local Aboriginal Elders and other Aboriginal people. These relationships are foundational to, but at the same time a result of, Acknowledgement practices. ECEC services would benefit from investing resources into a relational approach.

Limitations to this work, due to COVID restrictions during the research period, included our inability to incorporate children’s voices on their understandings of Acknowledgement practices and engage with Aboriginal Elders. Additionally, all participating centres belong to the same group, potentially influencing the range of understandings and experiences educators held about Acknowledgement practices. Further research with Elders on their perspectives would be fruitful to understand how they want to engage with ECEC, and how their involvement in the collective journey might lead to sharing of responsibility and burden (Ross et al., 2020).

We offer this work as one perspective of several, hoping it will be a catalyst for sharing ideas and discussions rather than prescribing practice in early learning centres. Like the educators who participated, we are conscious we may not get everything ‘right’ but recognise it is essential to begin – together.