title: Ko ētehi waiata tangi o Pare Hauraki

authors: Ngāpō, Korohere

subjects: Waiata tangi

abstract: Inā hiahia ai te tangata kia mōhio ngā momo mōteatea o Pare Hauraki i ngā wā o mua me huri atu rātou ki ngā wāhi kohinga waiata pērā i Ngā Mōteatea a Ngata. Ka mutu kua tuhia tēnei pitopito kōrero hei tautoko atu i te hui waiata tawhito i whakatūria i Te Whare Wānanga o Waikato i te 2008. He tirohanga tēnei tuhinga ki te momo o ngā waiata e rua kāore i āta waiatahia, i āta rangona i runga i ngā marae o Hauraki ā mohoa nei. Ka mutu mā te waihape atu anō ki tētehi waiata i titoa e Pua ki Tawhiti mō tōna tungāne tae noa atu ki te waiata tangi i titoa e Wetea rāua ko Tūkehu, tēnā pea, ka ara ake anō te whakaaro me hoki anō ngā iwi o Pare Hauraki ki te waiata atu anō i ēnei waiata.

text: Ko ētehi waiata tangi o Pare Hauraki Inā hiahia ai te tangata kia mōhio ngā momo mōteatea o Pare Hauraki i ngā wā o mua me huri atu rātou ki ngā wāhi kohinga waiata pērā i Ngā Mōteatea a Ngata. Ka mutu kua tuhia tēnei pitopito kōrero hei tautoko atu i te hui waiata tawhito i whakatūria i Te Whare Wānanga o Waikato i te 2008. He tirohanga tēnei tuhinga ki te momo o ngā waiata e rua kāore i āta waiatahia, i āta rangona i runga i ngā marae o Hauraki ā mohoa nei. Ka mutu mā te waihape atu anō ki tētehi waiata i titoa e Pua ki Tawhiti mō tōna tungāne tae noa atu ki te waiata tangi i titoa e Wetea rāua ko Tūkehu, tēnā pea, ka ara ake anō te whakaaro me hoki anō ngā iwi o Pare Hauraki ki te waiata atu anō i ēnei waiata.

year: 2011

title: Viruses without vaccines, or valuing indigenous research? The tensions of introducing Western research assessment practices into an indigenous university

authors: Bruce Ferguson, Pip

abstract: Over my past twenty-five years of educational practice, I have striven to develop a better understanding of indigenous ways of being and doing (in New Zealand’s case, this involves the values and knowledge of Māori). I have done this by visiting and occasionally staying on marae (Māori gathering-places); by reading relevant literature; by engaging in conversations with knowledgeable scholars and by researching the impact of Western practices on indigenous peoples.

In 2003 I managed a research team for Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, a Māori tertiary institution with branches across the country. Our Tertiary Education Commission had just introduced a variation of the English RAE, called the Performance-Based Research Fund, through which government research funds would henceforth be distributed. In collaboration with Māori colleagues, we chose to enter this process, believing that Māori research would be recognised and funded by our participation.

While this proved to be the case, there were significant examples of values clashes, such as the requirement for people to ‘boast’ of their research achievements in a context where such boasting is anathema; to claim ownership of knowledge where tradition often indicates that knowledge is not the property of individuals; and worst, at one point I found myself accused by my Māori manager of introducing ‘viruses without vaccines’. By this he meant Westernised ideas and practices which appeared to be benevolent but in fact were toxic (the idea derives from white settlers who apparently gave native Americans blankets permeated with a virus, causing thousands to die).

In this paper I will explore tensions of operating cross-culturally, and whether/how we can protect people from unintended toxic consequences of intended benevolent actions.

text: Viruses without vaccines, or valuing indigenous research? The tensions of introducing Western research assessment practices into an indigenous university Over my past twenty-five years of educational practice, I have striven to develop a better understanding of indigenous ways of being and doing (in New Zealand’s case, this involves the values and knowledge of Māori). I have done this by visiting and occasionally staying on marae (Māori gathering-places); by reading relevant literature; by engaging in conversations with knowledgeable scholars and by researching the impact of Western practices on indigenous peoples.

In 2003 I managed a research team for Te Wānanga o Aotearoa, a Māori tertiary institution with branches across the country. Our Tertiary Education Commission had just introduced a variation of the English RAE, called the Performance-Based Research Fund, through which government research funds would henceforth be distributed. In collaboration with Māori colleagues, we chose to enter this process, believing that Māori research would be recognised and funded by our participation.

While this proved to be the case, there were significant examples of values clashes, such as the requirement for people to ‘boast’ of their research achievements in a context where such boasting is anathema; to claim ownership of knowledge where tradition often indicates that knowledge is not the property of individuals; and worst, at one point I found myself accused by my Māori manager of introducing ‘viruses without vaccines’. By this he meant Westernised ideas and practices which appeared to be benevolent but in fact were toxic (the idea derives from white settlers who apparently gave native Americans blankets permeated with a virus, causing thousands to die).

In this paper I will explore tensions of operating cross-culturally, and whether/how we can protect people from unintended toxic consequences of intended benevolent actions.

year: 2012

title: Who should we listen to? Comparing parent and child report of post-concussive symptoms

authors: Liddicoat, Zabé

abstract: A significant proportion of people worldwide are impacted by the effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Research into the incidence and severity of TBI demonstrates that the majority of injuries are mild (such as concussion) and are experienced by children and adolescents. Despite the significance of concussion in young people, there is limited research exploring the impact of this injury on this age group. This is compounded by a lack of clarity on how best to assess concussion symptoms with regard to the measure utilised, timing of assessment, and informant reporting. Assessing concussion in children and adolescents is complicated by the child’s ability to report on concussion symptoms and negotiating reporting from parents and children simultaneously. Previous research has identified gaps in the literature including: lack of acute assessment of symptoms, few longitudinal studies into the pattern of symptom reporting over time, and lack of research associating subjective symptom reports with other objective symptom measures. Therefore, the main aims of this study were: 
i)	To assess parent and child concordance when reporting concussion symptoms over time.
ii)	To determine the association between parent and child ratings of concussion symptoms and objective symptom measures. 
This research was part of a wider pilot study, Concussion Recovery and Assessment in New Zealand Adolescents and Children (CRANIAC). It involved 49 pairs of children and their parents or caregivers. Twenty-seven children had sustained a concussion and 22 comprised a comparison group of children with an upper limb injury. The children and their parents completed the Post Concussive Symptom Inventory (PCSI) and Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT)) on four occasions after injury (one to four days, two weeks, one month, three months). Correlations were used to assess concordance between parent and child ratings at each time point and how the subjective PCSI ratings were associated with the objective symptom assessments from the SCAT. 
Results showed parents and children from both injury groups reported most symptoms acutely after injury and fewer symptoms at every subsequent time point. There were fewer symptoms recorded and lower agreement for parents/children with an upper limb injury than those with concussion. Parents and children appeared to agree least about symptoms during the acute period of injury and agreement generally strengthened over time as symptom number and severity decreased. Additionally, there was more agreement about the presence or absence of symptoms rather than the severity. Finally, the PCSI ratings from parents or children did not relate to objective SCAT domain measures. This suggests that these scales may be measuring different constructs. 
In conclusion, symptom report and parent/child concordance for children with concussion is distinct from another injury. When children have sustained a concussion, it is beneficial to obtain reports from the child and a caregiver, particularly closer to injury. This is because parents and children report similar amounts of symptoms but there are discrepancies in the severity and types of symptoms reported by both raters.  Therefore, it is not a case of asking who we should listen to, but acknowledging both parents and children give complementary information about concussion. It is especially important to obtain parent and child reports in the acute period after concussion. Similarly, subjective symptom report and objective ratings create a more comprehensive assessment. Future research into parent and child symptom reporting with a larger sample would allow analyses by age group, as well as an analysis of differences between reports. In a broader sense, future research into parent and child agreement across general measures of health and wellbeing may also be beneficial.

text: Who should we listen to? Comparing parent and child report of post-concussive symptoms A significant proportion of people worldwide are impacted by the effects of traumatic brain injury (TBI). Research into the incidence and severity of TBI demonstrates that the majority of injuries are mild (such as concussion) and are experienced by children and adolescents. Despite the significance of concussion in young people, there is limited research exploring the impact of this injury on this age group. This is compounded by a lack of clarity on how best to assess concussion symptoms with regard to the measure utilised, timing of assessment, and informant reporting. Assessing concussion in children and adolescents is complicated by the child’s ability to report on concussion symptoms and negotiating reporting from parents and children simultaneously. Previous research has identified gaps in the literature including: lack of acute assessment of symptoms, few longitudinal studies into the pattern of symptom reporting over time, and lack of research associating subjective symptom reports with other objective symptom measures. Therefore, the main aims of this study were: 
i)	To assess parent and child concordance when reporting concussion symptoms over time.
ii)	To determine the association between parent and child ratings of concussion symptoms and objective symptom measures. 
This research was part of a wider pilot study, Concussion Recovery and Assessment in New Zealand Adolescents and Children (CRANIAC). It involved 49 pairs of children and their parents or caregivers. Twenty-seven children had sustained a concussion and 22 comprised a comparison group of children with an upper limb injury. The children and their parents completed the Post Concussive Symptom Inventory (PCSI) and Sports Concussion Assessment Tool (SCAT)) on four occasions after injury (one to four days, two weeks, one month, three months). Correlations were used to assess concordance between parent and child ratings at each time point and how the subjective PCSI ratings were associated with the objective symptom assessments from the SCAT. 
Results showed parents and children from both injury groups reported most symptoms acutely after injury and fewer symptoms at every subsequent time point. There were fewer symptoms recorded and lower agreement for parents/children with an upper limb injury than those with concussion. Parents and children appeared to agree least about symptoms during the acute period of injury and agreement generally strengthened over time as symptom number and severity decreased. Additionally, there was more agreement about the presence or absence of symptoms rather than the severity. Finally, the PCSI ratings from parents or children did not relate to objective SCAT domain measures. This suggests that these scales may be measuring different constructs. 
In conclusion, symptom report and parent/child concordance for children with concussion is distinct from another injury. When children have sustained a concussion, it is beneficial to obtain reports from the child and a caregiver, particularly closer to injury. This is because parents and children report similar amounts of symptoms but there are discrepancies in the severity and types of symptoms reported by both raters.  Therefore, it is not a case of asking who we should listen to, but acknowledging both parents and children give complementary information about concussion. It is especially important to obtain parent and child reports in the acute period after concussion. Similarly, subjective symptom report and objective ratings create a more comprehensive assessment. Future research into parent and child symptom reporting with a larger sample would allow analyses by age group, as well as an analysis of differences between reports. In a broader sense, future research into parent and child agreement across general measures of health and wellbeing may also be beneficial.

year: 2020