Embedding Indigenous knowledges: An Australian case study of urban and remote teaching practicum

In this chapter we propose that there are certain conditions that enable the agency of pre-service teachers to enact curriculum decision-making within their pedagogical relationships with their supervising teachers as they endeavour to embed Indigenous knowledges (IK) during the teaching practicum. The case study, underpinned by decolonising methodologies, centred upon pre-service teacher preparation at one Australian university, where we investigated how role modelling in urban and remote schools occurred in the learning and teaching relationships between pre-service teachers on practicum and their supervising teachers. This chapter draws from an Office of Learning and Teaching (OLT) sponsored project at one Australian university; a full report on this project has been documented (see McLaughlin, Whatman and Nielsen, 2014). We commence with a discussion of decolonising and critical pedagogical spaces as the conceptual framework for the embedding Indigenous knowledges and perspectives in curricula and pedagogy. Our focus then shifts to a contextual overview of the development of Indigenous Knowledges (IK) in Australian school and university curriculum, providing a standpoint from which to consider the unfolding case study.

How childcare providers interpret "reasonable suspicion" of child abuse

- Background Childcare providers are often “first responders” for suspected child abuse, and how they understand the concept of “reasonable suspicion” will influence their decisions regarding which warning signs warrant reporting. - Objective The purpose of this study was to investigate how childcare providers interpret the threshold for reporting suspected abuse, and to consider the implications of these findings for professional training and development. - Method A convenience sample of 355 childcare providers completed the Reasonable Suspicion of Child Abuse survey to quantify what likelihood of child abuse constitutes “reasonable suspicion.” Responses were examined for internal consistency, evidence of a group standard, and associations with professional and personal demographics. - Results On a Rank Order Scale, responses for what constitutes “reasonable suspicion” ranged from requiring that abuse be “the” most likely cause (8 %) of an injury, to the second most likely (9 %), third (18 %), fourth (18 %), to even the seventh (8 %) or eighth (5 %) most likely cause of an injury. On a numerical probability scale, 21 % of respondents indicated that “abuse” would need to be ≥83 % likely before reasonable suspicion existed; 40 % stated that a likelihood between 53–82 % was needed; 27 % identified the necessary likelihood between 33–52 %; and 12 % set a threshold between 1–32 %. - Conclusions The present finding that no consensus exists for interpreting “reasonable suspicion” suggests that a broadly accepted interpretive framework is needed in order to help prepare childcare providers to know when to report suspected abuse.