Embedding Culturally Responsive and Sustaining Teaching Practice in an Aotearoa New Zealand Initial Teacher Education Programme

Abstract

This paper reports on how one initial teacher education (ITE) programme has worked to support culturally responsive and sustaining teaching (CREST) practice for its student teachers. In Aotearoa New Zealand, we are required by law to include as much of the language and customs of Māori (the Indigenous population) as reasonable in our school policies and practices. The issue becomes that most of us did not grow up in Te Ao Māori (the Māori worldview) to be able to authentically include this in our practice. Therefore, ITE programmes need to prepare future teachers to be able to meet the requirements of biculturalism and authentic inclusion of Māori. The ITE programme in this paper has explicitly included communicative language teaching (CLT) aspects within a noho marae (an overnight stay on a marae with associated aspects of Te Ao Māori) that are then expected to be included by our student teachers, specifically for this paper, in their science education assessment. This paper reports on how a cohort of student teachers has been able to embed CREST practices in their teaching. This paper concludes with recommendations to better ensure the inclusion of CREST practices in ITE and subsequent teaching practice.

1. Introduction

Aotearoa New Zealand grew out of colonisation after signing Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Aotearoa is the Indigenous name for New Zealand and both names are often used together to recognise the partnership that was agreed to in the signing of Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Te Tiriti o Waitangi is the name of the document signed in 1840 between the British Crown and Indigenous chiefs and should no longer be referred to by its English translation The Treaty of Waitangi) (McMurchy-Pilkington, 2001). It should be noted that prior to colonisation, the Indigenous referred to themselves by their iwi (tribe composed of many related extended families) or hapū (sub-tribe composed of related family members). In Te Reo Māori (the Māori language), the word ‘māori’ translates as ‘normal’ but was used by the colonial government as a way to homogenise the Indigenous as a part of its plan of assimilation (McMurchy-Pilkington, 2001). Māori have taken this word back and now use it; as such, it is written with a capital letter.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, we are legally bicultural in terms of education. The Education and Training Act 2020 (Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2020a) requires all schools to include local tikaka Māori (customary practices), Mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge systems), and Te Ao Māori (the Māori worldview) in their plans, policies, and curriculum. It goes on to note that schools should take “all reasonable steps” (Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2020b, Part 1, Section 9, subsection d(ii)) to use both tikaka and Te Reo Māori. This is not a requirement for bilingualism. It is a requirement for kura (schools) and kaiako (teachers) to be as bicultural as possible. In addition, the Teaching Council of Aotearoa New Zealand, which is the governing body of the teaching profession and sits outside the government, requires all practicing kaiako in Aotearoa New Zealand to “demonstrate a commitment to tangata whenuatanga [people of the land, i.e., Māori] and Te Tiriti of Waitangi partnership in Aotearoa New Zealand” (Education Council, 2017, p. 18) through the inclusion of “histories, heritages, languages, and cultures of partners in Te Tiriti o Waitangi” (Education Council, 2017, p. 18). Finally, it should be noted that there are only two official languages in Aotearoa New Zealand: Te Reo Māori and New Zealand Sign Language. English is only a de facto language; however, 95% of all ākonga (students) in Aotearoa New Zealand attend English-medium schools (Education Counts, 2025b). As such, many te reo words are now used commonly in the mainstream.

In terms of Initial Teacher Education (ITE), I would argue that part of our role is to help normalise the use and inclusion of tikaka, te reo, and Mātauranga Māori. In Aotearoa New Zealand, about 17% of the population identifies as Māori (Education Counts, 2025b; StatsNZ, 2025). In teaching, this percentage drops to about 12% (Education Counts, 2025a), so many of us do not have the lived experiences of growing up in Te Ao Māori using Te Reo Māori. To support our student kaiako in being more authentic, they all experience a noho marae (an overnight stay on a marae) as part of their ITE programme.

1.1. Noho Marae

In Aotearoa New Zealand, marae are the communal places that belong to a particular iwi, hapū, or whānau (a family). Marae serve both social and spiritual purposes and are seen as the place where Māori belong (Mead, 2003). To enter a marae, you must be welcomed by mana whenua (the local people of the land) of that marae. This process is formal and requires the manuhiri (guest) to follow the marae’s tikaka and kawa (protocols) (Mead, 2003). After this pōwhiri (the formal welcoming ceremony), manuhiri become part of the marae and are no longer guests. As such, they are now expected to act as members of the marae. On a noho, you spend the night on a marae, most often in the wharenui (the communal house of the marae decorated with carvings and panels recalling historical events and people). As part of a noho, meals are shared as well as the cleaning of the wharekai (dining hall to include kitchen), wharepaku (bathrooms and showers), and wharenui. The noho ends with a poroporoaki (farewell ceremony) to thank the manu whenua for manaakitanga (hospitality, generosity, and support), whakawhanaungatanga (the building of relationships), and rangitiratanga (leadership).

This article is a follow-up and builds on a previously reported study on how a resource published in 2020 (Rātima et al., 2020) is able to support student kaiako in being culturally responsive and sustaining in their teaching practice (Sexton, 2024). This article builds on the first in how and why our noho marae now adds to our student kaiako learning to be more culturally responsive and sustaining in their teaching practice. Specifically, this paper’s two programme components (noho marae and science education) are now grounded in a culturally responsive pedagogical framework using communicative language teaching methodology (Richards, 2006).

1.2. Culturally Responsive and Sustaining Teaching (CREST) Practice

As noted, Aotearoa New Zealand is legally directing teachers to be as bicultural as possible. Also noted, most of us did not grow up with meaningful exposure in either Te Ao Māori or Mātauranga Māori. The ITE programmes that the student kaiako in this paper attends have a conceptual framework that was developed in cooperation with our local runaka (local tribal council). This conceptual framework explicitly states that our ITE design and delivery are based on kaitiakitaka, equity, āta, ako, and transformative practice. Kaitiakitaka is a commitment to thinking and doing things to create an environment that sustains well-being to include physical, social, and emotional spaces (Durie, 1984, 1999; Pere, 1994). In terms of ITE, it means knowing where we are, who we are, and why we are (Hetaraka, 2024). Many have called for ITE to be aware of the impact of ongoing systems of oppression and to act to change them, i.e., equity (Banks et al., 2005; Cherng & Davis, 2017; Gorski & Swalwell, 2015). In our ITE programme, teaching for equity is intentional, includes elements of risk-taking and decision making that challenge and seek to change institutionalised oppressions as and when they occur. Āta is a cultural tool guiding understandings of well-being and respectful relationships (Pohatu, 2004; Forsyth & Kung, 2007). Āta offers a means to strengthen and promote both individual and collective mana (self-esteem) and well-being. Pere (1994) noted that in Mātauranga Māori, every person is a learner from the time they are born and is in a constant state of teaching. As such, ako is the understanding that each person is both an ākonga and a kaiako, leading to reciprocal moments of learning and teaching that strengthen respectful relationships (Pihema et al., 2004). In terms of ITE, ako means participating in, and contributing to, learning communities characterised by whanaukataka (relationships through shared experiences and working together) and manaakitaka (showing respect, care, and generosity for others) (Pere, 1994). In our ITE programme, when the practices of a kaiako embrace kiatiakitaka, equity, āta, and ako, teaching can be transformative. We want our student kaiako to not only see themselves as being able to make a difference but also be able to be the difference (Shields, 2010). Putting this conceptual framework into practice requires relevant, useful, and meaningful pedagogy.

Culturally responsive and sustaining teaching (CREST) practice is how I help move our conceptual framework from the page into practice. CREST has grown out of Ladson-Billings’ (1995, 2014) Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. In 1995, Ladson-Billings noted the conflicting issues faced by students of colour in predominantly Caucasian classrooms. In most of these settings, Ladson-Billings highlighted how the heritage and cultural practices of students of colour were not supported by arguing the need for Culturally Responsive Pedagogy. Nearly 25 years later, Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy was a response to Culturally Responsive Pedagogy being misused (Ladson-Billings, 2014). Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy acknowledges the importance of both linguistic practices and educational setting perspectives (Gay, 2018; Vass, 2017). Paris and Alim (2014) highlighted how Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy affirms ākonga’s cultural and linguistic diversity. Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy was further refined by Kotluk and Kocakaya (2018) in their argument for Culturally Responsive Education. However, I argue that CREST is the more appropriate term as it gives equal weight to being both culturally responsive and culturally sustaining in a kaiako’s practice. Especially, being culturally responsive means drawing on student kaiako cultural knowledge, life experiences, and frames of reference (Hargreaves, 2022), and culturally sustaining builds on student kaiako cultural and linguistic identities and ways of knowing (Paris & Alim, 2017).

2. Materials and Approach

As stated, CREST moves our conceptual framework from a concept into a practice, but this takes deliberate and explicit communicative language teaching (CLT) (Richards, 2006). As previously noted, most kaiako in Aotearoa New Zealand do not grow up in Te Ao Māori or using Te Reo Māori, and as such, it is a second language for most of us. Therefore, CLT is a suitable approach for understanding the process of second language acquisition. Spada (2007) makes an argument for how and why CLT has moved beyond “the notion of teaching method” (p. 282) and concludes with CLT as “the most influential approach” (p. 283). As such, this paper supports Spada’s (2007) conclusion that ITE needs “to make teachers aware of the different ways in which CLT is interpreted and implemented” (p. 284). Richards (2006) identifies ten core assumptions of CLT. To support our CLT interpretation and implementation in a Te Ao Māori context, we have deliberately adapted five of them (1, 3, 4, 5, and 10; renumbered 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, respectively) for our noho marae experience to support student kaiako in being culturally responsive and sustaining in their teaching practice:

• Real meaningful communication (pepeha in context, Kei te pēhea koe?/How are you?).
• Authentic material (karakia, waiata).
• Tuakana/teina|Āta (group and pair tasks).
• Embedded tikaka in teaching and assessment (role play, planning an activity).
• Task-based learning (role play, scaffold conversations, and pūrākau narration).

This noho has the explicit inclusion of waiata (songs), karakia (incantations to invoke spiritual guidance and protection, often translated as ‘prayers’ but not always the same as the Western connotation of religion), pūrākau (cultural narratives), and pepeha (a personal introduction to include significant people and places you are connected to). These four components have embedded meaning and connections to Te Ao Māori while at the same time helping student kaiako in using Te Reo Māori authentically. Prior to the noho, student kaiako attend briefing sessions on what will happen, how, and by whom. They practice their pepeha and the waiata and karakia that will be used over the course of the noho. In the noho, they apply teaching pedagogy from the course on how to use and make meaning from pūrākau in task-based learning. Each student kaiako is given the opportunity to present their pepeha, along with the staff members also staying on the marae. Both kaiako and student kaiako engage in various activities to demonstrate manaakitanga, whakawhanaungatanga, and rangatiratanga. An explicit part of the noho is the reflection time to make meaning from the experiences and how they are engaging in manaakitanga, whakawhanaungatanga, and rangatiratanga.

See Appendix A for a noho marae programme. A noho begins when student kaiako and kaiako gather outside the marae to prepare for the pōwhiri. As manuhiri, we are formally called onto the marae and follow the marae tikaka to enter the wharenui. This formal ceremony in Te Reo Māori not only welcomes us onto the marae but also brings us into the marae as members who are now part of the marae. The pōwhiri is followed by a shared meal as food and drink finish the ceremony. Student kaiako now have designated times to be helpers in the kitchen, set up for different activities, and take care of the marae. All activities are based in Te Ao Māori using Mātauranga Māori in real, meaningful practice. It is our intention that the student kaiako take ownership of their learning while supporting their peers (i.e., tuakana-teina in practice where the tuakana, as the more experienced and/or knowledgeable, works to support the teina as the less experienced and/or knowledgeable), so they effectively teach and learn (i.e., ako) from each other. As indicated, these five core assumptions of CLT have been embedded into our noho to position our student kaiako as active participants and co-constructors of knowledge and collaborative skills.

This noho marae experience is about respecting the Māori way of learning by seeing learning as something that happens in relationships between not only people and the community of learners they are in, but also the land. Through tuakana-teina, āta, and ako, we are all kaiako and ākonga and able to share knowledge. This allows all of us to be connected to who we are and where we come from (i.e., pepeha) as we all participate and engage in task-based activities around meaningful contexts (i.e., pūrākau, waiata, karakia, and kaitiakitaka of the marae) in a safe space.

Participants

The participants in this study were recruited from an ITE provider that offers a three-year Bachelor of Teaching qualification for primary and early childhood education, as well as a one-year postgraduate degree for primary, early childhood, and secondary education. All of our Year 2 primary and early childhood education student kaiako, along with our postgraduate primary, early childhood, and secondary education student kaiako, attend a noho marae as a component of their ITE programme in Semester 1 (January to June) of the year. It is made clear to each potential student kaiako in their interview that attending this noho marae is a component of their ITE programme, and attendance is an expectation. To support whakawhanaukataka (relationship building), the primary Bachelor of Teaching student kaiako attended the same noho as a cohort and took the same Year 2 compulsory courses, of which science education is one of their Semester 2 (July to November) courses. As noted, I have previously reported (Sexton, 2024) on the science education paper and how it explicitly requires the inclusion of links to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātuaranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020).

This paper’s Year 2 2025 cohort is typical of most years in terms of demographics as 42 (66.7%) self-identified as New Zealand/European; 12 (19%) self-identified as Māori, of which 5 listed this as first Ethnicity and seven as their second Ethnicity; 6 (9.5%) self-identified as Pasifika; and the final 3 (4.8%) self-identified as International students (all three from Northern Europe: England, Ireland, and Germany) (StatsNZ, 2025). In 2025, 62 of the 63 student kaiako successfully completed the science education component of their course. Therefore, 98.4% of the cohort completed both the noho marae and science education components. While both the noho attendance and the science education paper were compulsory course components, the student kaiako in this cohort voluntarily agreed to participate and gave informed consent. The author declares that research ethics approval for this article was provided by the University of Otago ethics board—Application D21/081.

3. Results and Discussion

The noho has expressed intentions to support the student kaiako in experiencing Te Ao Māori through Mātauranga Māori in supportive and meaningful use of Te Reo Māori, i.e., the five core assumptions of CLT. These student kaiako then continue with their programme of study with the expectation that they will take these experiences and put them explicitly into their teaching practice. In their Year 2 compulsory science education paper, in addition to explaining explicitly how, where, and why they are including the curriculum’s Nature of Science, Key Competencies, and Effective Pedagogies (Ministry of Education, 2007), they must also include links to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātuaranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema. Appendix B is the template that student kaiako are provided for their science education assessment.

As all student kaiako experienced the noho marae, attended the science education tutorials in which links to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātuaranga Māori, Key Competencies, Effective Pedagogies, the Nature of Science, and The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020) were explicitly demonstrated, and used the provided template for their science education assessment, it was anticipated that student kaiako would be able to demonstrate culturally responsive and sustaining teaching practices in their assessments, see

Table 1. CLT links to CREST in practice.

CLT	Number Putting CREST in Practice (n = 63)	%
5. Task-based learning	62	98.4
1. Real meaningful communications	58	92.1
2. Authentic materials	58	92.1
4. Embedded Tikaka in teaching	40	63.5
3. Tuakana-Teina/Āta	37	58.7

.

A culturally responsive and sustaining teaching approach is not only central to good teaching and learning in Aotearoa New Zealand but also a legal requirement (Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2020a). This necessitates incorporating aspects of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi partnership that values ākonga’s voice and creates a safe and inclusive environment for all learners. Our student kaiako are encouraged to use Te Reo Māori in such a way that it normalises the use of te reo, promoting identity, language, and culture.

I would argue that science is at its most powerful when ākonga are engaged in authentic inquiry. This allows ākonga to explore their own questions and make sense of their world through hands-on experiences. An essential part of this is ākonga kōrero (student talk). Ākonga kōrero is “education at its most elemental and potent” (Alexander, 2010, p. 306). The integration of Mātauranga Māori is not to be tokenistic but carried out as naturally and deliberately as possible by each ākonga. Using kupu (words) that are meaningful and necessary to ‘talk’ about the science ākonga are experiencing helps to normalise te reo not only in the lesson but also in the kaiako’s teaching practice. This affirms linguistic identity and validates Indigenous knowledge. Research has shown that weaving Indigenous perspectives into science enriches rather than dilutes scientific learning and positions ākonga to value multiple knowledge systems (Khupe, 2020; Snively & Williams, 2016).

As the lesson plan required student kaiako to plan an activity that their ākonga would do, having all 62 who submitted the assessment include task-based learning was not unexpected. As noted in Appendix B, the template included a planning box in which student kaiako were informed that links to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātuaranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020) were not an option. Student kaiako were told that there was no word count expectation on how much te reo was to be included. As a result, four chose to include only minimal phrases such as kia ora (which means ‘be well’ and is used as a common acknowledgement to another person, similar to hello) and ka pai (which means ‘it will be good’ and is commonly used to say well done to someone), see

Table 2. Student kaiako putting CREST into their practice.

Embedded Inclusion of CREST	Some Inclusion of CREST	Minimal Inclusion of CREST
Pamela	Dani	Luke
Mary	Kim	Jim
Betty	Barry	Renee
Tina	Lynda	Tracey

.

There were four student kaiako who embedded te reo throughout their assessment, such as Pamela’s introduction to her lesson (all names are pseudonyms):

Kia ora tamariki mā! He pātai tāku, which of these will rewā (melt) fastest in wera (heat): chocolate (tiakarete, ice (hukapapa), butter (pata), or wax? Turn to a budy and make a matapae (prediction) and a reason. [First two sentences translated as—Hello students. I have a question, which of these will melt fastest in heat: chocolate, ice, butter, or wax?]

While Pamela and Barry both self-identified as Māori (Pamela as her second ethnicity and Barry as his first), both grew up with limited exposure to te reo. It should also be noted that Luke was one of the three international students who migrated to New Zealand, and he was not exposed to any te reo until he began High School. The other nine student kaiako included in this paper all self-identified as New Zealand/European.

The four students who included some te reo did so through the use of authentic materials in their lesson planning. These student kaiako used a programme-provided resource (a handbook including basic to intermediate phrases, karakia, waiata, and sentence structures) to support student kaiako, including te reo in their teaching. Dani, like the others in this group, included the simpler and shorter karakia to start their lessons, for example:

Kia tau te rakimārie (May there be peace)

I roto i tēnei whare o tatou (In this place of ours)

I tēnei wā (in this time)

Barry and Lynda then went a bit further by bringing in classroom instructions and commands in te reo, such as whakaronga mai, titiro mai (Listen to me, look to me), as well as key vocabulary for their topic, such as Lynda’s ‘Exploring the Moon’ lesson: Marama—Moon, rua—crater, and matakōkiri—meteoroid.

While the planning template required student kaiako to include Te Reo me ngā Tikaka, Mātauranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020), it was unsurprising that the same four who chose to include minimal te reo also chose not to include karakia, embedding any tikaka or Mātauranga Māori ways of being and learning, such as Tuakana-Teina. Fortunately, there were three others, like Pamela, who grounded the beginning and ending of their lessons with appropriate and relevant well-being karakia, such as Mary’s beginning of her lesson:

Tukua te wairua kia rere ki ngā tuamata (Allow one’s spirit to exercise its potential)

Hai ārahi i a tātaou mahi (To guide us in our work)

Me tā tatou whai i ngā tikaka a rātou mā (as well as in our pursuit of our ancestral traditions)

Kia mau, kia ita, kia kore ai e ngaro (Take hold and preserve it, ensure it is never lost)

Kia pupui, kia whakamaua (Hold fast, Draw together,)

Kia tina, Tina, Hui e, Tāiki e (Affirm)

Betty, like Pamela and Mary, in her lesson on ‘Properties of Matter’ highlighted where and how she and the class would focus on sustainability as kaitiaki (guardians) for the taiao (the world) and respect the whenua (the land) as they upheld Māori tikaka as kaitiakitanga (stewardship/custodians of resources, environment, and knowledge). Finally, Tina was similar to Pamela, Mary, and Betty, as in her instructions for investigating ‘Forces and Motion,’ she wrote the following to be stated in her class, “We are working in groups and when we have discussions as a class it means we all get to share and learn together. Sometimes you help others and sometimes they help you—that’s tuakana/teina.”

As part of their assessment, student kaiako were required to provide a justification for what they did, how they did it, and why they did it this way. The student kaiako were given this opportunity to support their lesson planning with an argument for why it would be relevant, useful, and meaningful learning. Tina provided an example of how the four who embedded CREST in their practice justified their planning—translations provided here that were not part of the original assessment are in [ ] as these are in common usage in Aotearoa New Zealand:

Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka and Mātauranga Māori are evident throughout my lesson. One key area is talking about the whakapapa [genealogy, ancestry] of resources. I did this because it is important for children to connect their own cultural narratives to learning: to kōrero about their own stores and connections to the world and communities. This means the Western view of science is not dominated in the learning space, where Māori learners and all diverse learners can build their science understanding through a lens that supports their learning.

Tina, like the others in her group, embedded CREST throughout the lesson in authentic learning opportunities. In her lesson on ‘Forces and Motion’, she set up two demonstration ramps, both at the same height and angle but with different surfaces: one with sandpaper and one without. Her ākonga were asked to describe what they noticed about the two ramps. She then explicitly included the following:

Before we start racing our cars let’s think about the whakapapa. Or where these resources come from. Just like people have ancestors, the things we use also come from somewhere and have connections. Sand and wood come from Papatūānuku [Mother Earth]. Do you know of any atua [Māori cosmology beings or gods connecting Māori to the physical and/or spiritual worlds] or pūrākau [cultural narratives] that could be connected to these natural resources?

The four student kaiako who included some CREST in their practice did so mainly through the inclusion of concepts from The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020). Dani is an example of these student kaiako, where she stated the following:

Cultural inclusivity is embedded throughout the lesson, guided by the principles of The Hikairo Schema, which highlights respect, relationships and reciprocity in teaching and learning. This reinforces the values of kaitiakitanga [stewardship, guardianship] and manaakitanga [hospitality, caring], recognizing the responsibility to care for living things and the interconnectedness of life and the environment.

In her lesson on ‘How Plants Grow’, she highlighted where and how The Hikairo Schema’s (Rātima et al., 2020) concept of rangatiratanga focused on allowing her ākonga to demonstrate leadership and individual responsibility within their cooperative learning groups. This was the final lesson in a unit of work that brought together the learning experience over several lessons to allow her ākonga to report on their wheat grass seeds’ growth from the seeds they planted. In Te Ao Māori, plants are taonga (treasures, things of value) and connect us to Papatūānuku. Therefore, caring for plants shows respect as Mātuaranga Māori embraces the connections to all things to include both human and non-human worlds (plants, lands, and water). As a result, the student kaiako like Dani were on track and able to include some culturally responsive and sustaining links, unlike the four student kaiako who included minimal CREST in their practice.

Kim was also able to include some CREST in her practice, but unlike her peers in this category, she did so mainly through Mātauranga Māori. For her, she saw the intergenerational passing down of knowledge grounded in ancestral understanding of the world around us as key. She built her lesson around a whakataukī (a Māori proverb—a poetic, wise saying that contains underlying messages and wisdom relevant to Māori culture, often used to introduce a topic) describing how the kākāpō’s (large native parrot to Aotearoa New Zealand that does not fly) colouring blends into the native bush, i.e., camouflage. Her lesson on ‘How Animals Camouflage in their Habitats’ began with the kākāpō and then introduced other native animals, leading into an activity in which they matched animals to habitats. Kim began with a whakataukī in order to focus her ākonga on the concept of ecology, in which living things are suited to their particular habitats. She did this to lead her ākonga into meaningful use of the words ‘camouflage’ and ‘habitat’ as other native animals were brought into the lesson. For her, she saw the ancestral knowledge being passed down through whakataukī as a way to make the science memorable, coherent, and meaningful. She wanted her teaching to allow her ākonga to make sense of their world by building connections.

Jim was one of the four who included minimal CREST practices in their lesson. As noted, the template required all student kaiako to include this on the planning template. The problem, however, was their use of this planning in their lesson. Jim noted in his planning that he would use The Hikairo Schema’s (Rātima et al., 2020) rangatiratanga throughout his lesson:

Rangatiratanga can be determined within the students as they learn about gravity and effects of forces and motion through marbles. This can be shown throughout the lesson as students become the owner of their work they do and can show their understanding of the subject through multiple ways, such as physical examples of the ramps or through the results of the times they managed to record.

This concept was not mentioned or referred to again in the lesson until near the very end of his planning. Just prior to his conclusion, in which his ākonga would compare their results, he noted, “Rangatiratanga is displayed within this as it allows for students to display their understanding of the topic in different ways.” As it was only minimally included in the lesson planning, it was not unexpected that he did not refer to this in his justification. His entire justification was based on a Western science perspective referencing Piaget’s theory of human development and Western ideas of modelling in science education. While Jim chose not to meaningfully include any CREST in his lesson, Renee was far more problematic.

Renee based her lesson on ‘Rūaumoko Volcanic Eruptions’ (Rūaumoko is the Māori atua of earthquakes, volcanoes, and seasons). Her template planning included only basic references to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātauranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema. Her lesson was then staged with no inclusion of any of these links. While this was troubling, the far more problematic concern was that she noted numerous references to these links in her Teaching Points and Focus Questions. None of these were in her actual lesson, and there was no connection that could be meaningfully made between her actual lesson stages and these links. This complete disconnect was then mirrored in her justification. She noted the following:

Teaching pedagogies are proven to enhance student learning, there is significant use of these. This lesson plan focusses on creating a safe learning environment. Hands on learning being able to touch and feel the materials is a small aspect that can really enhance participation and enjoyment which overall stimulates the rich learning experiences.

Renee is making an implicit reference to some of the effective pedagogies of The New Zealand Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2007). Student kaiako were told that the six effective pedagogies in this document were based on decades of Aotearoa New Zealand classroom research. These are good pedagogies; the problem was Renee then stated that “The Hikairo Schema fluidly works with the effective teaching pedagogies.” This is problematic as the curriculum document (Ministry of Education, 2007) and The Hikairo Schema (Rātima et al., 2020) are not the same. The student kaiako were told explicitly how these two documents can work together, but also how they are different. Renee only focused on how they are similar without taking into consideration where they come from or how they are based on different cultural perspectives. I would argue that at best she has made an error in judgment in how to be culturally responsive and sustaining in her teaching practice, and at worst promulgating the assimilation policies of colonial New Zealand. The latter, if true, would be significantly worse than Luke’s decision.

Luke, as noted, was one of the self-identified international students. He migrated here and attended High School in Aotearoa New Zealand. He was like the others in the group in that he only included minimal CREST practices in his planning. Moreover, in his lesson, he only included a few common Te Reo Māori phrases. He acknowledged that he knows very little Te Reo Māori; his first and only noho marae experience was the one provided in Semester 1, and this paper’s inclusion of Mātauranga Māori is not what he grew up with. As such, he made the decision to include only what he was comfortable including, but would have to build on this limited knowledge, stating, “I cannot treat Te Reo Māori as an ‘add on’, I need to be able to authentically embed the Māori language to be able to reinforce its value. I need more learning.” Luke knows he needs more learning, but more importantly, he wants to learn more and is on the right track in that it cannot be what he terms an ‘add on’ but needs to be authentically embedded.

CREST teaching practices acknowledge that the use of Te Reo Māori and English validates all ākonga knowledge systems. It ensures that ākonga who whakapapa to Māori see their language, culture, and worldview reflected in the classroom. Science education is just one learning area in Aotearoa New Zealand, but if student kaiako are able to plan to be culturally responsive and sustaining in their teaching practice, this will allow them to more likely strengthen cultural identity confidence. Research has shown that integrating Mātauranga Māori and science in meaningful ways strengthens ākonga participation by valuing cultural knowledge systems, fostering inclusivity, and ensuring that education reflects the lived realities of Aotearoa New Zealand learners (Mercier, 2018; Snively & Williams, 2016). This is good learning as supported by Royal-Tangaere (1997), who highlights that teaching and learning are not only about acquiring knowledge but also about nurturing identity, strengthening whanaunatanga (relationship building), and honouring the interconnectedness of people, the natural world, and the spiritual realm. This is not only essential for our Māori ākonga but for all of our ākonga as it enables them to consider their own cultural practices in relation to Te Ao Māori and as part of a bicultural nation. This practice directly relates to Our Code Our Standards (Education Council, 2017) through the commitment to tangata whenuatanga (people of the land, i.e., Māori) and Te Tiriti o Waitangi, as it requires kaiako to actively uphold Te Reo Māori, Tikaka Māori, and Mātauranga Māori within their teaching practice, ensuring equity and cultural responsiveness for all ākonga.

4. Conclusions

The inclusion of CLT in the noho marae and culturally responsive and sustaining teaching practice (CREST) in the science education paper was intentional, as they both reflect a culturally responsive approach that values Māori ways of knowing. Moreover, in the science education component, both Māori and Western paradigms were acknowledged and included as able to work together, as many concepts can be explained and explored from both the mainstream and Mātauranga Māori perspectives, specifically highlighting patterns, interconnections, and relationships within the physical and cultural environments. By weaving Māori perspectives naturally and meaningfully, ākonga are supported to see science as interconnected with culture and to recognise that multiple knowledge systems can provide valuable explanations for natural phenomena. Not only science education but also education should acknowledge Mātautanga Māori as an authoritative and valid way of investigating and explaining our natural world, not as secondary or less valid than Western science (Moko-Painting et al., 2023).

CREST necessitates drawing on students’ cultural knowledge, life experiences, and frames of reference, but in ITE, it also means providing student kaiako with cultural knowledge, life experiences, and frames of reference. Similarly, CREST draws on cultural and linguistic identities and ways of knowing. So in ITE, CREST needs to support student kaiako in being more natural and non-tokenistic in the inclusion of cultural and linguistic identities as well as ways of knowing, as there is a body of evidence that supports the claim that students learn what they do (Nuthall, 2007). Our inclusion of CLT in our noho marae is a means to allow student kaiako to experience manaakitanga, whakawhanaungatanga, and rangatiratanga, so they are then able to put this into their own CREST practice.

4.1. Limitations

This research was conducted at only one university with only a one-year cohort of a Bachelor of Teaching (Primary Education) programme. While these student kaiako provide evidence of how a programme is working to support some of its student kaiako in being culturally responsive and sustaining in their teaching practice, these findings cannot be generalised to the wider teaching population.

4.2. Recommendations

The template that was provided and required to be used explicitly stated that student kaiako were to make links to Te Reo Māori me ngā Tikaka, Mātauranga Māori, and The Hikairo Schema. What some of these student kaiako have shown is that, as the current legal requirement for the inclusion of culturally responsive and sustaining teaching states, “taking all reasonable steps” (Parliamentary Counsel Office, 2020b, Part 1, Section 9, subsection d(ii)) allows for a wide range of possibilities in how this requirement is interpreted and put into practice. While I would never advocate for a te reo word count requirement in teaching, better alignment of the current law with the professional standards of teaching would be beneficial. According to Our Code Our Standards (Education Council, 2017), kaiako are required to demonstrate year-on-year practice and development of Te Reo me ngā Tikaka. Unfortunately, there is limited Professional Development and Learning funding available to schools, and much of this supports kaiako in making changes to the curriculum. Without meaningful commitment to further all kaiako abilities in being culturally responsive, the implementation of sustaining teaching practices will be limited.