Next February, the Waitangi Tribunal will look at whether the Crown’s treatment of kohanga reo has breached the Treaty. TESSA JOHNSTONE looks at challenges facing the 29-year-old language movement:

 “Ko wai te atua o te ngāhere?” asks Kaiako Shane Aramoana (above). Who is the god of the forest?

“Tāne Māhuta,” replies four-year-old Raukura Chankee-Paea.

“He aha te reo o Tāne Māhuta?” asks Shane – what is Tāne Māhuta’s language?

“Ngā putiputi, ngā pūrerehua, ngā rakau, me ngā rau,” Raukura says, describing the flowers, butterflies, trees and leaves.

“Ka aha tatou ki te tiaki ia Tāne? Ka unu mai ngā rau?” Shane asks Raukura how we can help Tāne Māhuta. Should we pluck the leaves off his trees?

“Ae…” Raukura says tentatively. And then, “Oh, kāo, ka mamae ia.”

No, she decides, plucking his leaves off would hurt him.

It’s Friday, walking day at Te Kōhanga Reo o Ngā Mokopuna in Kilbirnie, Wellington and the tamariki are learning about Tāne Māhuta, the god of the forest.

The kaimahi have braved public transport with nine children, aged between six months and four years, and have made their way to Wellington Botanic Gardens to explore Tāne Māhuta and learn about his language, his children.

It’s a world away from the politics of the Waitangi Tribunal, but it is children like these that are at the heart of a claim currently before the tribunal.

In July this year, a 400-strong hikoi marched to the tribunal to deliver an urgent claim asking for the kōhanga reo movement to be protected under the Treaty of Waitangi.

They were prompted by recommendations about kōhanga reo within the Early Childhood Education (ECE) Taskforce report An Agenda for Amazing Children released in June.

The report recommends “strengthening accountability measures” for kōhanga reo, and highlights the declining enrolment numbers and disproportionate number of Education Review Office (ERO) supplementary reviews.

The report also recommends implementing the 2001 Gallen Report which, among other things, suggests that administration of kōhanga reo be devolved from the National Kōhanga Reo Trust, which currently oversees kōhanga, to iwi within five years.

Education Minister Anne Tolley, who declined to give comment for this feature, told The Dominion Post that she was heartened by the report as a whole as it identified serious issues and made positive suggestions, though which – if any – of the recommendations will be acted on, is still up for discussion.

The Waitangi Tribunal ordered the National Kōhanga Reo Trust and Government representatives into mediation in October, and announced in November that the Trust’s request for an urgent tribunal hearing has been successful and would happen in February next year.

One of the reasons the tribunal gave for granting the urgent hearing request was that the issue involved nearly 10,000 children, and that Government had not offered sufficient options for the Trust board to work with.

According to National Kōhanga Reo Trust board co-chair Tina Olsen-Ratana (Ngāti Porou), the taskforce report was simply the straw that broke the camel’s back – the relationship with the Government has been broken for a long time.

“We’ve tried for 20 years to find a resolution, to find a way through, and that’s been at the expense of the kōhanga kaupapa.

“It assumes responsibility,” says Ms Olsen-Ratana of the suggestion that kōhanga should be shifted away from the Trust.

“Kōhanga reo was built out of the community, at a grassroots level, it wasn’t a Government policy. What right does the Government have to facilitate anything like that happening?”

The kōhanga movement was one of a number of community-led initiatives aimed at revitalising the language.

In 1983, a survey of Māori adults estimated there were just 70,000 fluent Māori speakers left, roughly 20% of the Māori population at the time.

“They thought a place to start would be to put it back into the mouth of the babies,” says Ms Olsen-Ratana about the birth of the kōhanga movement.

“In doing that the parents – who were the missing generation of speakers, like me – would learn alongside those children. Not only the language, but the customs, the culture, the values that go along with the language.”

The first kōhanga opened in Wainuiomata in 1982, and by 1993 there were 809 kōhanga around the country, working with more than 14,500 children.

The movement – and the subsequent establishment of kura kaupapa to work with primary school-aged kids coming out of kōhanga – undoubtedly contributed to the small, but not insignificant, growth of Māori language speakers.

The 2006 census showed that of the 565,300 children and adults who identify as Māori, 131,600 can speak about everyday things in the Māori language – 23%. For those aged 15 or over the rate is 26%.

The kura kaupapa system has not only been positive for the language, but it has also had a positive impact on the educational achievement of young Māori who move through it.

In 2008, around 84% of students in Māori-medium schools met literacy and numeracy standards for NCEA level one, compared with 68% of Māori students who attended mainstream schools.

According to the Ministry of Education’s annual report on Māori education, Nga Haeata Matauranga, they’re more likely to achieve the same NCEA result or higher than the national average, and are more likely to go on to university.

Unfortunately, despite these successes, kōhanga reo are in decline.

The number of children enrolled in kōhanga reo has dropped from its high point of 14,514 in 1993 to less than 9500 in August this year.

The number of kōhanga reo centres hit a high that same year with 809 around the country, but today there are just 465.

 In the past 10 years, 73 kōhanga have closed down.

Official documents from the Ministry of Education suggest that none of the closures have been forced by Government, but that whanau have made the decision to close on their own.

According to Ms Olsen-Ratana, the key reason for the closures is that the movement has been forced into a box it didn’t fit into: early childhood education.

“Since then, kōhanga hasn’t evolved – it’s just been forced to comply. It’s been made to adhere and change and become more ECE [early childhood education] in a lot of aspects, and at the expense of our language.”

The Trust’s Waitangi Tribunal claim is clear that the kaupapa of the movement was never just about education – it was also about te reo Māori, tikanga Māori, and whanau development – and being asked to comply to an education framework has been damaging to the movement.

“[Kōhanga is] not about teaching the language, it’s transferring the language. ECE is about teaching. They are about the teacher and the child. The kōhanga is about the whole family developing alongside one another.

“The parents are the teachers and the learners. The old people there are the experts, guiding and supporting them. It’s whole different model.”

The Trust’s Waitangi Tribunal claim outlines an increasingly frustrating relationship with the Government, which included the establishment of a working group and agreement between the Trust, Ministry of Education and Te Puni Kōkiri in 2003.

Although the tripartite relationship got off to a good start, according to the Trust there was little progress made between 2003 and 2007, and members seem somewhat offended that the Government officials sent to the meetings were less and less senior.

The relationship was given new life in 2008 after some discussions between the Trust and the Minister of Māori Affairs Pita Sharples, and a new agreement and working group worked well for a while – until the release of the Taskforce report, that is.

“We’ve made numerous attempts to fit within this world view that we don’t belong in. It’s not working. Our very essence is being compromised. So where do we fit?”

An ideal outcome for the Trust would be for the kōhanga reo movement to have its own legislation which respects its uniqueness, kaupapa and guarantees funding, ensuring that future changes of Government and government departments would have minimal impact on kōhanga.

“We don’t want our children to inherit this argument about how kōhanga reo is different from ECE.”

Ms Olsen-Ratana says it is enormously frustrating that even her generation still has to explain that kōhanga is not just an education provider.

“There seems to be more recognition of its uniqueness and indigeneity around the world than there is here,” says Ms Olsen-Ratana.

“I don’t understand what the big deal is – why not allow things to be as they are? You look at the Rugby World Cup, how much they’ve displayed Māori culture.

“But when it counts – and we’re talking about the survival of our language here – we’re still arguing about its value. We still have to explain those things. It just gets so frustrating.”

Although, like other community organisations, kōhanga reo struggle with funding, for the Trust the claim is not about money – it’s about the Government’s responsibility as Treaty partners to help them uphold the language.

“We are treated like an NGO [non-government organisation] instead of a partner. Our claim is not about the money –we’re talking about the right to be kōhanga in the model that it was designed to be.

“There has to be a partnership with the Crown again – in terms of the Crown’s roles and responsibilities to the revitalisation of the reo, and in terms of the Treaty partnership.”

But even if the Government were to grant the Trust’s wish tomorrow and give kōhanga reo their own legislation and funding, the movement has some enormous challenges ahead of it.

As the Taskforce report highlights, kōhanga numbers are dropping fast, and they are receiving a disproportionate amount of supplementary reviews from the Education Review Office.

In 2009/2010, 34% of kōhanga reo had supplementary reviews – a second review which checks progress on areas that are not up to scratch in a routine review – though the average across all ECE service providers was around 11%.

A brief scan of some of the reviews show they cover a wide range of compliance issues, from not carrying out fire drills regularly, to a lack of formal feedback processes to evaluate learning programmes, a lack of whanau participation, and not keeping records of children’s medication.

Most kōhanga meet the standards the second time around, but as the claim highlights, some regulations monitored by ERO are unlikely to ever be adhered to because they’re contrary to cultural practice and the kaupapa of kōhanga reo.

For example, the licensing criteria for kōhanga states there should be separate sleeping rooms for children, though it’s not unusual in a whanau environment for children to sleep in the same room as everything else is happening.

Another example provided in the claim is of kōhanga reo that have been asked to move into buildings which are fenced off from the marae, which would “detach whanau from their customary environment”.

“We’re not opposed to being accountable, we’re totally accountable. Gosh, we’re accountable to our own people, let me tell you,” says Ms Olsen-Ratana.

“But it’s ensuring what we’re accountable for is appropriate and does not compromise the unique kaupapa of kōhanga.”

The Trust has had a long time to mull over things like compliance standards, and its 25-year strategic plan Te Ara Tūapae outlines plans to create its own kōhanga standard and a review group to ensure it is adhered to.

The standards would be developed with whanau and kaumātua and would include expectations around health and safety, as well as tikanga Māori, te reo Māori and whanau participation.

Although the Trust says the claim is not about money, the numbers imply funding might have had an impact in some of the closures.

Te Kōhanga Reo o Ngā Mokopuna’s Kaiwhakahaere and whanau member Llani Harding (Ngāpuhi), who has two children at the kōhanga, worries about funding for their centre.

It runs out of a Housing NZ rental, and plans to build new premises on the same site as Te Kura Kaupapa o Ngā Mokopuna in Seatoun were stalled when a Ministry of Education contestable fund they were counting on was canned.

She says the funding it receives from the Trust just covers wages for staff, the fees cover curriculum costs and the bills, but everything else has to be fundraised for.

Government spent $1.15 billion on early childhood education in 2009/2010, and 4.9% (around $56 million) went on kōhanga subsidies, though they make up 9% of all ECE services.

As of February this year, quality kōhanga – kōhanga which have at least one kaiako (teacher) with a recognised qualification – are funded at an hourly rate of $8.63 per child aged under two, and $4.34 per child over two.

Standard kōhanga, those without any qualified teachers, are funded at $7.56 per child aged under two, and $3.80 for over twos.

The rates are comparable to those of playcentres and teacher-led home-based services, but some way from the rate of $11.80 (under two) or $6.53 (over two) for services with more than 80% of registered teachers.

From July last year, kōhanga were eligible for the 20 Hours ECE policy, though they’re funded at $3 less per child, per hour, than centres with more than 80% of registered teachers.

The Trust has developed a qualification for kaiako, an NZQA-recognised level seven qualification called Whakapakari Tino Rangatiratanga.

The three-year course covers the history of te reo Māori, language acquisition, traditional child-rearing practises, health and wellbeing, teaching and learning pedagogy, assessment, administration and human relations.

When Shane Aramoana joined Ngā Mokopuna, they asked him to start work on the Whakapakari qualification, as it would allow them to access a higher funding bracket.

Mr Aramoana, who learned to speak te reo Māori at high school, says the course was challenging at first, but it’s getting easier as he learns more.

“They ask you, what is the language of Tane, of the Māori gods and guardians? And you sit there and think to yourself, hmmm, I didn’t know they could talk. They say, you mustn’t be listening hard enough.”

He explains that one of the things he’s learned is that all the gods have languages – Tangaroa’s language is in the whales, the shellfish, the sand, the tides; Tane’s is everything in the forest.

One of his favourite things about kōhanga is seeing kids explain concepts like that to their parents when they come to pick them up.

“As a kaimahi, you sit back and you watch – a child has taught their parents.”

Mr Aramoana’s previous work had been at a playcentres, and he says at first he was “uneducated” about the kōhanga way.

“I thought reading a lot, writing, all those sorts of things had to take place here. Kids would read, or we would read to the children – but it was more than just reading. It was more so helping them to understand how the Māori world worked, and what was within the Māori world and instilling that all within the child.”

The Whakapakari qualification is described as a pre-service qualification and is not recognised by Ministry of Education or the Teacher Registration Board as a teacher qualification.

Ms Olsen-Ratana says that changing the qualification to meet the Teacher Registration Board’s requirements is not a possibility, as it would “change the very essence of our qualification”.

“For us, it’s not about one teacher and the status of the teacher. The experts are our old people, because they are the repositories of the language – they are it, the kaumātua, with the parents and the family around them.”

One of the consequences of the focus on formal qualifications, according to Ms Olsen-Ratana, has been that it’s driven away the traditional teachers, the kaumātua.

“We’re trying to push the kaumātua up and then we’ve got some kōhanga saying, well, don’t we need this person who’s just left teacher’s college? You can’t balance the books that way.”

She says it’s led to kaumātua feeling like they’re not valued, and that putting more importance on teachers implies that have more mana and knowledge than kaumātua.

“Our kaumātua saw it as not being valued and needed anymore, and that’s the stuff we’ll have to battle.”

So where to from here? How is the Trust going to get the kōhanga reo movement back on track?

“We’re embarking on another stage in our life in kōhanga reo. Our first priority is to get the position of kōhanga right.

“Our next is to develop kōhanga in line with kōhanga reo kaupapa, because there’s a lot of kōhanga who have been born in the last ten or 20 years who don’t know what that is. There’s a whole re-learning that has to happen within kōhanga reo.”

As for the tribunal process, Ms Olsen-Ratana says for it to be successful, there needs to be an acknowledgement of the Crown’s wrongdoing under the principles of the Treaty, and an apology.

“That’s not the end of it, but it’s a good place to start.”

Their focus will not be on building numbers – they want to get the movement back to its original kaupapa and ensure its sustainability first.

It sounds like a hard task, but Ms Olsen-Ratana and the Trust seem undaunted.

“We’ve been through 20 years of challenges, it can’t get any worse. We’ve lasted this long, the challenge we have ahead of us is whether the Crown actually takes seriously the contribution kōhanga has had and continues to have in the revitalisation of the language.

“That’s not a challenge for us though, that’s a challenge for the Crown.”

Dr Pita Sharples (pictured left) says is unable to say much on the issue to avoid prejudicing the Waitangi Tribunal hearings, but does expect the eventual findings of the tribunal to be accepted by the government.

“Successive governments have generally accepted the findings of the Waitangi Tribunal in relation to WAI 11 [the 1986 claim which recommended greater recognition of and access to te reo Māori].

“The government does accept it has an obligation under the Treaty to protect and promote te reo Māori, and kohanga reo are one response to the threat that te reo Maori might be lost.”

Dr Sharples also highlights another report under government consideration at the moment, Te Reo Mauriora, which is a big picture look at the Maori language strategy and sector.

The report describes government support for the Maori language as “patchy”, and questions the value for money over the last 30 years.

The politics of the claim and the Trust’s relationship with the Government is something staff and parents at Te Kōhanga Reo o Ngā Mokopuna say they don’t know much about – they just want to make sure kōhanga is protected.

Ngā Mokopuna’s Llani Harding, who’s currently readying the kōhanga for the first ERO review since she joined the kōhanga, supports the Trust’s claim and agrees the ECE framework doesn’t work for kōhanga.

“We’re just not like ECE. We have nannies and kuia coming in that are not qualified and we don’t mind them not being so – we don’t expect them to just have follow suit and fit into certain categories. We do things differently.”

For Louise Wright (Te Arawa, Rongowhakaata, Te Aitanga-a-Mahaki), learning about te ao Māori and te reo Māori is what sending her three children to kōhanga is about.

“I always wanted it to be easier for my kids than it was for us to learn Māori.”

Mrs Wright’s Mum is Māori, but doesn’t speak the language. But when Louise started thinking about having a family of her own, she signed up for night classes to learn te reo Māori.

She has to work harder and harder to keep up with the kids’ learning, but says that it’s important to her.

“For us and our family it’s really giving the kids their own language, the language they should have, because they are Maori. It’s part of them, and I can’t fully provide that myself.”