6 Braiding mātauranga Māori and volcanology to co-design educational resources:

Introduction: Co-designing bicultural educational resources through authentic partnerships with local iwi

Educators in Aotearoa New Zealand have an ethical responsibility to model the articles of the Treaty of Waitangi. Integration of these articles into the school curriculum is, however, often not authentic. The education system perpetuates the domination of Western knowledge systems, while marginalising Indigenous ways of knowing, and fails to recognise the value of diverse perspectives and worldviews for teaching and learning (Macfarlane and Macfarlane, 2018). The lack of opportunities for Māori and students from low socio-economic areas in traditional measures of learning reflects the domination of Western ways of knowing. In an attempt to address this gap, educators and researchers in New Zealand are increasingly seeking to understand ethical and authentic ways to engage with local iwi and to design educational solutions that address these inequities through curricula that benefit all students (Pardo et al., 2015).

Considering the current educational discourse in New Zealand, questions such as ‘Whose science are we teaching when we teach science?’ and ‘Who benefits, and who is marginalised by such an approach?’ are critical considerations, particularly in post-colonial societies (Southerland, 2000). Thus, curricular materials need to be reconsidered, in addition to teachers’ pedagogy, so that all learners have access to equitable learning opportunities (Tolbert et al., 2019). To do this effectively, there is a need for curricular resources that emulate different ways of knowing. But how can this be done in a way that is ethical and authentic? To answer this question, we showcase how the use of He Awa Whiria as a reflective framework can highlight elements of authentic collaboration between experts from diverse backgrounds and local iwi for the co-development of culturally responsive teaching resources.

A key objective of science education is to enable students to make sense of the world and live well in their environment. In New Zealand, this means living well in a landscape shaped by volcanism. Volcanic activity is part of New Zealand’s geographic, social and cultural landscape. Children are particularly vulnerable to natural hazards, and need a robust cultural and scientific understanding of the physical processes around natural hazards in order to be better prepared to withstand them (Kaiser and Boersen, 2020). A number of geologists in New Zealand recognise the benefits of multicultural perspectives in researching natural hazards (King et al., 2018). Māori communities – particularly iwi and hapū located in volcanic regions – have specific customs and narratives around geothermal activity that communicate understandings of these geologic processes, and lessons on how to live sustainably within volcanic regions. While knowledge of past events and current monitoring enable approximate forecasts of eruptions, forecasting their exact impact is challenging (Barker et al., 2019). Braiding Indigenous Māori perspectives with insights from geology can create a holistic outlook to understanding volcanic processes.

The New Zealand Ministry of Education recognises that it is vital for all New Zealanders to understand eruption scenarios for faster recovery. However, a reductionist and Western-science lens alone cannot lead to complete preparedness (Pardo et al., 2015). In 2018, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) funded the ECLIPSE (Eruption or catastrophe: Learning to implement preparedness for future supervolcano eruptions) programme, to raise community awareness and understanding of volcanoes around the Taupō volcanic zone in the North Island. As part of this larger project, in 2019 ECLIPSE researchers^[1] collaborated with the Earthquake Commission, Core Education, Māori researchers and kaumātua (Māori elders) to develop the LEARNZ resource^[2] ‘Natural Hazards: Our Taupō Supervolcano’. The resource braids understandings from the Indigenous science of mātauranga Māori and volcanology, to teach about volcanoes through a ‘collaborative partnership’ approach.

Collaborative partnerships are gaining recognition in New Zealand across various sectors, such as education and resource management. Recent examples of these initiatives suggest the need for exploring differences in understanding among partners in order to build trust. Partnerships with iwi require careful and responsible engagement on the part of Pākehā, and constant reflection. One way to do this is by referring to culturally relevant frameworks like He Awa Whiria. This framework can also be instrumental in addressing differences that may arise among partners by providing a pathway to include restorative practices, such as hui whakatika (a meeting to resolve differences), and thus ensuring the continuity of reciprocal partnerships. In the context of the collaboration highlighted in this chapter, He Awa Whiria serves as a metaphor, a cultural and conceptual framework that guided the methodology around the partnership. In the following section, we describe the need for multiple worldviews to teach about volcanism in New Zealand and provide our rationale for using He Awa Whiria as a tool for reflection around building authentic partnerships.

The need for multiple worldviews to understand volcanism in the 21st century

New Zealand is home to several volcanic sites and unique cultural demography. Māori narratives about volcanoes, alongside geological explanations, can ensure a holistic awareness of volcanic activity around New Zealand (King et al., 2018). While considering educational resources that braid Indigenous and other ways of knowing, it is vital to engage with local Māori communities. Indigenous Māori researcher Linda Smith (2012) writes that Western ways of knowing have often denied the validity of Māori knowledge, language and culture, leading to a lack of opportunities for Māori students. Consequently, educators have an ethical responsibility to be open to strategies that can address these educational inequities. However, to do this well, educators need curricular materials that authentically braid multiple cultural knowledge systems and practices with official curriculum imperatives.

The LEARNZ ‘Our Tāupo Supervolcano’ virtual field trip is one such resource. It was co-developed by Māori cultural leaders and locals from the Bay of Plenty region, geologists from the University of Canterbury (UC) and GNS Science, and experts from Core Education. Central to this resource is the appropriate blending of two worldviews to uphold the mana of te ao Māori and Western science. The LEARNZ virtual field trips are digital archives of curriculum materials that are available online, both synchronously, while the trip is happening, and asynchronously, after the trip has finished. In the LEARNZ resource, students virtually experience visiting a marae (Māori meeting house) and listen to discussions from some of New Zealand’s most influential cultural leaders.

During the filming of the resource, the partners followed a modified interface approach (Durie, 2004). In New Zealand, this approach refers to bringing together two sets of values and methods, namely mātauranga Māori and Western science, in a way that benefits both Māori and non-Māori. According to Durie, “research at the interface aims to utilise the energy that comes from two systems of understanding that can then be used to further development” (Durie, 2004, p 9). The interface approach generates mutual and shared benefits for all partners. Hence, it aims to prioritise the importance of each knowledge system (mātauranga Māori and Western science) for teaching and learning, also meaning that iwi have a share of the benefits of the teaching and learning experience, including intellectual property and commercialisation. The approach also attends to the preservation of human dignity. The interface reinforces cultural and spiritual beliefs, and the Indigenous worldviews are not compromised while braiding Indigenous and scientific methodologies.

Based on the principles above, the LEARNZ resource supports a bicultural (Macfarlane et al., 2018) and multi-logical (Canipe and Tolbert, 2016) approach to classroom science learning. The resource enables students to draw from mātauranga Māori and Western science, in order to explore natural phenomena and understand the hazards and risks associated with volcanoes. The archived videos offer a flexible teaching resource for those interested in digital literacy, science education and teacher education in a bicultural context in New Zealand. In line with the growing need for such culturally responsive educational resources for science classrooms, it is important to explore what enabled this collaboration to be successful. We used He Awa Whiria as a reflective framework to identify how lessons from the collaboration around the development of the LEARNZ resource could be applied to other contexts of culturally responsive educational resource development.

The rationale for adopting He Awa Whiria

The He Awa Whiria framework draws insights from Indigenous and non-Indigenous streams of knowledge. It recognises the collaborative benefits of multiple  streams (Macfarlane et al., 2015). In this braided rivers approach, the rivers are a metaphor for the knowledge systems; this recognises the plurality of knowledge systems that can start from different sources. In the context of understanding the collaboration around the development of the LEARNZ resource, much like rivers, Māori ancestral stories and volcanology knowledge streams converged at some points and diverged at others. When these streams of knowledge converged, they informed the design and engagement process around the evaluation of the resource development. At other times, the knowledge streams diverged, creating opportunities for new learning and reflections.

As researchers and educators with histories of working alongside local communities (in this particular example, with appropriate Māori researchers who are from the local areas) to co-develop educational resources and other teaching/learning innovations, our partnership around understanding the development of the LEARNZ resource was grounded, from its conception, in the process of co-construction, reciprocity and attention to power dynamics (Tolbert et al., 2018). Because we are a diverse group of researchers and educators with varying cultural and epistemological backgrounds and traditions, we sought to reflect on our collaboration to understand what elements led to the successful development of the LEARNZ resource, using a framework that would be more recognisable in the field of Indigenous research in New Zealand. The use of He Awa Whiria enabled us to work together respectfully, making connections across our different worldviews, backgrounds and histories, while keeping mātauranga Māori at the centre of our collaborations. The LEARNZ resource braids concepts and practices from mātauranga Māori and volcanology and can be a model for curricular tools that reflect community voices. Such culturally responsive resources can also address issues around equitable learning opportunities in New Zealand. The following section unpacks how we used He Awa Whiria to reflect on the collaborative development of the LEARNZ resource.

He Awa Whiria as a reflective and analytical tool

Successful collaboration between different knowledge systems is contextually bound, power-laden, and warrants careful and responsible engagement. Educational policies and research in New Zealand suggest engagement and partnerships with Māori communities can eliminate disparities between Māori and non-Māori students, but precisely how these partnerships are best achieved is less obvious and merits further understanding. Therefore, we wanted to ensure that our collaborations and interactions for developing the LEARNZ resource be authentically reflective of He Awa Whiria – that is, we wanted to ensure that both partners (Māori and non-Māori) had a shared understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities.

This project was part of lead researcher Sriparna Saha’s multi-study PhD project, housed within the ECLIPSE programme. The study that is the subject of this chapter was co-developed by Sriparna, supervised by Dr. Ben Kennedy and Dr. Sara Tolbert through regular consultations with our Māori guides Sylvia Tapuke (Ngāti Manawa) and Kelvin Tapuke (Te Arawa), alongside Professor of Māori Research at UC Angus Macfarlane (Ngāti Whakaue, Ngāti Rangiwewehi), who was the kaumātua for this project. Sriparna, Ben and Sara also developed relationships with the cultural leaders and iwi representatives who were part of the filming of the LEARNZ resource, via Sylvia and Kelvin.

Whakawhanaungatanga (building relationships) was critical to establishing mutual trust and open communication within the research team. We regularly met in person or online to discuss how to conduct the study, select participants, and collect and analyse the data. We realised that interviews were the most suitable form of data collection to understand the rich contexts of the collaboration. Interviews would allow the research team to capture distinct voices and perceptions, in particular the authentic voices of our Māori partners.

Considering the history and politics of Indigenous exploitation in research relationships (Smith, 2012), the research team needed to establish protocols for ethical engagement right from the beginning of the study, which could be revisited throughout all aspects of the process. We attained ethics approval from the Human Research Ethics Committee at UC. However, Sriparna, Sara and Ben soon realised – through conversations with Professor Macfarlane, Sylvia and Kelvin – that these Western and academic-rooted ethics and protocols for ethics were vastly insufficient for our engagement with the Māori partners who were part of the resource development. We thus decided to maintain an additional ethics document that explicitly listed norms for our collaboration, shared expectations to maintain clarity and transparency in communication, and notes from our discussions on appropriate methods of data collection as described below

Methods for understanding the collaboration around the LEARNZ resource: Data collection

There were essentially two stages to the development of the LEARNZ resource. The first involved planning and inception, and inviting the mana whenua (iwi local to the geographic locations of interest represented in the LEARNZ resource) to be part of the journey. The second involved filming through shared pūrakau (stories) and science narratives. We identified that a two-stage interview process would enable our partners to tell the story of the collaboration around the LEARNZ resource from their individual perspectives.

We invited those partners involved in the first stage to share their stories around the following three questions:

1. What was the story behind the development of this natural hazards virtual field trip?
2. What were some key characteristics to ensure authentic representation of the different participants representing mātauranga Māori and Western science that you approached to be a part of this virtual field trip?
3. What were some of the limitations that constrained the co-construction process?

When considering people involved in the second stage of the resource development – that is, the actual filming – we were particularly aware of the need to uphold the mana of people who shared their knowledge. This required careful and responsible engagement, as there have been instances of historical abuse in which researchers have extracted knowledge from Māori people in a non-reciprocal way. Questions for the second part needed to be rooted in three aspects that are crucial for authentic collaborations – that is, they provided an opportunity for the participants to reflect on their experience, re-affirm their shared goals, and reposition their emerging understandings. Hence, we co-designed the following questions for mana whenua and invited them to share their experiences around the filming of the LEARNZ resource:

1. What were your intentions on being part of this field trip?
2. How did the collaboration between you and the different people involved in this project work in practice during the trip?
3. What was learned through the experience, and what could have been done differently?
4. How has this experience affected your attitude towards similar future projects?

The engagement with mana whenua followed traditional protocols, laid down between the Māori partners and non-Maori partners who were part of the ECLIPSE programme prior to the filming of the resource. We spent time with Māori partners, to enable relationship building by sharing kai (food) and personal stories. Before the formal interviews, Sriparna shared ethically approved consent forms and information sheets with the interviewees. However, it needs to be clarified that during this engagement, the process of whakawhanaungatanga – to understand the intent of the research team, particularly Sriparna – preceded the signing of consent forms. With regards to the misuse of any culturally sensitive knowledge, we invited all participants to provide feedback on the final draft of the study’s findings and to co-author three publications.^[3]

This study on understanding the collaboration around the development of the LEARNZ resource is also rooted in other theoretical frameworks that support cultural enhancement, such as the IBRLA, which stands for initiation, benefit, representation, legitimation and accountability (Bishop, 1995). At the study’s outset, we followed an approach similar to that of Pipi et al. (2004); the role of the lead researcher was to give voice to the experiences, aspirations and reflections of the participants involved in the co-construction of the LEARNZ resource. Furthermore, the use of a culturally responsive resource in classrooms, and the involvement of Māori researchers from various iwi, engages Māori children; there is an affective and cognitive benefit from seeing people from similar cultural backgrounds in various roles, such as science and/or cultural advisors (Bolstad and Hipkins, 2008). We hope that our collaboration can serve as a model for the development of authentic bicultural resources that are reflective of the voices of a community with a vested interest in raising awareness about geological processes and equity in science learning opportunities.

What enabled the successful development of the LEARNZ resource? Insights from He Awa Whiria

We have reported the complete insights from understanding the collaboration around the development of the LEARNZ resource elsewhere (Saha et al., 2022). In this section, we would like to recap, and elaborate on the role those respectful relationships, values and the space for sharing between the knowledge streams played in collaboration around the development of the bicultural LEARNZ resource. Furthermore, we comment on the importance of tikanga Māori in restoring relationships and mana in times of conflicting understanding.

Respectful relationships

The collaborations and partnerships around the filming of the LEARNZ resource were driven by mutually respectful relationships. The filming of the LEARNZ resource started off as a KPI for the ECLIPSE programme. However, it transformed into a road trip of science, between friends who shared a passion for education. The transformative aspect of this authentic collaboration was evident through the stories our partners shared. Some of the relationships existed before the start of this collaboration, but the collaboration around the resource development itself provided opportunities to build new ones, through mutual connections and interest in education.

Whakawhanaungatanga and engagement with Māori partners were driven by local Māori facilitators and cultural guides for this project (Sylvia and Kelvin), who drew from their whakapapa (genealogy) to build relationships around this collaboration in the Bay of Plenty region. The engagement around Taupō was driven by Bubs Smith (Ngāti Tūwharetoa). Having Professor Macfarlane on our team also assured our Māori partners that the collaboration was culturally sound.

The involvement of various Māori academics, kaumātua, Māori facilitators and kaupapa Māori researchers enabled the non-Māori partners to learn about Māori approaches and practices, and understand the protocols and tikanga involved in building authentic collaborations. This, in turn, enabled the voices of all participants to be heard. More importantly, the collaboration to understand the elements that enabled successful filming of the LEARNZ resource co-produced new knowledge and evidence from two different lenses and emulated the He Awa Whiria framework – that is, multiple knowledge streams contributed to the design and methodology of the project.

Trust and transparency were key to this process of relationship building. In line with the Māori philosophy of whakawhanaungatanga, we believe that the relationships built around this collaboration on understanding elements of authentic partnerships will continue outside this project. One may question: What does this look like in practice? How do we maintain these relationships after the goals of the project have been met? Putting this relationship building into practice, the team at UC invited our Māori partners to be part of other collaborations – through co-authorship of research outputs – while also acknowledging their time and knowledge through koha (gifts of thanks) appropriate to the level of engagement and being respectful of tikanga.

Values and tikanga

When considering longevity of relationships, the role of values and tikanga cannot be ignored. Building collaborations grounded in He Awa Whiria is a time-intensive process, requiring multiple phases of engagement. The various stages of consultation and engagement can lead to understandings grounded in good faith that go beyond contractual obligations. For example, the whakawhanaungatanga process included not just initial introductions with our Māori partners, but included spending time building and maintaining authentic relationships. At the start of this collaboration, Sylvia and Kelvin participated in a Māori education research conference organised by Professor Macfarlane at UC. Following this, Sriparna spent time with Sylvia and Kelvin, which was an opportunity for them to develop an understanding of their roles around involvement in this project. Later, during a team meeting for the ECLIPSE project, Sylvia and Kelvin welcomed Sriparna at their home, which was another opportunity for them to know each other through shared discussion. In another instance of whakawhanaungatanga, Sriparna and Sara spent three days and two nights at Iramoko Marae for a seminar on science and mātauranga Māori; following a ceremonial welcome, Sriparna and Ben also met with Sylvia and Kelvin at their home in Rotorua to continue conversations around the project. These instances of whakawhanaungatanga led to growth in bicultural confidence in the Western-science team. They offered an opportunity to examine the shared values in the context of this collaboration. Considering this within He Awa Whiria, the mātauranga Māori and Western-science ways of doing things went hand in hand, where two different worldviews informed objectives and protocols around the project collaboration. Western researchers should always use methodologies that are informed by kaupapa Māori values when collaborating with tangata whenua.

Space for sharing

The space for sharing is a true reflection of He Awa Whiria in practice. The two streams of knowledge – mātauranga Māori and volcanology – that run through this collaboration converged at some points, representing research methodologies and protocols informed by both worldviews. However, there were instances where these knowledge systems diverged. These divergences served as reflective spaces for evaluation of our collective understandings around the project collaboration. We recognised that breakdowns in communications could be navigated by clarifying non-negotiable aspects of the partnership. In one such instance, during the filming of the LEARNZ resource, there was an overlap between a karakia (prayer) and the online schedule for the schools participating in the live version of the field trip.  The engagement leaders later clarified the relative importance of each aspect. Reflecting on the experience, they recognised that the needs to be online and having time for karakia must be put in the research brief so that both partners know what to expect.

The clarity in these expectations can enable long-term relationship-building. In this case, it also allowed the tikanga Māori approach that involved the tangata whenua, the marae and the hapū in the engagement, and enabled them to be comfortable and feel safe to engage in the process. The space for sharing offered an opportunity for all partners to reposition their understandings and clarify expectations such as: following up on projects; getting feedback from our partners on research outputs/publications; and co-authorship of three peer-reviewed manuscripts. Furthermore, this process of following up can also lead to research contracts and more opportunities for our Māori partners, so that the relationships, once developed, continue to grow.

The importance of hui whakatika: Tō tātou waka – our shared journey

In this section, we want to reiterate the importance of communication, and assessing the understanding of cultural protocols between Māori and non-Māori partners. Macfarlane et al. (2019) highlight an important aspect of collaborative partnerships at the interface by identifying that “progress in regard to researchers becoming better informed about Māori research protocols and practices have been satisfactory, yet questions persist” (p 16). As a key stakeholder, we identified that sometimes these questions manifest as differing expectations that can cause a breakdown in communication. The outcomes of such a breakdown can have a massive impact on the partnership, causing anxiety among partners and eventual disengagement from the collaboration. It is important to remember that Western researchers’ participation in te ao Māori is at the invitation of tangata whenua and is based on ‘good will’; if there is negligence from the Western-science researchers, it can result in disengagement. We identified that a fundamental way to restore the relationship can be found through exploring Māori philosophies and practices, such as hui whakatika (Macfarlane, 2007). Hui whakatika refers to a time for making amends, and is a way to restore balance and harmony within the collaboration.

Once we acknowledged our feelings, we identified the strengths and successes of this collaboration. During this process, we realised that the success of our partnership couldn’t be summed up merely through academic publications. We defined our collective success as: being a whānau of interest; multiple publications; meeting tribal leaders; getting children excited about science; supporting science learning; braiding the rivers of Western science and mātauranga Māori; emergent pathways; connections with other people; and mutual respect and admiration.

Two major factors had led to the disengagement: a lack of communication and a lack of understanding around the concerns of our partners. As a way forward, we came up with a three-step plan.

1. Reconnecting with our partners, to discuss where the communication went wrong
2. Being aware of the culture of communication, so that we know which stream of the river we are in
3. Summing up our experience around the hui whakatika in this book chapter.

We concluded the hui whakatika with the following whakataukī (proverb):

Toia te waka mātauranga
Mā wai e tō? Mākū e tō
Mā te whakaranga ake e tō, māu e tō

Haul forth the canoe of education
Who should haul it? I should. You should
All within calling distance should haul the canoe

The hui whakatika acted as a space of reflection, where we realised that keeping the communication going is key.

Commentary on the power dynamics

During this research project, there were several differences in conceptualisations, practices and expectations that inform and shape the Western-academic worldview and Indigenous Māori worldviews. The inevitable power differential at personal, systemic and institutional levels that exists between the two groups can lead to differences in learning opportunities and outcomes between Māori and non-Māori students.

Addressing this power differential encompasses serious consideration of cultural competence and identifying methodologies that are appropriate for conducting research at an interface of the Māori and non-Māori. In terms of the engagement process, Sriparna (alongside the research team at UC) worked with our Māori colleagues as partners interested in exploring specific domains, such as education and social justice for the interest of volcano-science education. Through the engagement process, we discovered that He Awa Whiria was able to capture the nuances of the process involved in the development of the partnership around this project. While, historically, methodologies rooted in Western-academic worldviews attempted to fit Māori worldviews in to Western frameworks of knowledge and learning, He Awa Whiria enabled both the knowledge streams, although distinct from one another, to be equally legitimate (Macfarlane, 2019), and informed different aspects of our collaboration.

Conclusion: Reflections and recommendations for using He Awa Whiria

We found that following the He Awa Whiria framework throughout the development and implementation of this project ensured issues around ethics and integrity could be addressed in a culturally appropriate way, without compromising on mana of either knowledge system. Acknowledgement of the other system of knowledge is key to understanding the full extent of He Awa Whiria and its impact on the project outcomes. Following He Awa Whiria also required an assessment of levels of cultural competence, and identifying the people with the mana and authority appropriate to supervise the project. Support from Professor Macfarlane was one way to ensure that our Māori partners felt safe to be part of this engagement. In addition to initial acknowledgement and support, it was important to build an understanding of other knowledge system(s) through all stages of engagement, to improve cross-cultural understanding. This required assistance and expertise from the cultural supervisors, Professor Macfarlane, Sylvia and Kelvin.

In addition to He Awa Whiria, the IBRLA framework (Bishop, 1995) enabled us to assess whether the objectives were achieved. For example, Māori involvement in the development of the LEARNZ resource was evident in the videos where Māori cultural leaders and locals can share their knowledge about geology and landscape through discussions, and in their willingness to share their experiences during the collaboration. Similarly, continued and ongoing consultations with our Māori partners exhibited momentum and Māori interest, and connection with kaupapa Māori. By involving the Māori partners in the resource development, our project on understanding the elements of authentic collaborations upheld the integrity of the original LEARNZ project and represented the authentic Māori voice.

The Māori voices in this collaboration are reflected throughout, by participation in Zoom meetings and continued dialogue with Sylvia and Kelvin. During the development of the LEARNZ resource, multiple forms of Māori approaches – such as waiata (song) and storytelling – represented a range of Māori stakeholders. Over time, several ongoing open conversations also helped legitimise the LEARNZ resource and its development to the wider community, ensuring accountability to Māori – past, present and future.

Closing comments

True partnership must respect the right of Indigenous peoples to share their stories, experiences and ideas. In the context of this project, using the He Awa Whiria framework (supported by IBRLA) facilitated this process, by acknowledging the strengths of multiple knowledge systems. The framework also provided space to acknowledge any lack of understanding of other knowledge systems. The onus of careful and responsible engagement rests with the researchers and requires engagement with an ethical consciousness.

A partnership grounded in He Awa Whiria goes beyond creating space for Māori ways of doing and knowing. It also means valuing the richness that these ideas add to our collective understanding of ways of knowing and has the potential to break the cycles of mistrust between Māori and non-Māori researchers and stakeholders. Participation of Western researchers in te ao Māori is at the invitation of tangata whenua and based on ‘good will’. But this trust or good will can be broken by negligence. Following tikanga is particularly important when differences arise, so that the balance can be restored in a way that is non-punitive.

We identify that the cross-cultural collaborations must reflect the values and the relevant Indigenous knowledge system. We hope the case presented here can inspire more educational initiatives and partnerships, using a strength-based bicultural lens. Developing resources for building an understanding of natural processes grounded in different knowledge systems can have benefits for disaster preparedness and can create access to equitable learning opportunities for all learners.

Acknowledgements

We would like to acknowledge the contributions our partners made to this project. We are grateful to Pouroto Ngaropo, Rita Tupe, Bubs Smith and Kiharoa Milroy, who gave their time generously and saw the potential of the LEARNZ project.

We have co-authored three research papers together and the lessons presented in this chapter would not be complete without the insightful discussions that occurred. This collaboration has been transformative for us and enabled us to learn what authentic He Awa Whiria partnerships can look like.

References

Barker, S.J., Van Eaton, A.R., Mastin, L.G., Wilson, C.J.N., Thompson, M.A., Wilson, T.M., Davis, C. & Renwick, J.A. (2019), ‘Modeling ash dispersal from future eruptions of Taupo supervolcano’, Geochemistry, Geophysics, Geosystems, 20(7), 3375–401: https://doi.org/10.1029/2018GC008152

Bishop, R. (1995), ‘Collaborative research stories: Whakawhanaungatanga’ (PhD thesis, University of Otago).

Bolstad, R. & Hipkins, R. (2008), ‘Seeing yourself in science’, New Zealand Council for Education Research: www.nzcer.org.nz/research/publications/seeing-yourself-science

Canipe, M. & Tolbert, S. (2016), ‘Many ways of knowing’, Science Teacher, 83(4), 31–35: https://doi.org/10.2505/4/tst16_083_04_31

Durie, M. (2004), ‘Exploring the interface between science and indigenous knowledge’, 5th APEC Research and Development Leaders Forum, March 2004, 21.

Kaiser, L. & Boersen, K. (2020), ‘Kura e tai aniwhaniwha (schools and tsunami): Bi-cultural and student-centred tsunami education in Aotearoa New Zealand’, Australian Journal of Emergency Management, 35(2), 58–65.

King, D.N., Shaw, W.S., Meihana, P.N. & Goff, J.R. (2018), ‘Maori oral histories and the impact of tsunamis in Aotearoa-New Zealand’, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 18(3), 907–19: https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-18-907-2018

Macfarlane, A. (2007), ‘Hui whakatika: Restorative practice’, in A. Macfarlane, Discipline, Democracy and Diversity: Working with students with behaviour difficulties (151–61), (Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research).

Macfarlane, A. & Macfarlane, S. (2018), ‘Toitū te mātauranga: Valuing culturally inclusive research in contemporary times’, Psychology Aotearoa, 10(2), 71–76: [PDF] https://www.psychology.org.nz/journal-archive/Toit%C5%AB-te-M%C4%81tauranga-Valuing-culturally-inclusive-research-in-contemporary-times-Angus-Macfarlane-and-Sonja-Macfarlane.pdf

Macfarlane, A., Macfarlane, S. & Curtis, T. (2019), ‘Navigating kaupapa Māori fields of knowledge, education, cultures, and ethnicities’, Educational Theories and Philosophies, 22: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.328

Macfarlane, A., Macfarlane, S., Derby, M. & Webber, M. (2018), ‘Bridges to success for Māori: An aspirational lens’, Psychology Aotearoa, 10(1), 11–15.

Macfarlane, S., Macfarlane, A. & Gillon, G. (2015), ‘Sharing the food baskets of knowledge’, in A. Macfarlane, S. Macfarlane & M. Webber (eds), Sociocultural Realities: Exploring new horizons (52–67), (Christchurch: Canterbury University Press).

Pardo, N., Wilson, H., Procter, J.N., Lattughi, E. & Black, T. (2015), ‘Bridging Māori indigenous knowledge and Western geosciences to reduce social vulnerability in active volcanic regions’, Journal of Applied Volcanology, 4(1): https://doi.org/10.1186/s13617-014-0019-1

Pipi, K., Cram, F. & Tuuta, C. (2004), ‘A research ethic for studying Māori and iwi provider success’, Social Policy Journal of New Zealand, 23, 141–53.

Saha, S., Tapuke, S., Kennedy, B., Tapuke, K., Hersey, S., Wright, F., Tolbert, S., Macfarlane, A., Leonard, G., Tupe, R., Ngaropo, P., Milroy, K. & Smith, B. (2022), ‘Use of “Our Supervolcano” virtual field trip to support bicultural classrooms in Aotearoa New Zealand’, Science Activities, 59(2), 84–96: https://doi.org/10.1080/00368121.2022.2056115

Smith, L.T. (2012), Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples (2nd edn.), (Dunedin: Otago University Press).

Southerland, S.A. (2000), ‘Epistemic universalism and the shortcomings of curricular multicultural science education’, Science & Education, 9(3), 289–307.

Tolbert, S., Knox, C. & Salinas, I. (2019), ‘Framing, adapting, and applying: Learning to contextualize science activity in multilingual science classrooms’, Research in Science Education, 49(4), 1069–85: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-019-9854-8

Tolbert, S., Schindel, A. & Rodriguez, A.J. (2018), ‘Relevance and relational responsibility in justice-oriented science education research’, Science Education, 102, 796–819: https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21446

Wilkinson, C., Hikuroa, D., Macfarlane, A. & Hughes, M. (2020), ‘Mātauranga Māori in geomorphology: Existing frameworks, case studies and recommendations for Earth scientists’, Earth Surface Dynamics Discussions, February, 1–40: https://doi.org/10.5194/esurf-2020-5