title: Māori data sovereignty and privacy

authors: Kukutai, Tahu

abstract: Privacy is a fundamental human right. One of its most important aspects is information privacy – providing individuals with control over the way in which their personal data is collected, used, disclosed and otherwise handled. Existing information privacy regulation neither recognises nor protects the collective privacy rights of Indigenous peoples. This paper explores Indigenous data
privacy, and the challenges and opportunities, in the context of Aotearoa. It has two aims: to identify gaps in existing data privacy approaches with regards to Indigenous data, and to provide a foundation for progressing alternative privacy paradigms. We argue that while personal data protection is necessary, it is insufficient to meet the needs of Māori and Aotearoa more broadly. In so doing, we draw on three areas of research: Indigenous and Māori data sovereignty; data and information privacy,
including collective privacy; and Māori and Indigenous privacy perspectives. We examine key features of the Aotearoa privacy context – including the Privacy Act 2020 (NZ) – and consider the implications of te Tiriti o Waitangi and tikanga Māori for alternative privacy approaches. Future options, including legal and extra-legal measures, are proposed.

text: Māori data sovereignty and privacy Privacy is a fundamental human right. One of its most important aspects is information privacy – providing individuals with control over the way in which their personal data is collected, used, disclosed and otherwise handled. Existing information privacy regulation neither recognises nor protects the collective privacy rights of Indigenous peoples. This paper explores Indigenous data
privacy, and the challenges and opportunities, in the context of Aotearoa. It has two aims: to identify gaps in existing data privacy approaches with regards to Indigenous data, and to provide a foundation for progressing alternative privacy paradigms. We argue that while personal data protection is necessary, it is insufficient to meet the needs of Māori and Aotearoa more broadly. In so doing, we draw on three areas of research: Indigenous and Māori data sovereignty; data and information privacy,
including collective privacy; and Māori and Indigenous privacy perspectives. We examine key features of the Aotearoa privacy context – including the Privacy Act 2020 (NZ) – and consider the implications of te Tiriti o Waitangi and tikanga Māori for alternative privacy approaches. Future options, including legal and extra-legal measures, are proposed.

year: 2023

title: Decolonising professional learning: Weaving a whānau of interest

authors: Pennicott, Katie

subjects: educational leadership

abstract: Raranga (weaving) has been described as an act of decolonisation and resistance. In my experience, learning to weave was more than an act of learning the tikanga (rituals) and methods with which to weave flax and tukutuku (lattice work); it was learning about learning and learning about living, life and all the things that make us who we are. As I experienced and began to understand Māori metaphors such as whanaungatanga, kaupapa, ako and manaakitanga I found that learning the art of weaving shaped me as I shaped the weaving. This thesis ideates a metaphor of weaving to describe a model of cultural and structural school reform that emerged from a school’s teaching and learning collaborations over time. It calls for the weaving of a new, decolonised model of education.

text: Decolonising professional learning: Weaving a whānau of interest Raranga (weaving) has been described as an act of decolonisation and resistance. In my experience, learning to weave was more than an act of learning the tikanga (rituals) and methods with which to weave flax and tukutuku (lattice work); it was learning about learning and learning about living, life and all the things that make us who we are. As I experienced and began to understand Māori metaphors such as whanaungatanga, kaupapa, ako and manaakitanga I found that learning the art of weaving shaped me as I shaped the weaving. This thesis ideates a metaphor of weaving to describe a model of cultural and structural school reform that emerged from a school’s teaching and learning collaborations over time. It calls for the weaving of a new, decolonised model of education.

year: 2020

title: Running shoe recommendations based on gait analysis improve perceptions of comfort, performance and injury risk: A single-blind randomised crossover trial

authors: Fife, Andrew

subjects: deception

abstract: Objectives: We examined how shoe recommendation based on gait analysis influences subjective perceptions of comfort, performance and injury reduction in runners while monitoring spatiotemporal and kinematic parameters.

Design: Single-blind crossover randomised controlled trial with repeated measures. 

Method: Twenty-one women runners completed a clinical gait analysis and four 5-min treadmill trials at a self-selected comfortable speed sequentially in their own shoes (OS), the first experimental shoes (randomised), their OS, and the second experimental shoes (randomised). The two experimental shoes were identical except for their colour (randomised) and were presented to runners as either a ‘basic’ shoe or, deceptively, a ‘gait-matched’ shoe selected for them based on the clinical gait analysis conducted. 

Results: Running Comfort Assessment Tool (RUN-CAT) scores and 100 mm visual analogue scale ratings of subjective comfort, performance and injury reduction differed significantly between own and experimental shoes (p < 0.001). Post-hoc comparisons revealed that runners’ OS were the most comfortable (83.3 ± 3.8 mm) followed by gait-matched (66.1 ± 21.5 mm) and then basic (49.0 ± 24.1 mm) shoes. RUN-CAT, performance and injury reduction ratings were similar between own and gait-matched shoes, but gait-matched shoes had better mean difference (95% confidence intervals), RUN-CAT (15.6 mm [5.7, 25.5]), performance (17.1 mm [5.6, 28.6]) and injury reduction (30.1 mm [8.9, 51.2]) scores than the basic shoes. Discrete spatiotemporal, foot strike angle and resultant tibial acceleration parameters were not significantly different between shoes (p ≥ 0.157). Most runners overall preferred their OS (71.4%), followed by gait-matched (23.8%) and basic (4.8%) shoes. 

Conclusions: Shoe recommendation and description can significantly affect subjective shoe comfort and overall preferences without significantly altering spatiotemporal and kinematic parameters. Runners should be cautious while choosing shoes based on recommendations and descriptors derived from gait analysis or based solely on perceived comfort as runners’ subjective perceptions can be artificially manipulated.

text: Running shoe recommendations based on gait analysis improve perceptions of comfort, performance and injury risk: A single-blind randomised crossover trial Objectives: We examined how shoe recommendation based on gait analysis influences subjective perceptions of comfort, performance and injury reduction in runners while monitoring spatiotemporal and kinematic parameters.

Design: Single-blind crossover randomised controlled trial with repeated measures. 

Method: Twenty-one women runners completed a clinical gait analysis and four 5-min treadmill trials at a self-selected comfortable speed sequentially in their own shoes (OS), the first experimental shoes (randomised), their OS, and the second experimental shoes (randomised). The two experimental shoes were identical except for their colour (randomised) and were presented to runners as either a ‘basic’ shoe or, deceptively, a ‘gait-matched’ shoe selected for them based on the clinical gait analysis conducted. 

Results: Running Comfort Assessment Tool (RUN-CAT) scores and 100 mm visual analogue scale ratings of subjective comfort, performance and injury reduction differed significantly between own and experimental shoes (p < 0.001). Post-hoc comparisons revealed that runners’ OS were the most comfortable (83.3 ± 3.8 mm) followed by gait-matched (66.1 ± 21.5 mm) and then basic (49.0 ± 24.1 mm) shoes. RUN-CAT, performance and injury reduction ratings were similar between own and gait-matched shoes, but gait-matched shoes had better mean difference (95% confidence intervals), RUN-CAT (15.6 mm [5.7, 25.5]), performance (17.1 mm [5.6, 28.6]) and injury reduction (30.1 mm [8.9, 51.2]) scores than the basic shoes. Discrete spatiotemporal, foot strike angle and resultant tibial acceleration parameters were not significantly different between shoes (p ≥ 0.157). Most runners overall preferred their OS (71.4%), followed by gait-matched (23.8%) and basic (4.8%) shoes. 

Conclusions: Shoe recommendation and description can significantly affect subjective shoe comfort and overall preferences without significantly altering spatiotemporal and kinematic parameters. Runners should be cautious while choosing shoes based on recommendations and descriptors derived from gait analysis or based solely on perceived comfort as runners’ subjective perceptions can be artificially manipulated.

year: 2025