Charles Darwin University Associate Professor James Smith presents his reflections on the HEPPP-funded* Whole of Engagement Initiative, launched in the Northern Territory, Australia. *Higher Education Participation & Partnerships Programme

1. Associate Professor James Smith
Office of Pro Vice Chancellor – Indigenous Leadership, Charles Darwin University;
&
Visiting Fellow, National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Curtin University
&
Adjunct Research Fellow, Collaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health,
Curtin University
Negotiating respectful community
engagement approaches to promote higher
education pathways among remote
Indigenous communities: experiences from
the Whole of Community Engagement
initiative

2. Acknowledgement
I acknowledge that this presentation is being
delivered on the traditional land of the
Nyungar people and pay respects to elders
past, present and future.
27/05/2015 2

3. Acknowledgement
27/05/2015 3

4. Acknowledging collective efforts
I would like to
acknowledge the
collective efforts of the
WCE team. Whilst this
presentation is largely
based on my own
reflections, they are
drawn from our
collective experiences.
27/05/2015 4

5. “CDU is deeply committed to serving Indigenous people
and particularly those in the Northern Territory. The
Australian higher education experience shows that low
participation, high attrition and low academic success
rates by Indigenous people are commonplace. This
needs to be disrupted; but universities cannot do this in
isolation. Key partners – indeed the leaders must be
communities and families. This is best led through
whole-of-community engagement processes.”
Professor Steven Larkin, Pro Vice Chancellor –
Indigenous Leadership, Charles Darwin University
27/05/2015 5

6. Whole of Community Engagement (WCE)
initiative:
• Funded through the Higher Education
Participation and Partnership Program
(HEPPP)
• $7.5 Million – project from July 2014
until June 2016
• Working with up to six remote
Indigenous communities (in both Top
End and Central Australia)
• Large-scale multi-site Participatory
Action Research project
• Underpinned by a partnership
approach
WCE Background
27/05/2015 6

8. Aim:
• To work with six remote Indigenous communities across
the NT to build aspiration, expectation and capacity to
participate in higher education
Objectives:
• Explore current community perspectives of higher
education, and linking with existing strategies for
achieving quality of life aspirations;
• Co-create ongoing opportunities for community,
research, academic and public policy leaders to engage
in mutually beneficial and critical relationships; and
• Identify means for making education relevant and
culturally and physically accessible;
WCE Aim and Objectives
27/05/2015 8

9.  Gunbalanya (n = 1,200+)
 Maningrida (n = 3,500)
 Galiwin’ku (n = 2,100+)
 Yirrkala (n = 840+)
 Tennant Creek (n = 3,060+)
 Yuendumu (n = 810+)
Which communities:
27/05/2015 9

10. Steering Group oversee project (est Feb 2014)
Site selection criteria developed over the following four
months (n = 20).
Example selection criteria:
 Enrolment data – Yrs 9-12
 Completion Data – Yr12
 VET enrolments and completions - CDU and BIITE
 Existing educational programs and projects
 Infrastructure – i.e. learning centres, child and family centres
 Bandwidth
Note: Communities were not involved in this short-listing or
preferred sites
How were communities selected?
27/05/2015 10

11.  Program Manager appointed 1 July 2014
 Tentative site selection early August 2014
 Staff Recruitment August-September 2014
 Community Engagement Leaders x 3
 Mentor and Enrichment Officers x 3
 Teacher Liaison Leader
 Project Co-ordinator
 Evaluation Manager (0.5FTE)
 Staff commencement Sept-Oct 2014
 HREC approval Oct 2014
 Community visits commence
 First Indigenous community-based researcher
commenced in Jan 2015
Project Timeline
27/05/2015 11

12.  Unique opportunity to recruit to positions simultaneously
 An opportunity to consider existing relationships staff had with
preferred communities
 Need to push boundaries on institutional recruitment policies
and processes (Western vs Yolngu knowledge)
Staff Recruitment
27/05/2015 12

13. What do the terms ‘community’ and
‘community engagement’ mean to you?
What does culturally respectful ‘community
engagement’ look and feel like?
How do you know if you have achieved
successful ‘community engagement’ (or not)?
Questions to ponder
27/05/2015 13

14.  Put simply – we didn’t define ‘community’
 There were different views about ‘community’ among partners, staff
and Indigenous citizens
 A realisation was reached that each participating ‘community’ was
best positioned to advise us about what the term meant to them
 Community representatives were invited onto the Steering Group in
consultation with key cultural authorities after sites had been selected
 There were differences in cultural understandings of what a
‘community’ constitutes
 There is no consensus in academic scholarship about what a
‘community’ constitutes in Indigenous contexts
How did we define community?
27/05/2015 14

15.  There were differences in staff, local community and
public opinion and peer-reviewed evidence about how
to define community engagement (CE)
 There are differing discourses relating to
‘engagement’, which can impact the socio-political
context
 There were differences in experiences among staff and
participating communities about preferred CE
approaches
 There were different theoretical conceptualisations
and positions about CE, including underpinning
principles and values
 There were different CE frameworks and models
Defining Community Engagement
27/05/2015 15

16. August 2014 March 2015
27/05/2015 16

17. Defining Community Engagement
27/05/2015 17
Sunday Canberra Times, 16 November 2014Project Brief used during the inaugural
community visit to Yuendumu in 7-9 October 2014

18. Ethics & Community Engagement
27/05/2015 18

19. Logistics of Community Engagement
27/05/2015 19

20. Logistics of Community Engagement
27/05/2015 20
Cyclone Lam – 19 February 2015 Cyclone Nathan – 23 March 2015

21. A quest for common Community
Engagement models and tools
27/05/2015 21

22.  Journal of Community Engagement & Scholarship
 Inter-sectoral term
 Principles of community engagement:
 Relational and partnership approaches (Dempsey 2010; Johnston 2010)
 Empowerment (Dempsey 2010)
 Consultation (Johnston 2010)
 Collaborative practice (Dempsey 2010; Johnston 2010; Kotze et al 2013)
 Sustainability (Clifford & Petrescu 2012; Ramachandra & Mansor 2014)
 Collective impact (Barnes et al 2015)
 Indigenous community engagement (Cervone 2007; Campbell & Christie
2008; Madden et al 2013)
 Higher education and community engagement (Campbell & Christie
2008; Dempsey 2010; Bernado et al 2012; Clifford and Pertrescu 2012)
Theories & Principles of
Community Engagement
27/05/2015 22

23. Engaging with communities on their terms
27/05/2015 23

24.  How do you know if community supports your
activity? Who is best positioned to provide this
support? What evidence do you need?
 Verbal confirmation (but from whom)
 Letters of support
 Meeting minutes (quorum can be problematic)
 Artwork
 Recruiting community-based Indigenous staff
 Communicating in local languages
Reflections about engaging with
communities on their terms
27/05/2015 24

25. Ultimately our dream is of a conversation between a
parent and a child that starts with: “So, what degree are
you planning to study for when you go to university?”
We want this dream to become commonplace
rather than an exception.
27/05/2015 25

26. 27/05/2015 26
 Associate Professor James Smith
 Whole of Community Engagement - Program Manager
 Office of Pro Vice Chancellor – Indigenous Leadership
 Charles Darwin University
 T. +61 8 8946 6328 |
 M. 0455 088 501
 james.smith3@cdu.edu.au