WIXLIB

Editors and ContributorsxiiiCatherine Hungerford School of Nursing, Midwifery and Indigenous Health,Charles Sturt University, Bathurst, AustraliaMichael Johnston The University of Sydney, Sydney, AustraliaNatalie Leung International and Global Studies, Camperdown, NSW, AustraliaMichael A. McDonnell Early American History, The University of Sydney,Camperdown, NSW, AustraliaJanine Mohamed The Lowitja Institute, Carlton, VIC, AustraliaTran Nguyen National Centre for Cultural Competence, The University ofSydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaJiaru Ni Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Camperdown,NSW, AustraliaJanine Oldfield Batchelor Institute, Batchelor, NT, AustraliaKathleen Pait James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USAAlessandra Pecci Faculty of Society and Design, Bond University, Gold Coast,QLD, AustraliaTai Peseta Western Sydney University, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaChris Pitt Aboriginal Health and Wellbeing Clinical Academic Group, Universityof NSW, Kensington, AustraliaMatthew Poll University Museums, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW,AustraliaRosanne Quinnell Faculty of Science, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW,AustraliaLiz Rix Gnibi College of Indigenous Australians, Southern Cross University,Lismore, AustraliaKim Robertson Office of the Pro Vice Chancellor—Indigenous Leadership,Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, AustraliaDarlene Rotumah Gnibi College of Indigenous Australians, Southern CrossUniversity, Lismore, AustraliaGabrielle Russell National Centre for Cultural Competence, The University ofSydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaEhssan Sakhaee School of Civil Engineering, The University of Sydney,Camperdown, NSW, AustraliaKayla Sale Translational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University,Sydney, NSW, Australia

xivEditors and ContributorsPaul Saunders Translational Health Research Institute, Western SydneyUniversity, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaCraig N. Shealy James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USAJuanita Sherwood Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney,Sydney, NSW, AustraliaJames A. Smith National Centre for Student Equity in Higher Education, Bentley,AustraliaRenee Staton James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USALee Sternberger James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USAJakelyn Troy Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research, The University ofSydney, Sydney, NSW, AustraliaJonnell Uptin Sydney School of Education and Social Work, The University ofSydney, Camperdown, NSW, AustraliaDein Vindigni School of Health and Biomedical Science, Royal MelbourneInstitute of Technology, Melbourne, VIC, AustraliaFelix Wang James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USAKyar Wilkey Translational Health Research Institute, Western Sydney University,Sydney, NSW, AustraliaMichele Willsher Batchelor Institute, Batchelor, NT, AustraliaLauren Zarb School of Nursing and Midwifery, La Trobe University, Melbourne,VIC, Australia

List of FiguresFig. 6.1Fig. 6.2Fig.Fig.Fig.Fig.6.36.46.57.1Fig. 7.2Fig. 8.1Fig. 8.2Fig. 8.3Fig. 10.1Fig. 12.1Fig. 12.2Fig. 12.3Fig. 13.1Fig. 14.1Aggregate Profile—contrast by top 30% and bottom30% of Full Scale scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Decile Profile—contrast by top 30% and bottom 30%of full Scale scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aggregate Profile—contrast by gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Aggregate Profile—contrast by country of origin . . . . . . . . . .Aggregate Profile—contrast by ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Conceptual model of potential performance parameters tostrengthen Indigenous higher education monitoring andevaluation in Australia. Source Smith et al. (2018, p. 71)reproduced with permission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Towards data sovereignty: a national conversation aboutstrengthening evaluation in Indigenous higher contexts inAustralia. Source NCSEHE (2018, p. 5) reproduced withpermission. Design by Jeffrey Phillips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The motivational gravity grid (Carr & MacLachlan, 1997).Used with permission of the authors, 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Perceived workplace cultures of respondents (n 10) . . . . . .An indigenist model of leadership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The Aboriginal “culture house”—a metaphor for thecomplexity and interdependence of related aspects ofaddressing cultural differences (Franks, 2011 p. 9) . . . . . . . . .Extract from Dawes notebook (Dawes et al., 2009) . . . . . . . .Patyegarang trail in Campus Flora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Robert Andrew’s work, GARABARA, installed at thenew Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences building(Photo credit R. Quinnell The University of Sydney) . . . . .Bovill and Bulley’s (2011) ladder of student participationin curriculum design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Model of engagement and assessment for AGEN3008Indigenous Land and Food Knowledge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .94.96.97.99. 100. . 120. . 129. . 142. . 143. . 151. . 185. . 219. . 224. . 228. . 237. . 267xv

xviFig.Fig.Fig.Fig.List of Figures15.115.217.117.2Aunty Kerrie’s wrap-around model of cultural proficiency . . .Participants’ scores on workshop content . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Adapted from O’Leary’s Cycles of Action Research . . . . . . .A logic model of action research in cultural competence,proficiency and safety in maternity care and education . . . . . . . 284. . 286. . 313. . 316

List of TablesTable 6.1Table 6.2Table 8.1Table 15.1Table 17.1Correlation matrix findings above 0.40 between SocioculturalOpenness and Beliefs, Events and Values Inventory (BEVI)scales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Sample results for Background–Domain Contraston the BEVI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Core values of Indigenous communities (after Shannon et al.,2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Thematic analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .A representation of the Action Research process(Kildea, Barclay & Brodie, 2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85.90. . 139. . 287. . 315xvii

Part IIntroduction

Chapter 1Cultural Competence and the HigherEducation Sector: A Journeyin the AcademyJack Frawley, Gabrielle Russell, and Juanita SherwoodIntroductionAlthough cultural competence in higher education is a worthwhile starting pointfor teaching, learning, research and leadership in the higher education sector, it hasbeen argued that it is the journey and not the destination that is important (Clutton,2017). What is cultural competence, and what does one encounter on a culturalcompetence journey? Pecci, Frawley, & Nguyen (in this volume) suggest that culturalcompetence discourse is a “cartography of sorts”, and this is an apt metaphor. Mostjourneys require a map, and this book is, on one level, a map of a journey throughhigher education policies and programmes, where issues and themes emerge througha range of perspectives.Finding the origin of cultural competence is not easy. It appears to have emerged inthe 1970s in the health sector of the USA. The US version of cultural competence wasborn in child mental health and social services where African American, Hispanic,Pacific Islander and First Nations peoples were treated poorly, and hence, equitablecare was an issue (Cross et al. 1989). Along with this was the need to find models foreffectively working with East Asian refugees who had different cultural models ofunderstanding, spoke other languages and had complex social and healthcare needs.Over subsequent decades, the practice and study of the cultural competenceconcept have extended into the areas of business, education and the social sciences.There seems to be general agreement in the literature that an agreed definition ofcultural competence is elusive (Pecci et al., this volume). One report suggests thatthere are more than 300 interrelated constructs (Leung, Ang & Tan, 2014) and aplethora of instruments that claim to measure them. Nevertheless, the definition mostJ. Frawley (B) · G. RussellNational Centre for Cultural Competence, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australiae-mail: jwfrawley@icloud.comJ. SherwoodFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia The Author(s) 2020J. Frawley et al. (eds.), Cultural Competence and the Higher Education Sector,https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5362-2 13

4J. Frawley et al.widely cited in scholarship is provided by Cross et al. (1989, p. iv) who define culturalcompetence as “a set of congruent behaviours, attitudes, and policies that cometogether in a system, agency, or among professionals and enables that system, agency,or those professionals to work effectively in cross-cultural situations”. Cross et al.(1989) emphasise that while identifying a commitment to improving cultural competence at the organisational level is an “ambitious journey”, the process should not beseen as a hindrance to a system. In their view, a culturally competent system wouldvalue diversity; have the capacity for individuals and systems to be able to undertake cultural self-assessment; be conscious of the dynamics inherent when culturesinteract; have institutionalised cultural knowledge; and have developed adaptationsto diversity (Cross et al., p. v).Critical engagement with the existing field of scholarship provides a valuable placefrom which to understand what is meant by “cultural competence” in both theoreticaland practical terms. Frisby and O’Donohue (2018) recommend that cultural competence be viewed rationally and critically rather than dogmatically, unthinkingly andblindly. Likewise, Palmer and Carter (2014) suggest that cultural competence isan ongoing work and is a process not an end-state, with a lifelong commitment toself-critique and reflection. Clutton (2017) believes that the language of “culturalcompetence” is unhelpful because it focuses on culture as ethnicity and that it is timeto shift language to “contextual sensitivity” for the heightened awareness of citizens,as individuals shaped by their histories, socialisation, life experiences and currentinstitutional structures (Clutton, 2017, p. vii).Cultural competence in an Indigenous Australian context is, in the most part,informed by the constructs of knowing, being and doing (Martin, 2003). “Knowing” is about “knowing and understanding history, culture, customs and beliefs”;“being” is about “awareness, authenticity and openness to examining one’s ownvalues and beliefs”; and “doing” is “culturally appropriate action and behaviour”. Todevelop cultural capabilities requires “continuous development and practice in allthree domains, a continuous process of learning” (CoA, 2015, p. 3).Due to Indigenous people having been treated by most government systems assecond-class citizens, there has been a lack of equitable service provision in theareas of health and education. This has had long-lasting implications and resultedin inequitable opportunities. Cultural competence is viewed as both a philosophical rights-based model and a pedagogical approach to improve the knowledge ofproviders in the areas of law, health, education, housing and welfare; and to reduceunconscious bias in order to enhance Indigenous people equitable access to the basicservices all other Australians enjoy.BackgroundIn 2014, the University of Sydney established the National Centre for CulturalCompetence (NCCC) to become a thought leader in cultural competence philosophy,praxis, process and methods. Since then, NCCC has contributed, through a variety

1 Cultural Competence and the Higher Education Sector 5of ways, to the dissemination of knowledges, pedagogies and skills that informa whole-of-university approach to embedding cultural competence (Sherwood &Russell-Mundine, 2017). At a university system level, this has included an innovative professional leadership development programme for the university’s academicand professional staff. The Culturally Competent Leadership Program develops andsupports a network or community of practice of cultural competence championsacross the University of Sydney. It has also included a suite of modules and workshop offerings to develop and apply the cultural competence concept. The work ofthe NCCC is a response to the University of Sydney’s 2016–2020 strategic plan thatemphasises the development of cultural competence for all staff and builds leadershipquality in this area.While there exist a number of cultural competence conferences with a focus onhuman rights, health and disabilities, until recently there have been no conferenceson cultural competence or the intersections between cultural competence and thehigher education sector. In 2018, the NCCC hosted a conference to address thisgap: Cultural Competence and the Higher Education Sector: Dilemmas, Policies andPractice Conference 2018. In the consultation phase of the conference, letters weresent to 37 national and international organisations to determine their interest and thisreceived an overwhelmingly positive response.The hosting of the conference facilitated networking and sharing of informationand created a national dialogue about the role of the higher education sector incultural competency policy and practice. The conference provided a culturally safeopportunity to present research and share experiences and emerging evidence aboutcultural competence models and approaches. Furthermore, it generated and documented an evidence base about the most effective approaches for supporting culturalcompetence in the higher education sector and allowed the exploration of differentand innovative approaches and strategies that incorporated Indigenous Knowledges(IKs) and practices into the development and implementation of cultural competence in the higher education sector. The chapters in this book are drawn from thepresentations at this conference.Cultural Competence and the Higher Education SectorUniversities Australia (UA), the peak body representing Australian universities,developed the Indigenous Cultural Competency project to be a key source of guidanceand direction in informing the case for cultural competence within the Australianhigher education sector. UA recommends making cultural competence in universitiesall encompassing, including in research practice, teaching and learning methodologies, and employment practices; and sees the role of universities as agents of change,and committed to a social justice agenda. UA (2011) defines cultural competence as:Student and staff knowledge and understanding of Indigenous Australian cultures, historiesand contemporary realities and awareness of Indigenous protocols, combined with the proficiency to engage and work effectively in Indigenous contexts congruent to the expectations

6J. Frawley et al.of Indigenous Australian peoples [and] the ability to critically reflect on one’s own cultureand professional paradigms in order to understand its cultural limitations and effect positivechange. (p. 3)Developing cultural competence within the higher education sector requiresleaders to facilitate and guide a whole-of-institution approach that “includes examining individual attitudes and practice in teaching as well as management, executive,policy and strategic commitment to revise and assess capacity to implement culturallycompetent teaching, learning, academic, research and employment spaces” (Tayloret al., 2014, p. 37). Cultural competence represents a critically important journey inhigher education (Sherwood & Russell-Mundine, 2017) and aligns with UA’s viewthat positions university institutions as agents of change, not only in improving highereducation for Indigenous Australians within the universities, but also by making “acommitment to the capacity building of Indigenous communities” to reach moreequitable outcomes for access and participation within these institutions (UA, 2011,p. 17). This requires leadership that is open, respectful and committed to a reflective cycle of critical thinking that explores context and content beyond a generalappraisal, leading to critical reflective praxis.This book, set in a higher education context, aims to create a national and international dialogue about the role of the higher education sector in cultural competence policy and practice, by sharing different perspectives and experiences, presentresearch and emerging evidence about cultural competence models and approaches.PerspectivesThe concept of culture is a useful starting point; however, like cultural competence,it is a concept that resists definition. Given that the concept of culture cannot beeasily grasped in that it is forever changing, it should also present challenges whenbeing measured in unidimensional or face valid terms (see Wang et al., this volume).Nevertheless, exploring the concept of culture can provide the basis for consideringthe way culture is used in cultural competence. It is also useful to consider how thewords “culture” and “cultures” are used in terms such as “workplace culture” and“organisational culture” and in regard to institutional racism; and that cross-cuttingthe concept of cultural competence are interrelated concepts such as IKs, racism andleadership.Indigenous Knowledges in higher education should traverse the disciplines andextend beyond Indigenous perspectives to one in which the “discipline areas maythemselves be challenged” (Bradley et al., 2008, p. 33). Parent (2014) states that IKs:encompass the technological, social, economic, philosophical, spiritual, educational, legaland governmental elements of particular Indigenous cultures throughout the world. AsIndigenous Knowledges are context-specific and interwoven within a given community’slived experience, they are dynamic and ever-changing to reflect environmental and socialadaptations. Indigenous Knowledges are therefore not a singular body of knowledge but are

1 Cultural Competence and the Higher Education Sector 7multi-dimensional and pluralistic in that they contain many layers of being, knowing, andmodes of expression. (p. 59)Indigenous Knowledges within the academy call for transformative practice—not just within teaching and learning, but about what it means for the student experience (Martin, 2016). It also calls for the co-creation of an intercultural space inwhich cultures and knowledges can be shared and co-developed, seeking a balanceof western knowledge systems with Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing.The embedding of IKs in the academy does, however, come with a caution, in thatthis process remains a problematic, complicated, contested and con

Lee Sternberger James Madison University, Harrisonburg, VA, USA Jakelyn Troy Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Research, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia Jonnell Uptin Sydney School of Education and Social Work, The University of Sydney, Camperdown, NSW, Australia Dein Vindigni School of Health and Biomedical Science, Royal .