1 Talking about Nothing to Talk about Something

Background

Before looking forward, it is important to look back at what has come before. A well-respected whakatauki (Māori proverb), ngā tapuwae o mua, mō muri, cautions us to begin by understanding what happened in the past if we are to make a difference in the future (Macfarlane, 2015). New Zealand’s founding document, the Treaty of Waitangi, established a partnership between the Indigenous Māori people and the colonial government (Glynn, 2015). Although the treaty was meant to create unity, it has been the cause of much dissent and disagreement in political, social, and educational contexts. Historically, educational policies in Aotearoa New Zealand, like those in other colonized societies, have focused on processes of assimilation and integration. In essence, one system of education was offered to all regardless of cultural background or need. Treating all learners in the same way was considered the best way to achieve educational success. Awareness and acknowledgement of culture were mostly ignored, and this led to underachievement by minority groups (Alton-Lee, 2005; Glynn, 2015; Samu, 2006).

In 1984, a bicultural approach to education was adopted by the New Zealand government. This approach sought to redress the inequity faced by Māori people in the traditional colonial educational system. However, little indication of how to achieve this redress was provided. Mostly, the focus was on strengthening and affirming the identity of Māori as equals (Lourie, 2016, 2018). Pedagogy was not redesigned to incorporate the development of strong relationships between educator and learner and among learners themselves. Such relationships are paramount to addressing the imbalance of educational achievement in the colonial educational system (Bishop et al., 2014; Glynn, 2015; Samu, 2006). Māori and Pacific cultures especially value face-to-face interactions to build trusting relationships (Berryman et al., 2016).

The current educational system is characterized by a genuine desire to correct educational imbalances brought about by colonial education (on decolonizing higher education, see Chapters 8 and 9 of this volume). Furthermore, a number of frameworks have been proposed to address these imbalances, but the widespread implementation of one or more frameworks has yet to find expression in teacher practice. Critical digital pedagogy and talanoa provide a framework and a set of aligned practices that hold the promise of developing strong relationships of trust in order to address power imbalances.

Critical Digital Pedagogy

To engage with critical digital pedagogy, clarification of each of the three constituent terms is required. First, critical digital pedagogy is critical to the extent that it draws from a broad critical tradition often seen to have been influenced, initially, by Karl Marx’s definition of social class as a product of access to (or lack of access to) the means of production and thus wealth. Marx’s ideas were later critiqued and built upon by members of the Frankfurt School, notably Adorno, Horkheimer, and Marcuse (Giroux, 2017). This initial critique of the injustice and social inequality brought about by unequal access to wealth was later extended to include the study of a range of other ways in which the workings of power and influence in society have led to injustice and social inequality, noticeably in regard to the interplay among race, class, and gender. It is the latter sense in which critical digital pedagogy is most often considered to be critical.

Second, the workings of power and influence affect all aspects of society, particularly those institutions that serve to entrench the power and influence of the ruling class. The school, from the perspective of critical pedagogy, is a place where prospective workers are prepared to enter a market-dominated society in which their skills will oil the wheels of industry (Freire, 1970; Giroux, 2011). In this sense, pedagogy is both a vehicle for entrenching the neo-liberal agenda and inherently shaped by that agenda. Paradoxically, pedagogy also provides a space in which critical pedagogists can engage the neo-liberal agenda in ways that illuminate the workings of power and influence in the service of benefiting some in society at the expense of others (McLaren, 2017). Pedagogy becomes contested terrain.

Third, pedagogy cannot meaningfully be separated from digital networks, platforms, and ways of being in a digital world. However, just as pedagogy itself is not value free or neutral (Bernstein, 2000), so too digital artifacts and ways of being are not value free or neutral (van den Hoven, 2007; Winner, 1980). In fact, all too often, digital artifacts and ways of being are appropriated by education from other contexts. One example is the use of presentation software for instructional purposes even though presentations encourage “lecture-style” instruction, which runs counter to the dominant social constructivist spirit of the educational age. Critical digital pedagogists seek to illuminate how power and influence play out in the design of such digital artifacts and how these digital artifacts demand pedagogical and social arrangements that benefit some learners to the detriment of others. For the purposes of this discussion, our focus is on elements of learning design that enable and encourage a talanoa approach to the development of relationships across the hybrid program.

The Talanoa Framework

The concept of talanoa was used to develop a Pacific research methodology (Vaioleti, 2006). A model evolved that incorporated four important values: ofa (love), mafana (warmth), malie (humour), and faka’apa’apa (respect). We see these values as the foundation upon which strong learning communities can be built. Talanoa offers cultural values that improve the online learning experience, build relationships, and strengthen learning to meet better the needs of diverse learners—including those who traditionally prefer in-person relationships in order to participate in their learning. What would be considered seemingly trivial talk actually contributes to thinking, learning, and knowledge building on multiple levels (Vaioleti, 2006).

This aligns well with another familiar concept in Aotearoa New Zealand education, ako- a te ao Māori, in which teacher and learner learn from each other. This entails the importance of reciprocity in and collaborative approaches to learning, building productive relationships, and empowering learning (Keown et al., 2005). The talanoa approach embraces the concept of ako. In teaching sessions, candidates become confident to share their views. These shared learning experiences are used by the teaching team to develop further the design and delivery of content. This affects learning not only for these particular candidates but also for the candidates in other cohorts.

Farther afield, the Talanoa Dialogue is a process that has been adopted as part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and is based upon similar principles of inclusion, participation, and transparency. The purpose is to share stories, develop understanding, and build empathy and trust among participants (United Nations, 2019). Another key feature of the talanoa concept is that all those involved believe that their contributions are valued and that they can participate equally in the conversation or learning.

Talanoa in the Master of Contemporary Education

The talanoa concept—and associated values—lay the foundation that underpins the building of relationships in the Master of Contemporary Education (MCE).

The talanoa MCE framework begins with the learner at the centre. Learners have the opportunity to share openly who they are and where they have come from. The talanoa values ofa (love), malie (humour), faka’apa’apa (respect), and mafana (warmth) provide the foundation upon which socio-cultural elements are developed and strengthened as learners make connections to people and places. Learners begin to have a strong sense of confidence, belonging, respect, and empathy for and from others—allowing full immersion in the opportunities and challenges of the whole learning experience.

In designing the program, careful thought was given to how we might best engage facilitators and participants against a backdrop of limited in-person connection. Since both facilitators and many participants are dispersed across the country, interaction and collaboration in the program take place largely online. Some of the questions that we asked were how could we best develop a learning community, and which tools could we use to create connections, foster critical discussions, and enable learning to push the participants to challenge their thinking and practice? Which tools could we use to help emulate the connections that normally would have been possible in a traditional, in-person program? How could the team enable participants to connect with each other and with the teaching team without the luxury of being together in a classroom? The relevant elements of program design presented below address these questions.

At the beginning of the program, candidates meet in-person during an orientation day. The day begins with a talanoa session, integrating the four values of talanoa: ofa, mafana, malie, and faka’apa’apa. Candidates are given the opportunity and freedom to talk about “nothing,” to speak about themselves and reveal anything that they are comfortable sharing with the group. There is no direction from facilitators to answer specific questions, and they do not lead the discussion or determine who speaks when. Candidates have shared control of the experience. They determine what they say and when they say it. Mana (prestige, status, standing) is strengthened as candidates share; it is all about the speakers. The experience begins with the facilitators talking about themselves. This is crucial in modelling the process for following speakers. A culture of trust and respect begins to form. The space begins to close between the candidates and facilitators and among the candidates. This can take a long time, but it is time well spent. In establishing mafana, participants are encouraged to share who they are, where they are from, and who walks with them on this journey (for sample introductions, see below). This allows candidates and staff members to begin making connections with each other. It allows each cohort to create its own culture—a safe place to communicate—and creates the understanding that “we are all in this together.” We all know who we are and who is joining us on this journey. Rather than traditional meet-and-greet icebreakers, in which one learns people’s names or favourite colours, this talanoa approach takes longer and goes much deeper. The risk is greater because the spotlight is on each individual participant within the group. It can be intimidating, but the vulnerability creates the beginnings of faka’apa’apa and ofa. Malie is interwoven to help make people feel more comfortable.

Program orientation is a critical time when connections begin, and people often verbalize their connections to people who have already introduced themselves. This is especially true for Māori and Pacific Island candidates, who become more confident as connections are made. Malie is frequently used to strengthen mafana.

As stories are shared and connections are made, faka’apa’apa occurs in the form of a sense of both respect (and pride) for oneself and respect for others. A strong sense of trust is established, as is an acceptance of everyone and the values that have been shared. There is the ability to build understanding of and empathy for who they are at this time, the pathways that led them there, and the values that they bring to this journey. As these values of talanoa develop, a strong sense of community is built, one in which students have each other’s back. This sense of community is further supported by the development of smaller collaborative peer groups that provide support and opportunities for robust critique and discussion—not only about learning in the program but also about the application of that learning in classrooms and educational contexts in which participants work.

In addition to orientation day, in-person, on-campus study days are offered four times a year, and talanoa is reinforced on these days. Since we were unable to meet in-person in 2020 because of COVID-19, online opportunities had to be bolstered to ensure that candidates could still make real connections to each other. For the new cohort that started during this time, the talanoa values took longer to build. In online sessions, groups were smaller, and more time was given during each breakout (small online groups organized by the teacher) to ensure that the process of talanoa could occur. At the beginning of and during online sessions, time is set aside to allow candidates to talanoa, both as a class and in smaller groups, through the use of breakout rooms. It is important to ensure that time is set aside to allow this talanoa to happen so that candidates are more comfortable participating in robust discussions. This embeds the concept of talanoa, in which to be able to talk about something important one needs to be able to talk about nothing (Vaioleti, 2006). An illustration of this importance was when we forgot to allow time for candidates to talanoa in a cross-cohort session; the candidates themselves challenged us on the importance of allowing the talanoa process to happen to ensure that the academic discussion could occur.

In the online environment, opportunities for various types of communication connection are an important component of talanoa. Primarily, they occur via both asynchronous and synchronous online discussions. Evaluating previous programs—and how online spaces had been used—convinced the program team to provide more support in synchronous online discussions than had been provided in other programs. Asynchronous online discussions also needed to be bolstered effectively if candidates were to engage in rigorous and robust discussions.

Zoom, a video- and web-conferencing platform, is used as a synchronous online discussion platform for regular meetings. Full-time candidates have weekly Zoom sessions, whereas part-time candidates have fortnightly meetings. These meetings provide much more than the opportunity for synchronous discussion. They build relationships and understanding not only among fellow candidates but also, vitally, with the facilitation team. An integral aspect of these synchronous meetings is the opportunity to make real-time connections. Bridging the spaces between candidates and the facilitation team, and between the learning content and existing knowledge, is a key component of these sessions. In each session, candidates can make connections with each other via breakout rooms. These breakout sessions provide opportunities to build relationships and to critique, argue, and challenge the learning and the application of this learning to their own practice-based contexts. Rather than being lecture-type sessions or webinars, these sessions are meant to teu le va/close the gaps (Reynolds, 2019).

The use of asynchronous online discussion forums is provided through Slack, essentially an instant messaging tool. It allows users to communicate through closed and open channels and direct messaging, and it enables them to share content and files. Initially intended as a forum to be used for general connection and collaboration in the program, Slack soon played a much greater role. It enabled more robust online discussion and academic support of students. Furthermore, it became apparent that the platform could be used effectively to foster the development of a community of learning and a sense of connection, thus limiting feelings of isolation often experienced in online learning situations.

Each new cohort includes both full-time and part-time students. In Slack, a General Channel provides a space for interaction across all registered cohorts, regardless of where participants might be in their learning journeys. In addition, a Cohort Channel—and cohort full-time and part-time channels—provide cohort-specific spaces for interaction and collaboration. Furthermore, each cohort is divided into small (four to eight people) collaborative peer groups, and each of these groups is provided with a Slack channel. Finally, Slack also enables private messaging between participants. Candidates are thus able to use open, closed, and private forums to ask questions, provide answers, and make connections not only with the teaching staff but also with each other.

The immediacy and multi-channel nature of this interaction and collaboration enable participants to develop strong relationships of trust. These relationships are the bedrock upon which collaborative engagement with course content, assessments, topical issues, readings, and general work and life discussions are built (Stommel, 2020). The program teaching team provides additional Slack channels to support Māori and Pasifika candidates (ManaakiFono Channel) and candidates in need of additional academic support (Mahi Tahi Channel). Because of the ease of use and speed of instant messaging within Slack, communication often takes the form of natural conversation. Candidates also use Slack to alert staff members to challenges or technical problems that can be addressed before becoming more widespread or problematic (Vela, 2018). These channels provide the space for candidates to ask questions in smaller, more comfortable forums. Initially, these channels are used for discussion; however, as candidates become more comfortable in the ManaakiFono Zoom sessions, the channels are used more for housekeeping purposes. This is different from the general cohort channels, with the larger group dynamic that continues to use the Slack channels conversationally and for deeper academic discussion. The ManaakiFono group holds these academic discussions in an environment of mafana (warmth), faka’apa’apa (respect), and ofa (love).

The use of Slack surprised the facilitation team. It became a forum that provided more support and critical discussion than was first intended. This, we believe, is a result of several factors. First, the immediacy of the messaging enables questions to be answered and connections to be made regardless of the time of day. Spontaneous conversations between students often take place both during the day and late at night. Second, questions can be answered not only by the teaching team but also by fellow candidates. Third, because of the open channels available to everyone, candidates can respond from within or across different cohorts. And fourth, candidates can communicate in open or locked channels or via direct messages to either the teaching team or individual candidates.

Strengthening relationships, building connections, and providing spaces for conversation and collaboration are essential elements in bridging gaps in knowledge, relationship, and understanding that exist among people. From a talanoa perspective, va is seen as the space between relationships that operate across dimensions. Addressing these spaces through talanoa gives context and meaning to the learning. These spaces are integral to relationships, and rather than hinder such relationships they strengthen them. Va exists between facilitator and candidate and between candidate and candidate. It also exists between the digital tools that we use and the quality of relationships that we wish to develop. Teu le va, as we noted, is the closing of the space (Reynolds, 2019). It is through deliberate acts that these spaces are closed and relationships are built.

The approach adopted in the MCE program was somewhat vindicated during the COVID-19 lockdown in Aotearoa New Zealand. Candidates who had already established strong relationships of trust and were communicating online were able to focus on transferring the skills and knowledge that they had acquired in their learning to supporting others in moving abruptly to online study. In addition, candidates initiated connections using Slack as a means of support and encouragement. They created shared spaces in which they provided resources and ideas to help others address the challenges that the lockdown had created.

Conclusion

From the perspective of critical digital pedagogy, it is exactly these spaces in digital learning that represent interrupted relationships and allow the play of power and hegemony. Morris and Stommel (2020) argue that learning in online settings has to be allowed to evolve and grow and be situated in the real world, involving real-world experiences. Learning, they argue, should not take place behind closed doors, and academic rigour is enhanced by genuine engagement with the learning. Providing opportunities in online forums to talk about nothing is vital to developing meaningful interactions and building relationships. Once learners are comfortable in the online space and have built mutual feelings of trust and respect, deeper learning conversations can occur. The talanoa approach works with all cultures because in its essence it is about people and making authentic connections: E hara taku toa i te toa takitahi engari he toa takitini (I come not with my own strengths but bring with me the gifts, talents, and strengths of my family, tribe, and ancestors).

Key Takeaways

• The cultural framework of talanoa (talking about nothing to talk about something) is an effective model to develop relational trust in in-person and online spaces.
• Teu le va (closing the gap) ameliorates power relationships and allows active online discussions, creating the foundation for critical digital pedagogy.
• Building online relationships is more than an icebreaker activity and needs to be interwoven deliberately into the learning in an online space.
• Relationship building has to be designed across the program in different modes so that students hear each other, see each other, and connect with each other.

References