Notes on Country-Centric and Indigenous Pedagogies in Australian Curriculum

Context and speaker

David Spillman, faculty of Education, connected to and speaking from an Aboriginal perspective. He references his kinship to country and his cultural grandfather (whose photo is described) and to local places (Barakwater Hole) as part of his identity and teaching philosophy.
The session is about imagining what an authentically Australian curriculum framework could look like, rooted in Indigenous knowledges and country-centric perspectives.
He situates his lived experience across multiple geographic locations in Australia (e.g., North Central New South Wales, Warwickham) to illustrate connections to land, water sites, and custodianship.
He describes his professional journey: starting teaching in a large urban secondary school, with prior experience in the military, remote Queensland and Aboriginal communities, as a teacher and principal, followed by a decade running leisure programs. This breadth informs his critique of conventional curricula.
He emphasizes that this presentation is part of ongoing conversations with principals across Australia about alternative curriculum frameworks that center Indigenous knowing and place-based education.

The politics of curriculum

A core claim: the act of creating, selecting, designing, and implementing any curriculum is political.
- There are always people who decide what is in/out and there are agendas and purposes behind those choices.
- Dominant voices are present, marginalized voices are often excluded.
- Curriculum acts as a policy enactment driven by particular purposes, whether those purposes are explicitly stated or not.
This political lens remains central when considering curriculum frameworks and how they reflect power relations and priorities in society.

Purpose of education: explicit vs implicit framings

He raises the critical question: what is the purpose of education?
They published a paper (referenced as "Replacing education in country. What is the purpose of education?") and discuss the difficulty of linking explicit policy documents across jurisdictions to the actual curriculum being rolled out.
Policy documents in different jurisdictions can be explicit about goals, but linking those goals directly to classroom curricula is complex and often lacks a straightforward one-to-one correlation.
The Australian government’s stated purpose (as per a government department source) is to ensure Australia’s future prosperity and to remain competitive internationally.

Policy landscape in Australia and neoliberal shift

The talk critiques a shift toward neoliberal, standardized curriculum approaches focused on teaching, learning, and assessment as market mechanisms.
- The implication is that education becomes a market-like system where competition and capital enterprise drive outcomes.
- This framing raises concerns about placing the future of children and society in the hands of market forces.
He and colleagues argue for recognizing the noble profession of teaching and resisting reducing education to market logic.
The dominant, hegemonic position in education is seen as highly politicized, largely oriented toward capitalism, competition, and nationalism.
Despite positive elements in the Australian curriculum and standards, the overall alignment is seen as out of balance when interpreted through a market-centric lens.

Teaching as a noble profession and ethical commitments

Teaching is framed as a noble profession with a strong ethical obligation to students and their futures.
The emphasis is on serving students, their families, and future generations, rather than portraying teaching as a vehicle for individual or political gain.
The ethical stance includes care for place, community, and country, aligning with Indigenous pedagogies and responsibilities.

Power, voice, and who gets to decide

The question of who has a say in curriculum design is central.
Power relations determine whose knowledge is prioritized and whose voices are marginalized (dominant vs marginalized groups).
The practical reality is that schooling often reflects a dominant worldview, with limited engagement from diverse communities unless explicitly included.
The critique highlights the need for more inclusive decision-making that centers Indigenous knowledge systems and country-based perspectives.

Country-centric framework and Indigenous knowledges

The core idea is that education should be anchored in country (place) and reciprocity with land and waters.
The concept of "Country" includes obligations, care, and reciprocal relationships with Earth and non-human entities.
There is an explicit emphasis on local focus and country-centric curriculums, which serve as the core from which broader curricula can be mapped.
The approach is informed by Indigenous epistemologies that view land, water, stars, animals, and other elements as living and personified entities with relationships to humans.

Key concepts: Earth kin, reciprocity, and related country practice

Earth kin: all beings (humans, animals, plants, water, fire, stars, seasons, mountains, etc.) are alive and have meaningful relationships with humans; everything is part of a system with reciprocal care.
Reciprocity: learning practices emphasize giving back care to places and things that sustain life.
Relating to country: a practice of learning by being still, listening, and observing the place before acting; a slower, attentive approach to knowledge gathering.
The language and metaphor of earth-centered relationality underpins a country-first approach to pedagogy.
The practice of "relating to country" and the idea that learning should begin with meaningful engagement with the local place rather than rushing to external or disconnected content.
The reference to cross-species systems in various Aboriginal territories (e.g., Kakachi country) shows that relationships extend across humans and non-humans, shaping laws, stories, and learning.

Two-way (both-ways) bilingual education

Two-way (bi-cultural) or bilingual education is about students learning in two languages and seeing the world through two cultural lenses.
The aim is to cultivate the ability to act in culturally appropriate ways within both Indigenous and non-Indigenous contexts, and to recognize the value of multiple knowledges.
This approach is contrasted with Eurocentric schooling, proposing a model where local knowledges and Indigenous pedagogies sit alongside and eventually inform mainstream curricula.

What a country-first curriculum might look like

The proposal: start with country knowledge and local knowledges as the foundation, then map to the Australian Curriculum where possible.
The country framework would be a stand-alone, rights-bearing framework for all children, rather than an add-on within a Eurocentric system.
The model emphasizes inquiry-based learning journeys that begin with country-based questions and observations before linking to broader academic outcomes.
Early unit development can be anchored in country knowledge (e.g., related country as a unit of work) and then connect to micro-environment studies.
There can be connections to Australian Curriculum general capabilities, e.g., personal and social capability, but the country framework remains central.

Practical frameworks and examples (slide references mentioned)

Slide references illustrate a range of country-based practices:
- A school near Alice Springs (in September) developed a framework applicable to equipment and daily school life.
- A seasonal calendar framework was developed to reflect local ecological and cultural cycles.
- Examples from areas around Grafton on the North Coast of New South Wales illustrate how country frameworks can be adapted across jurisdictions.
- A reference to CFIRO (or similar) calendars that call back to how calendars and seasonal patterns of country can be used in curriculum.
- The final slide presents a full version of the proposed country-centric framework (constructed during the talk), intended as a model to replace or supplement existing curricula.
The underlying aim of these examples is to demonstrate practical, place-based tools that align with Indigenous knowledge systems and support inquiry-based learning.

Implementation pathways and mapping to Australian Curriculum

The country-first approach can lead to meaningful units of work that naturally connect to local environments, cultures, and histories.
Teachers can map country-based inquiries to Australian Curriculum outcomes where appropriate, ensuring alignment with general capabilities and standards while preserving country-centric principles.
The approach supports a gradual integration where country-centered pedagogy drives curriculum design first, and mainstream content is mapped afterward.
In practice, this may involve co-design with Indigenous communities, elders, and knowledge holders to ensure authenticity and reciprocity.

Connections to foundational principles and real-world relevance

Country-centric education aligns with broader educational concepts such as place-based education, community-embedded learning, and experiential inquiry.
Indigenous pedagogies emphasize relationality, responsibility, and reciprocity, offering a critique of purely extractive or decontextualized learning.
The framework supports students developing a deep sense of place, identity, and belonging, while also enabling global awareness and engagement with broader issues.
It reflects a shift from mere content transmission to developing dispositions, responsibilities, and care for Country.

Ethical, philosophical, and practical implications

Ethical: center Indigenous knowledge, languages, and ways of knowing in schooling; recognize the rights of communities to co-design curricula.
Philosophical: reframe education from human capital and market competition toward relational, place-based, and holistic understandings of learning and being.
Practical: requires robust community partnerships, professional development for teachers in Indigenous pedagogies, and dedicated time for community-led curriculum design.
Policy implications: potential reallocation of resources, creation of new roles (e.g., knowledge custodians, co-design facilitators), and new assessment approaches aligned with country-based outcomes.

Practical takeaways and next steps

If you are considering alternative curriculum frameworks, start with country knowledge as the anchor and build outwards toward broader content.
Engage with Indigenous communities, elders, and knowledge holders to co-create learning experiences that honor reciprocity and place.
Consider how to map country-based learning to the Australian Curriculum, ensuring alignment while preserving core Indigenous principles.
Explore bilingual or two-way education models to support language revival and cross-cultural competence.
Review existing school and community examples (e.g., Alice Springs school framework, seasonal calendars, NSW coastal country practices) for practical inspiration.
Recognize the political nature of curriculum choices and advocate for more inclusive decision-making that elevates marginalized voices and country-centric perspectives.

Closing notes

The talk invites educators to imagine a curriculum that values place, land, and Indigenous knowledges as foundational rather than ancillary.
It presents a practical vision for a country-first curriculum that still engages with global perspectives and prepares students for international realities while caring for local environments.
For further reading and discussion, contact the presenter and consult referenced papers (e.g., the paper on replacing education in country), and related articles such as the Indigenous pedagogy discussions and dual-language education work.