Introduction

Indigenous Engagement Division, The University of Queensland

Contextualisation of the Indigenisation of curriculum

Why Indigenise curricula? Australian universities operate in a time when theories of decolonisation, acknowledgements of Indigenous rights and the need for truth-telling are positioned as prominent correctives to the dominance of non-Indigenous knowledges as the system through which the nation understands itself. This methodology of knowledge transfer has meant that generations of learners receive an education that is generally absent of an understanding of Indigenous lives, histories and cultures. Moreover, this absence has meant that the majority of non-Indigenous people are without the knowledge tools that aid in understanding how they have benefited from and are the beneficiaries of colonisation. Indigenised curricula as educative mechanisms generate reconciliatory knowledges and strengthen future generations’ abilities to receive and act within critical solutions for securing social cohesion in the nation.

The task of Indigenising curriculum at The University of Queensland (UQ), was given impetus through Action 14 and the associated deliverables of the (Innovate) Reconciliation Action Plan 2019–2022 to “Review and facilitate a UQ-wide approach to embedding Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander curriculum and inclusive teaching practices in programs” (UQ, 2018, p. 25).

Indigenising curriculum continues to be a focus within the Stretch Reconciliation Action Plan 2025–2027 through Action 18: “Embed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander curriculum and inclusive teaching practices in programs” (UQ, 2024, p. 37).

Additionally, it is important to note the Indigenising curriculum journey at UQ has been influenced nationally by Universities Australia’s Indigenous Strategy 2022–25 (2022), which denotes:

• Recognising the value Indigenous people and knowledge bring to the university and embedding Indigenous value systems and knowledges into university structures and commitments.
• Universities have Indigenous content in curricula that is meaningful, appropriately developed and appropriately resourced.
• Universities ensure students graduate with an awareness of Indigenous values and knowledges. (p. 55)

Indigenising curriculum at UQ has also been influenced at the international level by the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2007), which affirms that:

• Indigenous peoples are equal to all other peoples, while recognizing the right of all peoples to be different, to consider themselves different, and to be respected as such.
• All peoples contribute to the diversity and richness of civilizations and cultures, which constitute the common heritage of humankind. (p. 2)

This Handbook, which the editors are pleased to share with UQ and the wider community, represents a culmination of activities that have been mobilised across various academic and professional spaces. Within this edited collection, colleagues have documented their Indigenising curriculum efforts throughout the University, including Architecture (Go-Sam and Greenop); Business (Jordan et al. and Leroy-Dyer et al.); Chemical Engineering and Sustainable Minerals Institute (Sharma and Lant); Communication and Arts (Butler); Education (McLay and Armour); History and Philosophy (Berkhout and Donaghy); Indigenous studies (Blue et al.); Institute for Teaching and Learning Innovation (Graham and Henry); Languages and Cultures (Crump and Disbray); Library (Lagos et al.); Music (Collins et al.); Nursing, Midwifery and Social Work (Thompson and Maxwell); Political Science (Brigg); Science (Hird et al.); Social Science (Martin); and UQ College (Moor et al.).

Governance for Indigenising curriculum

Commencing in 2021 with the formation of the Indigenising Curriculum Working Party (ICWP), expertise was drawn from both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander staff, non-Indigenous staff and Indigenous students, and included the President of the Academic Board, representation at faculty level and the Director of the Institute of Teaching and Learning Innovation (ITaLI). In establishing the ICWP, the University acknowledged its responsibility to Indigenise the curriculum by inclusion of recognised leaders who championed University-wide change to the teaching and learning agenda. Decisions made by the ICWP were communicated to the Teaching and Learning Committee (now the Teaching, Learning and Student Experience Committee). Key decisions led to the formation of a set of principles for Indigenising curriculum, incorporation of Indigenising curriculum at the programmatic (degree) level and the establishment of a sub-committee of the Committee for Academic Programs and Policy (CAPP). This sub-committee is now known as the Indigenous Learning sub-committee and has as its terms of reference, not only Indigenising curriculum, but also addresses the Indigenous student experience.

Critical Indigenous voices underpin the Indigenisation of curriculum

Critical to how Indigenising curriculum was to be governed and operationalised within the University was a centring of the Indigenous voices of academic staff and students.

In the National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education report Building the Evidence to Improve Completion Rates for Indigenous Students (Fredericks et al., 2022), the Indigenous student voice was telling, advocating that an Indigenised curriculum was beneficial for the whole student body and necessary to advance engagement with Traditional Owners of Country where universities are situated and counter racist views. Students stated:

I just wish that it [Indigenous knowledges] had been a bit more present for the full student body and that it had been a bit more ingrained in some of my classes and things like that.

They could do better to engage with the [Traditional Owners] … and privilege, you know, put focus on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander content and knowledges.

So, I think you still end up with these issues in classrooms from other students that even unintentionally make comments like “colonialism was good for Indigenous people”. (Fredericks et al., 2022, pp. 18–19)

In universities, where Indigenous student populations have not reached parity with other student cohorts, senses of belonging are compromised or, worse, Indigenous students’ participation is put at risk because there is an absence of being able to see themselves in the curriculum. Teaching and learning founded in approaches of perspectives (commencing), studies (embedding) and knowledges (immersed with Indigenous knowledge holders) strengthens the value of Indigenising curricula within universities.

Consultations with Indigenous academic staff, many of whom have contributed to this Handbook, affirmed that Indigenous knowledge systems existed and needed to be respected as the cultural and intellectual property of Indigenous peoples, and they sought to ensure the Indigenous authoritative voice was centred. The Indigenous academic voice also spoke to the need for the cultural capabilities of non-Indigenous staff to be strengthened, as this was seen as critical to building appropriate knowledge and skills for an Indigenised curriculum that should be located across faculty courses and programs where possible. Moreover, it was voiced by Indigenous academics that Indigenising the curriculum required an informed leadership who could champion the required changes at discipline level. For Indigenising curriculum to succeed, a high-order set of principles was required to frame the work to be undertaken.

Principles for Indigenising curriculum

A core set of principles was developed to frame the work of Indigenising curriculum at UQ. These principles – Country, Relationships, Respect, Benefits, Cultural Capability, Reciprocity and Truth – are reflected in the contributions provided in the Handbook.

Country is a generic term used by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to denote the lands to which there are inherent senses of belonging that is evidenced through genealogical connection. In Indigenising curriculum, Country needs to be acknowledged as a living entity with which Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have a relationship. This relationship recognises Country as foundational source of Indigenous knowledges. Martin’s chapter acknowledges the challenges in teaching about the value of Country:

Building the capacity of graduates to work on Country has consequently become important across a range of subject areas, with Australian graduates increasingly required to identify and engage with Indigenous rights holders in relation to a host of activities. Yet Country can be difficult to understand, especially for non-Indigenous people.

When Indigenising curriculum is taught through immersive approaches, however, as Butler has been able to do, the learning, through manifestation of appropriate behaviours, allows Country to be the teacher: “Not nearly enough can be said about the value of silence and non-verbal communication when learning on Country.” Hird et al. part 1 offer questions pertinent to those connecting Indigenising curriculum to Country. The questions form a critical guide for teaching academics.

The development of Relationships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is critical for an Indigenised curriculum. Relationships are an important touchstone within Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural practices and inherent within relationships is the concept of reciprocity. Best practices in inter-racial relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous people move beyond the transactional only to arrangements where mutual care is centred and meaningful engagement is understood as a shared practice. Brigg writes honestly about relationships:

Beyond advocating and informing oneself, it is crucial to provide resources and fora for people – students or colleagues – to Indigenise their understandings while consolidating legitimacy and base for Indigenising efforts. In my experience, this is best achieved by suggesting guideposts for engagement while allowing people to inhabit their understandings and pursue Indigenising curriculum efforts in their own ways. There are risks in such a relatively open approach, but there is also no definitive guidebook for pursuing this work, and no possibility for perfection.

Indigenising curriculum requires building Respect for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures, lands, waters, knowledges, histories and rights through its core business of education and research, as well as campus environments. Respecting and valuing Indigenous knowledges, peoples and perspectives is foundational to an Indigenised curriculum and contributes to decolonisation.

Moor et al. importantly identify how Indigenising curriculum requires deep understandings of relationality:

Indigenising curriculum is not a matter of simply changing content; this does not address the epistemological nature from which Indigenous worldviews originate. Indigenous understandings and their origins are deeply rooted in relational contexts that must be acknowledged and integrated into the educational framework. So where do we begin?

Ethical care needs to operate, as Jordan et al. have identified in their chapter:

These learnings included making space for relationship building, checking in with each member to get a sense of how they are feeling, being respectful and making time for all participants to share their views, and recognising there is no single leader; rather, it is a collaborative process for addressing issues, solving problems, and making decisions in a caring and constructive way.

In teaching and learning contexts, the valuing of respect enacts a movement to deep thinking as Sharma and Lant note:

Hopefully … the course will make future engineers more aware of their operating context, better informed of historical legacies and more responsible in adhering to their code of conduct as engineering professionals. So far, student acceptance of and engagement with the course content is promising; and, as educators, it is reassuring that students are willing to embrace course content that pushes them to think and critically reflect.

The Benefits of an Indigenised curriculum requires cultural capabilities of educators to be aware of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural protocols and an ability to be able to engage respectfully with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, knowledges and perspectives. Berkhout and Donaghy acknowledge that true benefit eventuates when courses “include more than one week of Indigenous perspectives to encourage depth in student engagement”.

In addition, Leroy-Dyer et al. note, “Transforming the curriculum … [at multiple opportunities] has resulted in a remarkable increase in student satisfaction … This shift has demonstrated not only the effectiveness of the approach, but also the value students place on an Indigenised business curriculum.”

Go-Sam and Greenop take this consideration further in their chapter, naming the key objective for students: “Admittedly, the time constraints of the studio do not allow in depth critical examination of essentialism and cultural hierarchies. Our approach links to developing students as both accomplished scholars and culturally capable.”

In showcasing the various Indigenising curriculum in the Faculty of Science, Hird et al. part 2 acknowledge student feedback on learning:

Many students reported that it was the first time in their studies that they had been introduced to Indigenous perspectives or interacted with Indigenous peoples. Some students discussed how there was unlearning, in that the content challenged their views on how knowledge is produced when previously they assumed scientific knowledge was very black and white. Overall, students reported a transformation of their awareness of Indigenous ways of knowing into an appreciation and respect that they will take into the workforce.

Cultural Capability training is a necessary condition for quality teaching practice that positively impacts the learning experience. Building strong relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous people is important. Through connections and partnerships, Indigenising the curriculum expands the body of knowledge for creating change to advance ideas that benefit the world.

McLay and Armour’s chapter advocates for cultural capacity building:

By Indigenising curriculum and building cultural capability, the School of Education aims to better prepare our students to infuse Indigenous knowledges, perspectives, histories and cultures through all areas of the curriculum. Additionally, this approach should also broaden students’ knowledge in these areas to inform their own ways of thinking and practicing.

Thompson and Maxwell rename this effect:

To progress, we must unlearn the entrenched colonised perspectives that have been forced upon us. These perspectives are deeply embedded in our systems, which were created primarily for colonisers and often neglect the strengths and needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, families and communities, as well as other minority groups. Further, unlearning requires us to acknowledge the biases and limitations of Western education, which often prioritises colonisers’ perspectives and ignores or marginalises Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander voices, and those of other marginalised peoples. In unlearning, we must critically reflect on the power dynamics that have perpetuated colonial hierarchies.

In order to move to transformed relationships, the principle of Reciprocity needs to be upheld. Reciprocity enables mutually agreed and respectful relationships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and non-Indigenous people.

Collins et al. provide a teaching tip in their chapter that is critical to enacting reciprocity: “Co-teaching between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people models the ways Indigenous and non-Indigenous people can work respectfully together. Of course, relationships take time to build and develop and you cannot rush this; centre the relationship and reciprocity.”

Crump and Disbray consider reciprocity in relation to cultural humility:

It involves engaging with others humbly, authentically and from a place of learning. The nature of the program being co-designed with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people extends beyond the simple catchcry of “nothing for us without us”. There is a clear and present need to ensure non-Indigenous staff have a deep level of understanding of the contexts and associated impacts on Indigenous languages revitalisation.

Truth and truth-telling can be a contested matter. Truth-telling from the perspective of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people challenges misinformation and misrepresentation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander lived realities. An informed understanding challenges the myths and stereotypes that abound. Truth-telling centres the Indigenous voice in the curriculum and is a mechanism that leads to greater reconciliation between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples.

Berkhout and Donaghy untangle the complexity of truth which they see as “best done by immersing ourselves in Indigenous knowledges and engaging with Indigenous perspectives without imposing the values and norms of Western knowledge systems”.

Graham and Henry write to the impacts of truth-telling:

Participants noted openly that they experienced new and varied emotions. Many felt uncomfortable and had to consider their own culture, values and biases as they navigated many of the topics discussed. These sessions provided a safe and supportive space for participants to share their learnings and emotions, enabling many to continue their journey of discovering the truth with the encouragement and solidarity of others.

The chapter developed by Lagos et al. affirms the value of truth:

By centring truth-telling, for example, we can include the voices and perspectives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples that have been excluded in the past, and challenge colonial myths historically reinforced by libraries and other collecting institutions. This has required our Library teams to examine their practices and to question who has the authority to make changes and update records. In doing so, power and authority have been renegotiated.

Final thoughts

Throughout the journey of Indigenising curriculum at UQ, there has been a spoken refrain of not wanting to do the wrong thing, of not knowing where to start. This commentary is reasonable given that those who are responsible for teaching and learning in the University are products of non-Indigenous learning systems, particularly in Australia, where absences of Indigenous learnings are normalised and, as a consequence, there is a struggle to understand one’s own location in reference to Indigenous Countries, knowledges and peoples. In publishing the work of Indigenising curriculum as it evolves at UQ, the authors are bringing to the domain of teaching and learning practically and theoretically informed pedagogies, understandings of assessment, tactics for producing resources and a depth of content matters that can be considered. It is hoped that confidence rises with the development of an Indigenised curriculum for current and future practitioners.