Strengthening Indigenous parents’ co-leadership through culturally responsive home-school partnerships: a practical implementation framework

ABSTRACT

The momentum of the decolonising education movement has led many scholars to rethink the ongoing impacts of colonialism on Indigenous peoples and generate catalysts for change. Using the decolonisation lens, the aim of this phenomenological study was to investigate the barriers, outcomes, and enablers of effective collaboration between West Papuan parents and teachers. Results suggested that although they encountered many obstacles, both groups of participants still believed in the possibility of establishing sustainable, culturally responsive home-school partnerships. In addition, when teachers embraced West Papuan culture in home-school partnerships, it increased their professional skills, parents’ agency, and self-efficacy, which in turn, enhanced children’s learning outcomes and strengthened children’s Indigenous identity. We offer a culturally responsive home-school partnership framework, developed from the bottom-up narratives of teachers and parents. The framework centres on three key strategies: culturally responsive communication, decolonising pedagogical practices, and emancipatory support.

KEYWORDS:

• Indigenous parents
• parental engagement
• parental involvement
• family-school collaboration
• culturally responsive
• home-school partnerships

Introduction

The literature on Indigenous home-school partnerships indicates that there is a counterweight to and resistance towards ongoing hegemonic strategies of engaging families that perpetuate settler-colonial ideologies and aims (Bang, Nolan, and McDaid-Morgan 2018; Washington 2019). Many parents suffered psychological trauma in their schooling as a result of assimilation and colonial practices (Madden, Higgins, and Korteweg 2013) that now influence their perceptions of their children’s schools. They are reluctant to get involved as they deem school to be a place that will destroy their identity and culture (Ratcliffe and Boughton 2019).

The growing force of the decolonising education has prompted scholars to reconsider the effects of colonialism on Indigenous communities and foster transformative change (Barkaskas and Gladwin 2021). In this context, culturally responsive home-school partnerships play a crucial role in dismantling the Western-Eurocentric educational approach and bridging the gap between conventional educational systems and Indigenous culture (Berryman and Ford 2017; Garcia 2014). By incorporating Indigenous culture into the learning process, these partnerships promote more culturally sensitive education for Indigenous students (Berryman and Togo 2007).

Our study broadens the body of knowledge into previously unexplored geographic areas, populations, or socio-cultural contexts. It aimed to identify challenges to culturally responsive home-school partnerships, discover enablers, and develop a practical implementation framework. We are especially concerned with West Papuan parents who have experienced ongoing sociocultural conflict (see Sianturi et al. 2023). Moreover, the literature exploring the topic within the West Papuan community is limited. Research questions included:

1. What challenges do Indigenous West Papuan parents and teachers encounter in building culturally responsive home-school partnerships?

2. What are the outcomes of current home-school partnerships?

3. What are the enablers of culturally responsive home-school partnerships?

The findings of this study could provide schools with transformative strategies, combining a national education framework and localised manifestations to enhance parents’ engagement. This framework, tailored to the specific circumstances of West Papuan communities, will serve as a guide for educators, policymakers, and stakeholders to navigate the intricacies of incorporating Indigenous culture into the education system. The study contributes to transforming education to be more culturally relevant for Indigenous communities.

The context of the study

Education in West Papua is characterised by intense contestation at epistemic, ontological, and socio-political levels (Kudiai 2015; Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022). This contestation stems from a long history of oppression faced by the West Papuans at the hands of the Indonesian government, starting from the time when West Papua officially became part of the Indonesian entity (Overweel 1992; Sugandi 2008; Upton 2009; Wangge and Webb-Gannon 2020). At the epistemic level, it is evident that Indonesian knowledge systems are predominantly regarded as valid, relevant, and authoritative within the Indonesian education system, while the knowledge systems of Papuans are marginalised (Kudiai 2015; Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022).

Additionally, there are frequent conflicts concerning the existence of West Papuan cultures and identity within the educational framework. West Papuan cultural identities, language, perspectives, and ways of knowing are often overlooked in the curriculum (Kudiai 2015). The curriculum and textbooks employed in schools for Papuan students are significantly disconnected from their lives and cultural context, both in terms of language and content (Mollet 2007; Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022). For example, textbooks and educational resources rarely contain images of West Papuan children, but rather, they predominantly feature images of other Indonesian children (Sianturi and Hurit 2023). Although there are few children’s books that feature West Papua’s culture, those books sometimes do not reflect the authentic West Papuan culture and can be misleading (Rifanto 2022). This underrepresentation can reinforce feelings of cultural invisibility and hinder students’ ability to relate to the materials on a personal level. Consequently, West Papuan students face challenges in learning at schools.

West Papuans also face struggles with limited access to education, acculturation, cultural rights, language policies, and the enduring impact of historical and ongoing stereotypes, discrimination, and oppression on educational opportunities and outcomes (Kudiai 2015; Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022). Language policies applied by the government that do not allow the use of Papuan languages in schools cause endangerment of those languages (Arka 2016; Rizqo 2018). Moreover, Papuans are commonly stigmatised with negative labels such as inferiority, backwardness, and poverty (Sugandi 2008).

Because of the oppressive system and its persistent associated dynamics in their region, some Papuans contend that colonialism continues to this day (Sugandi 2008; Widjojo et al. 2010). West Papuans strive for recognition, equity, and social justice in society and schools (Webb-Gannon 2014). When they resist the educational system’s ongoing attempts to assimilate their children, sometimes cultural clashes with educational institutions occur. The lack of Papuan parents’ engagement at schools is considered by teachers to be apathy that leads Papuan students to perform poorly (Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022). However, this might highlight the intentional expressions of Papuan agencies and resistance concerning their aspirations to safeguard their distinct identity and cultural traditions, ensuring their vitality and preservation in the lives of their children (Kudiai 2015). These clashes occur due to the lack of teachers’ understanding of Papuan culture and the complexity of challenges Papuan people encounter (Sianturi, Lee, and Cumming 2023).

Home-school partnerships in Indonesian education context: policy and practices

Since early 2020, at the beginning of the global pandemic, schools have increasingly realised the importance of parent-school cooperation. However, this significance was recognised even before the pandemic, as evidenced by the inclusion of school committees in Indonesian governmental legislation, ‘Regulation of Minister of Education and Culture Number 75 of 2016’ (Kementerian Pendidikan dan Kebudayaan 2016). As per this legislation, the school committee as an independent body consists of parents/guardians, local community members, and educational leaders. The committee functions to 1) assist schools in determining education policies related to school regulations, programmes and performance; 2) raise funds and provide other educational resources; 3) supervise educational services in schools; and 4) follow up on feedback from students, parents/guardians, and the community, and school committee’s assessment on school performance. Moreover, the Ministry of Education (2021) recommends the inclusion of home-school partnerships within the curriculum design. Specifically, this Ministry of Education (2022) recently initiated a new curriculum, ‘Kurikulum Merdeka’ which means ‘freedom curriculum’; this is more adaptable and contextually relevant as schools are given more agency and encouraged to engage parents and local communities in developing an operational curriculum.

Despite these well-developed policies, obstacles remain in determining the optimal process for implementing culturally responsive home-school partnerships. First, school committees often lack an understanding of the purpose of partnerships. For example, in an evaluation study involving 440 participants (school committee leaders, principals, parents, and other stakeholders) across 33 provinces in Indonesia, the research team (Tim Peneliti 2011) found that school committees focused on issues related to the school budget and paid little attention to the school’s essential functions, e.g., monitoring the student’s learning process, attendance, and strategies to enhance students’ success.

In addition, a study involving Papuan parents and teachers conducted by Sianturi et al. (2023) reported that the development of home-school collaboration had not been recognised as a collective objective by school personnel. All teachers commented that cooperation was still considered part of the individual teacher’s responsibilities. Furthermore, Indonesian educational policies fail to acknowledge Indigenous rights and cultures and overwhelmingly focus on ‘gap gazing’ discourses between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Indonesian students at national scales (Hermino 2017; Hermino and Arifin 2020). These existing policies are deemed to deprive Indigenous heritage so it is not surprising that some Indigenous elders resist engaging with government institutions (Muslim 2021). The last obstacle is the absence of a practical implementation framework for culturally responsive home-school partnerships. In developing a local curriculum as a part of school collaborative programmes, school personnel in Hamadi’s (2021) study argued that there were no partnership models that could be applied.

Theoretical perspectives and positionality

As an Indonesian Indigenous woman, the lead author has first-hand experience of poverty and limited education opportunities. Inspired by her upbringing, she has focused her research on Indigenous education in West Papua. Despite living and working with the West Papuan community for several years, she is not a Papuan. Hence, in her stance as an outsider, she took great care to approach the experiences of Papuan parents and teachers in their collaborations with careful attention to their complexities. During the development of the study and data analysis, the research team consulted with two Indigenous West Papuan elders and a researcher to ensure a thorough understanding of West Papuan culture and identify potential sociocultural biases that might be overlooked. Moreover, the outcomes of this study were enhanced by the involvement of authors 2 and 3, who are non-Indonesian, have Asian and Caucasian backgrounds, are social science and educational researchers and have conducted much research on key issues related to people of colour and with special needs. In addition, given the colonial historical context and its impact on education within the Papuan community, we believed that decolonising, Indigenising, and culturally responsive perspectives were useful theoretical perspectives when analysing the entire discourse presented by participants to mitigate social-historical-political bias.

The demand for decolonisation is grounded in the lived experiences of injustices associated with historical power imbalances and colonialist legacies (Moodie 2018). Mignolo (2007) argued the urgency of a de-linking strategy to disrupt the continued dominance of colonial legacies and foster the liberation of marginalised communities by reclaiming their own histories, identities, and futures. The education system has historically been abused in colonial control (Barkaskas and Gladwin 2021). The Western-European conception of knowledge and rational scientific reasoning underpinning its dominance has colonised education (Barkaskas and Gladwin 2021). Curricula have been developed with the notion of being standard, ignoring Indigenous realities. The imperative is that decolonising education unpacks education’s historical entanglement with colonialism to address sociocultural inequities by fostering inclusive, reflexive, and transformative frameworks in pedagogy and curriculum (Duku and Salami 2017). However, decolonising education can be overwhelming and cannot be undertaken without embracing Indigeneity, as decolonising and Indigenising are inseparable and interdependent (Yang and Wayne 2012). The sustainable goal is not merely to bring Indigenous culture into a classroom but to reform the Western-Eurocentric colonial construction of education into an Indigenised education system (Grange Le and Mika 2018), including four broad elements of policy, curriculum, pedagogy, and partnerships (Barkaskas and Gladwin 2021; Bishop et al. 2021).

Therefore, decolonising educational partnerships requires collective responsibility (Madden, Higgins, and Korteweg 2013). In establishing a sustained home-school partnership, school personnel must ensure that all their conduct is free of deficit views (Bang, Nolan, and McDaid-Morgan 2018). Although some teachers might intend to build relations with parents through knowledge sharing, it can trigger implicit hierarchy and devaluation of Indigenous knowledge and culture (Washington 2019). Therefore, their collaboration must stem from culturally responsive perspectives (Bang, Nolan, and McDaid-Morgan 2018; Gay 2000; Ladson-Billings 1995). Indigenous people’s values and cultural practices are key to the long-lasting development of partnerships between schools and Indigenous families (Garcia 2014; Sianturi, Lee, and Cumming 2022).

Moreover, it is essential to sincerely acknowledge and centre Indigenous knowledge systems, culture, and identity within pedagogy (Yunkaporta 2009). Gay (2000) and Ladson-Billings (1995) highlighted culturally responsive classroom practices that utilise the language and culture of students as a means to teach them a portion of the acceptable curriculum. However, Paris (2012) offered the term culturally sustaining pedagogy that goes beyond mere responsiveness or relevance to the cultural practices of students and actively fosters the preservation of their communities’ cultural and linguistic competence, while also facilitating access to dominant cultural knowledge. Scholars who developed a funds of knowledge approach to school-community relationships provide insight into practical ways of culturally sustaining approaches to education (Esteban-Guitart and Moll 2014). Funds of knowledge encompass valuable educational resources derived from households, local communities, and the environment, integrated into school practices to enhance children’s learning (Moll 2019). In our study, we used the term culturally responsive home-school partnerships to refer to partnerships between a school, family and local community that respected each other’s cultural background and preserved the cultures and language of the family and the local community.

Methods

Design and participants

School sites and parents’ homes were in a suburban and low to middle socioeconomic area in Papua Province, Indonesia. In this regency, due to acculturation, West Papuans have adopted a mixed language, comprising elements of the Papuan language and Indonesian. West Papuans use this mixed language for daily communication and Indonesian at school.

All aspects of this research that involve Indigenous communities adhered to Indigenous protocols. To understand West Papuan culture, context, and rights and ensured the protection of each Indigenous participant, two Papuan elders and one Papuan researcher were consulted. Human research ethics committees at the authors’ university, Indigenous Representative Board, and the regional education authorities provided ethical approval to conduct this study. We obtained informed consent from all participants.

Employing a phenomenological case study design (Bracken 2014; Eddles-Hirsch 2015) allowed the research team to understand the multiple perspectives of Indigenous parents and teachers on barriers they encounter in their partnerships and how partnerships can be carried out in culturally responsive ways. Parents and teachers were recruited with the assistance of a local Papuan support person and selected using purposive sampling. Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, semi-structured interviews were conducted online from late 2021 to mid-2022; scholars suggested online interviews for safety reasons (Lobe, Morgan, and Hoffman 2020). While recognising the limitations of online methods, such as diminished rapport-building compared to face-to-face methods (Kraglund-Gauthier 2015), we attempted to mitigate these limitations. We scheduled interviews during participants’ preferred school hours and utilised Indonesian for teachers and a mixed language for parents. The local support person was also present to provide technical assistance and interpretation if needed. With participants’ consent, we also video recorded the interviews to include facial expressions and body language. This approach was to establish rapport and encourage comfortable expression. It enabled researchers to obtain rich data despite virtual interviews (Stanko and Richter 2015). Documents such as the school’s website, examples of students’ homework, and text-messaging that teachers and parents used to communicate were also collected. Data were analysed using Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) (Pietkiewicz and Smith 2014).

Participants comprised 22 Papuan parents and 8 teachers from two primary schools. Parents and teachers of students in grades two to six participated in this study. All teachers were females with at least one year of experience in being homeroom teachers; some even had over 20 years of experience. Two of them were Papuan while the rest were non-Papuan. Parents (18 females and 4 males) included mothers, fathers, and guardians. All of them came from low (n = 14) to middle (n = 8) socioeconomic backgrounds and had two to eight children, and six of them were single mothers. Their education levels varied, including primary school (n = 1), junior high school (n = 5), secondary school (n = 9), associate degree (n = 1), bachelor’s degree (n = 5) and master’s degree (n = 1). Names of participants were replaced with pseudonyms.

Data analysis

Using the research questions as a guide, all transcriptions were analysed following a three-step approach developed by Pietkiewicz and Smith (2014, 10), comprising reading repeatedly and taking notes, identifying emerging themes from these notes, and shifting through themes and connections in order to develop a conclusion. The information from the document analysis was combined with the data from the transcripts. The first author developed a coding frame using NVivo, while the second and third authors validated the accuracy and consistency of codes. Some participants checked transcriptions. One Papuan researcher and one elder provided constructive feedback on preliminary results.

Findings

Barriers to culturally responsive home-school partnerships

Challenges to culturally responsive home-school partnerships were classified into three subthemes: challenges that arose from teachers, parents, and both parties as a result of the interaction dynamics or conflict between them.

Teacher’s family demands and lack of indigenous knowledge and commitment

Family demands. As some parents worked during school hours, teachers realised that it would be more effective to meet with parents in the afternoon. However, this rarely happened, as teachers usually went home soon after school hours. In addition to teaching in schools, some teachers had other responsibilities, e.g., studying at university, having second jobs to cover family needs and children’s education, difficult family circumstances, and living far from school. These circumstances made it difficult for them to keep their commitments to the school after school hours. Therefore, they did not have much time to communicate with parents outside of school hours. Ayu commented,

It could be that our schedule doesn’t match. School hours are parents’ hours of work. If it’s outside working hours, maybe I’m the one who doesn’t have time. Because I live far away from school, it’s a bit far away, so if I want to return to school later, it isn’t easy. First, my child is also often sick, so outside of school hours, I don’t think I have that much time… My husband is now on duty in another regency.

Lack of Indigenous knowledge. Although non-Papuan teachers had lived within the West Papuan community for a long time (about 4–27 years), some of them did not understand the importance of Papuan culture and identity to Papuan parents and children and the impact of colonial legacies and the systematic oppressions that parents faced. This lack of understanding affected how they interacted designed pedagogical practices and with parents. Sometimes, they gave students homework that was complex and not relevant to their real life. Figure 1 is a depiction of one student’s homework, revealing how the information in the homework lacks relevancy to the context of the student’s life. All learning materials and homework were written within the context of Jakarta (the capital of Indonesia), although the students lived in Papua.

Figure 1. Homework example.

The lack of understanding of Papuan culture, identity and colonial legacies also triggered the emergence of teachers’ deficit views of Papuan parents and children and racial discrimination. Although most non-Papuan teachers did not explicitly voice that Indonesia exercises colonial power over West Papuan people, they acknowledged that the West Papua is a part of Indonesia, and their actions signalled perpetuating colonialism. Some parents reported incidents indicative of continuing colonial attitudes held by some non-Papuan teachers. Many parents reported bullying against their children (e.g., black, lazy, smelly, and stupid) by Indonesian peers, and the recurring discrimination that schools and teachers failed to address resulted in clashes. Parents shared that these situations were not new, as similar experiences had happened repeatedly over time. Parents perceived some teachers as ineffective in managing the clashes. For instance, Matha recounted how her son’s distress towards school and subsequent school refusal stemmed from a teacher’s inappropriate response to conflicts arising from an Indonesian student’s bullying behaviour. She attributed this ongoing negative outlook to the teacher’s lack of awareness about prevailing racial discrimination among students and a colonial and unjust attitude.

Moreover, Papuan students’ silence in class was misinterpreted as disengagement, serving as a criterion for evaluating their academic achievement. Ayu, a non-Papuan teacher, said active participation was linked to higher rankings among Papuan students. Ana’s son received a poor report due to being mislabelled as mute by his teacher when he did not answer questions, while Ana attributed this inactivity to classroom bullying. Another non-Papuan teacher, Iin, commented, ‘I want Papuan children to be able to adapt to non-Papuan children’. In essence, this teacher was advocating for a process of assimilation. Some non-Papuan teachers repeatedly conveyed to Papuan children that they must exceed non-Papuan children, which indirectly communicated the notion that Papuan children were considered ‘good’ students when their academic performance surpassed that of non-Papuan children.

Parental attributes, family demands, and family dynamics and complexities

Parental attributes. Both parents and teachers reported that the significant factor that impeded parents’ participation was parental attributes, including low education levels and SES. Some parents only completed primary school and junior high school and had poor literacy and numeracy. This, in addition to the lack of relevancy of homework, led parents to assume that they did not have sufficient skills to help children learn at home. The invisibility of Papuan culture and knowledge in pedagogical practices was a significant challenge for students in understanding the material and for parents in helping their children learn.

Among parents, 60% were financially disadvantaged and 27% were single mothers. Due to this circumstance, many of their children’s educational needs were still unfulfilled, including transportation costs and school supplies. Home resources for children, such as computers and books were also limited, making it difficult for parents to provide their children with maximum guidance. In addition, some had to work late at night, finding their children already asleep when they came home.

Family dynamics and complexities. The level of parental engagement was also influenced by family dynamics and complexities (e.g., traumatic experiences at home, conflict, domestic violence, and divorce). These circumstances affected parents’ performance in helping their children complete their homework. Sella, a single mother with low SES, shared how she experienced psychological distress when her ex-husband took her child away, which influenced her focus on working and taking care of her other children.

Now I feel sorry for my first child, because I don’t know whether she goes to school or not… I felt it was a loss, I had tried so hard to support her education, how I strived to make money to buy her uniform, until she was in year three. Then her father [my ex-husband] took her away, didn’t give her a good education…. My heart aches, and I am disappointed.

Family demands. Family demands (e.g., religious activities, cultural priorities, being away from a partner, extended family) sometimes prevented parents from effectively supporting their children’s learning. Religious activities were usually carried out in the afternoon until the evening when children were scheduled to study. Some children missed school because their parents brought them to their ancestral lands to attend cultural ceremonies so that children could learn their culture. Some parents also took care of their extended family, which limited their capacity to facilitate their children’s learning. Parents viewed these responsibilities as cultural obligations to protect their cultural well-being. As the eldest son in his family, Keli was responsible for the extended family, which required him to handle his relatives’ problems. Rosa, with four children, also added,

For several years I have taken care of my sick mother. So, my mother has had a stroke for nine years; I have to look after her. My husband works in another regency, so every eight months or ten months, he comes back here. Besides caring for my mother and children, I usually work in the traditional market. Because a salary from my husband alone is not enough for the children and the sick parent.

Despite all the complex issues experienced by parents, they tried their best to ensure these circumstances were not detrimental to their children’s academic outcomes and well-being. The narratives that they shared demonstrated stories of perseverance, resilience, determination, and the ability to overcome adversity with courage and tenacity. They encouraged their children to complete their homework independently or requested that older siblings assist.

Parent-teacher conflicts

Some parents perceived that the utilisation of educational systems as a means to assimilate and dominate Indigenous populations posed a significant and formidable challenge. This affected the relationships between parents and schools. Some teachers and parents perceived that establishing close relationships was problematic. Having respectful dialogues with parents seemed difficult for teachers, due to the fear of offending or being offended, memories of past conflicts that were not properly addressed, and language barriers. In addition, unpleasant experiences and actions that indicate racial discrimination led parents to have generational mistrust towards school and negative perceptions of teachers. Due to teachers’ limited understanding of the systemic oppression and colonial legacies affecting parents, there was a tendency to misinterpret the perceived lack of parental involvement in schools as indifference. However, this resistance from parents primarily stemmed from their perspectives that the schools were making ongoing and continuous efforts to assimilate their children.

Outcomes of effective home-school partnerships

Sustained collaboration between teachers and parents improved teachers’ culturally responsive attitudes and practice, along with their co-leadership capabilities. Teachers’ intentional and authentic dedication across multiple layers of attempts to build holistic collaborations with parents led them to develop a classroom culture that promoted transformative learning for children. Moreover, the challenges during their interactions with parents became an opportunity to practice and acquire necessary co-leadership skills. They believed that the ability to communicate effectively was essential for building trust, aligning attempts in the pursuit of a shared goal, and inspiring positive change in the local community where they lived and worked.

Some teachers invited parents to share Indigenous knowledge at the school. This made parents feel welcomed and respected. During their collaboration with those teachers, they began to realise their capability as they taught Papuan culture to their children. Their relationships with teachers reflected a strong attitude of tolerance. Some parents were enthusiastic when helping their children prepare for Papuan cultural arts performances. Teachers’ support and empowering activities facilitated parents to be more confident in guiding their children to complete homework that was initially considered challenging.

When teachers and parents established culturally responsive home-school partnerships, there were significant positive impacts on children, such as the development of children’s school-related skills and the increase of their educational pursuits and engagement. Parents reported that they were proud when they saw that their children’s reading and maths skills improve. One-to-one guidance offered by teachers, constant communication, inspiring stories, and encouragement from teachers, were found to improve learning and reduce persistent chronic absences.

Enablers to promote culturally responsive home-school partnerships

Teachers’ attitudes and beliefs

The obstacles described earlier were overcome when teachers had a positive attitude towards and strong belief in the success of their partnerships with parents. It was explicitly referenced at each site that a few teachers showed a genuine desire to nurture relationships with Papuan parents, resulting in culturally responsive relations between them. Their commitment was to gain Indigenous cultural knowledge and listen actively to the parents’ aspirations. Fostering close relationships with Indigenous families was instrumental in forming an understanding of the importance of Indigenous ways of knowing. Their understanding was reflected in their teaching practices and interactions with parents. Practices that enabled more parental involvement are elaborated on in the next section (see Figure 2 for a summary).

Figure 2. Culturally responsive home-school partnerships framework.

Indigenous cultural resources

Another enabler was the availability of Indigenous cultural resources, including having a Papuan presence at school, Indigenous elders and community members acting as members of a school committee, and parental involvement. Although Papuan administrative staff and teachers were not designated as liaisons, they were willing to support if parents or non-Papuan teachers needed their help regarding Papuan culture or Papuan students’ and parents’ problems. Several non-Papuan teachers commented that they did not hesitate to ask their principal and colleagues, both Papuan, to teach them about the Papuan language and culture. In addition, some parents also openly expressed their willingness to be involved in school. Most were parents who worked as professionals or held higher education degrees. Their intention was to support their fellow Papuans, especially those with complex needs.

One of the good opportunities is … if we can share our experiences. I’m happy if I’m more involved in my child’s school, with parents of other students, especially with teachers. [Dewi, a mother with a bachelor’s degree]

Lira, an activist for Indigenous Papuan women living near the participating school and parents’ housing, took the initiative to provide additional free educational services, i.e., reading and writing with a Papuan cultural approach, for students at the school. She eloquently said it was her pleasure to assist the school whenever necessary. In addition, teachers and parents observed that several external collaborators focused on promoting Papuan culture were available to provide services, helping students with complex support needs. Finally, some parents and teachers sincerely hoped that these Indigenous cultural resources could be maximised in the future, e.g., through empowering activities or restorative practice programmes, to create sustained culturally responsive home-school partnerships.

Culturally responsive home-school partnerships framework

Throughout the interviews, teachers and parents articulated the ways they conducted their culturally responsive home-school partnerships. At the end of the interviews, they were also asked about the recommendations on how to increase collaboration in the future. Based on these, we developed a practical implementation framework for culturally responsive home-school partnerships (Figure 2).

While Figure 2 presents the framework in a linear manner, it should be understood that the intended implementation of the framework is cyclical, as depicted in Figure 3.

Figure 3. The implementation framework of culturally responsive home-school partnerships.

The core of the framework

An acknowledgement of Indigenous culture, parents’ life experiences are at the heart of this framework. To maximise the outcomes of home-school partnerships, considering Indigenous epistemologies and ontologies in the whole process of partnerships was vital, which underpinned three components: mapping and planning, implementation, and evaluation and reflection. The framework focuses on three major strategies: culturally responsive communication, decolonising pedagogical practices, and emancipatory support. Moreover, the framework is intended to improve teachers’ knowledge of Indigenous culture and attitude and parents’ knowledge, agency, and self-efficacy. When there was harmony between them, children’s learning outcomes were elevated, and Indigenous identity was strengthened.

The components of the framework

Mapping and planning

Barriers and enablers that teachers identified can be used to map and plan their collaboration. This identification is a continuous process that teachers can also undertake while partnering with parents. As the recognition of Indigenous culture is the core of this framework, it is imperative to ensure that teachers understand Papuan culture.

Teachers claimed that the importance of embedding Indigenous culture and identity in their partnerships had not been emphasised either in their previous teacher education or during their teaching. Therefore, teachers might enhance their knowledge of Indigenous history, culture, language, and heritage through consultation and engagement with Papuan elders and community members in their school community. Amy, a non-Papuan teacher, for example, affirmed that she learned Papuan culture, folk songs, and language from her Papuan colleague.

Implementation

This component comprised a three-pronged approach: culturally responsive communication, decolonising pedagogical practices, and emancipatory support.

Culturally responsive communication refers to a communication approach that adapts to cultural backgrounds and styles, valuing diversity, and promoting respectful and effective interactions. It is inherently woven through relationality, respect, and reciprocity. For example, teachers could modify their communication styles and language use to accommodate parents’ different cultural preferences, actively listen to parents’ diverse perspectives, foster inclusive dialogue, and continuously communicate with them. Papuan teachers and some non-Papuan teachers highlighted that they usually initiated their communication with parents with an open, natural, and warm welcome, which led to respectful dialogues. Although Indonesian was the mandatory language in schools, these teachers chose to use some Papuan terms and mixed language when they reached out to Papuan parents. They usually contacted parents through communication tools (e.g., text messaging and WhatsApp) in the afternoon, when parents finished work. Sometimes they visited parents in the afternoon or evening to build rapport, listen to their stories, create a shared experience, and inform parents of their children’s progress. Parents also asserted that discussions with teachers conducted one-to-one and in a family setting might help them feel more comfortable in expressing their opinions about their children, create a strong relationship, and allow parents to participate in decision-making. These ways of communicating within the Papuan cultural context represent caring, and parents regarded teachers not merely as ‘a teacher’ doing their professional job, but as a part of their family.

Decolonising pedagogical practices means approaches that disrupt dominant narratives and prioritise the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge and perspectives in the curriculum. These practices have several aspects: 1) validating Indigenous voices, knowledge systems, language and histories within the curriculum; 2) creating more equitable learning environments that respect the autonomy, agency, identity, and self-determination of students and communities; 3) fostering critical thinking, self-reflection, and analysis of colonial legacies and their impact on knowledge production, teaching practices, and educational policies; 4) valuing the expertise of local communities and families and seeking their active participation in shaping educational content, decision-making processes, and curriculum development; 5) recognising the interconnectedness of knowledge and encouraging experiential, and contextualised approaches to learning to foster a deeper connection between students, communities, and the environment (e.g., integrating Indigenous ways of knowing, cultural practices, and land-based teachings).

These approaches can enhance parents’ agency, self-efficacy, awareness of their own ability to teach their children Indigenous knowledge, and trust towards teachers. The use of personal stories as a means of reciprocally connecting Papuan students and non-Papuan teachers can foster student-teacher relationships. Likewise, acknowledging Papuan children’s identity in the classroom is also critical. One sample activity eloquently expressed by Amy, a non-Papuan homeroom teacher, was transforming the classroom into a home for students. Since she presented herself as her student’s parent and her students as her children and created a class environment like in an Indigenous family which emphasised respect, sharing, and giving, students felt safe and comfortable.

Furthermore, some teachers acknowledged that they must regularly motivate students academically, be flexible in time, identify the cause of students’ problems by approaching them, employ distinctive strategies according to the student’s needs, and develop schoolwork based on the student’s abilities. These approaches allowed Papuan students to improve their learning and parents to have more agency and self-efficacy in helping their children learn. Puput, a Papuan teacher commented, ‘We don’t give homework [that is] too difficult. We just contextualise it to the student’s situation’. When parents saw that the task was doable, they confidently said to their children that they understood it. Subsequently, they were able to find the strategies required to help children complete the task.

Parents also appreciated the attitude of teachers who did not privilege non-Papuan students or ignore Papuan students. When seeing teachers treat their children fairly, parents deemed this to be a form of concern for their children. Dodo, a single mother, commented, ‘I always thank the teacher because my child is cared for… treats my child just, not different from other children’.

Nevertheless, teachers found it challenging to decolonise pedagogical design features because existing educational regulations have not acknowledged Papuan knowledge systems, culture and heritage in the curriculum. That is, they must be ready to be accountable to the school. Furthermore, this required extra time and effort. However, they argued that small but consistent actions would go a long way.

The absence of Papuan culture in the school curriculum was also regretted by all the parents who participated in the study. The curriculum in Indonesia was under the complete authority of the Indonesian government. To date, Papuan culture is merely deemed an additional element within the Indonesian cultural landscape. Parents voiced the need for curriculum alignment with Papuan culture and languages. Enye, a guardian and Indigenous art coach, suggested cultural immersion as a doable first step to instilling Papuan identity and culture in schools by inviting students every week to perform their Papuan culture dancing, e.g., traditional dances, singing folk songs, or wearing traditional clothes. This was not only a cultural celebration, but this activity symbolised the respect for and appreciation of the culture they inherited.

Emancipatory support describes assistance or empowerment that aims to enable individuals or groups to liberate themselves from oppressive systems or conditions. For example, schools provided resources, skills training, and advocacy support to parents, empowering them to challenge systemic inequalities and work towards their own liberation. Raising teachers’ awareness of social, political, and economic structures that perpetuate inequality could help teachers find support that fosters a parental sense of agency and empowerment.

Teachers help disadvantaged parents succeed in their parental engagement. Some teachers noticed that parents required more support to overcome the obstacles and actively engage with their children’s education. Although some teachers were spending their own money to provide such support, they argued that it was imperative to improve their students’ educational attainment. Puput explained, ‘I don’t require them to buy the thematic book. If they don’t have money to buy it, they let me know, and I will prepare it for them’. Individualised reading and numeracy assistance was provided after school for students with specific needs.

Despite the cultural, language, and other barriers, parents hoped for more resources to assist their children with their education. For example, schools might offer assistive workshops or empowering support for parents in order to accommodate their views about their children’s success and resolve these barriers and other systemic forms of oppression. Noma, a young Papuan teacher skilled in using digital technology, through two weeks of training, empowered parents to use technological tools effectively to guide their children to learn at home.

Evaluation and reflection

Both teachers and parents recommended routine evaluation meetings. These meetings were critical to measure the impact of partnerships on parent-teacher relations, teachers’ knowledge of Indigenous culture and attitude, parents’ knowledge, agency, and self-efficacy, and students’ academic progress and Indigenous identity. Reflective questions cycled through stages of implementation and planning, e.g., what has worked, what needs to be improved in the future, and if the achievement can still be maximised, what resources are required (see Figure 3).

Discussion

Our findings shed light on the barriers, enablers, and outcomes of home-school partnerships. Based on these findings, we developed a framework to promote culturally responsive home-school partnerships. Barriers to culturally responsive home-school partnerships were complex, not only associated with Indigenous cultural issues but also with teachers’ and parents’ life experiences. The life experiences of parents were deeply intertwined with the enduring effects of colonial legacies, oppression, and inequity that they had encountered.

The barriers included teachers’ family demands and their lack of Indigenous knowledge; parents’ attributes, family demands, and family dynamics and complexities; and parent-teacher conflicts. Papuan parents had a strong desire to contribute more to their children’s learning both at home and at school, although sometimes their engagement was limited, due to the financial difficulties that required them to work full-time, and responsibility for their extended family. Parents with limited education often faced increased challenges when assisting their children with schoolwork, as they lacked confidence and encountered difficulties with questions that seemed disconnected from their sociocultural context and daily lives. However, they motivated their children to complete their homework autonomously or sought support from older siblings. These narratives exemplified stories of perseverance, resilience, determination, and the capacity of Papuan parents to overcome challenges with courage and tenacity. Papuan parents had similar obstacles to those found in the broader literature within Indigenous communities (Gerlach and Gignac 2019; Huber et al. 2018; Kaomea 2012). Similarly, the teacher’s lack of knowledge of the cultural and customary context of the Papuan people and the impact of colonial policies often led to a clash in their interactions with parents. This conflict made some teachers take ‘caution’, tending to minimise their interaction with some parents (cf. Dor and Mentzer 2019).

These complex challenges were of course also influenced by insufficient support for teachers. Teachers claimed that they were not provided with adequate support from either school leaders or the government regarding how to establish partnerships with parents. Barriers should be addressed jointly by teachers, school leaders and the government. Therefore, support such as workshops, training, guidelines, and policies are required to facilitate teachers to be able to mitigate these challenges.

Teachers’ authentic attitudes and firm beliefs towards parents and teachers’ recognition of the values of Indigenous culture were essential enablers for constructing sustained culturally inclusive home-school partnerships. A synthesis of studies on school-Indigenous community engagement indicated attitudes and beliefs that are necessary for teachers to co-create high-quality micro-collaborations (Lowe et al. 2019). Teachers who develop close ties with Indigenous families gain knowledge and awareness of the importance of local knowledge and can then incorporate it into their pedagogy and practice (Lowe 2017). Moreover, teachers’ attitudes towards Indigenous culture and heritage is the focal point of Indigenous students’ success, and ‘awareness is the first place to start’ (Moon 2017, 34).

Likewise, all parents in this study called for incorporating Papuan culture, history, language, and issues into the curriculum and instructive programmes. The invisibility of Papuan cultures and knowledge systems was a result of the decades old and ongoing control exerted by the government. Papuan parents articulated issues of political and social sovereignty as they sought to reclaim their autonomy, advocate for their rights, and assert their self-determination. The validation and inclusion of Indigenous knowledge into the curriculum extended beyond the connectedness of knowledge and experiences of young Papuans with current practices. It fostered the preservation of their communities’ cultural and linguistic competence while facilitating their access to dominant cultural knowledge. Paris (2012), who coined the concept of culturally sustaining pedagogy, suggested that teachers might not only focus on how responsive or relevant their teaching strategies are, but moreover, they might support their students’ competence in their communities’ cultures and languages. It is crucial to maintain support for both the traditional and evolving ways in which cultural practices are embraced and utilised by present-day youth (Paris 2012; Sianturi, Chiang, and Hurit 2018). Moreover, given the current degradation of Papuan identity and culture (Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022), the infusion of this Papuan culture might validate and reaffirm Indigenous cultural identities and specificities among students.

The visibility of Indigenous families within the schooling curricula enables the increase of parents’ self-efficacy, agency, and trust towards teachers (Milne and Wotherspoon 2022). Indigenous families and students have historically been confronted with several challenges, including racism, and invisibility within school curricula and pedagogical practices. Due to this invisibility, non-Papuan teachers tend to view Papuan parents as incompetent, having no interest in their children’s academic performance (Sianturi, Lee, and Cumming 2023). When schools value Papuan culture, parents might have more agency to contribute to their children’s school matters. Previous research indicated that the problem was invisibility, not deficiency or disinterest (Hare 2011). While there have been increased opportunities for teaching and engaging with Indigenous knowledge, they were still primarily viewed as add-ons or complements to current curricular frameworks and structures. Existing regulations in Indonesian education systems have yet to demonstrate an appreciation of Indigenous cultural values in curriculum, pedagogy, and home-school partnerships (Hermino 2017; Sianturi, Chiang, and Sumarsono 2022). Developing a policy on reconciliation-related education, which mandates that schools acknowledge Indigenous culture and epistemologies in school practices will go a long way to remedying educational inequities and historical traumas directly rooted in settler colonialism (Milne and Wotherspoon 2022; Ratcliffe and Boughton 2019).

While only a few high schools in West Papua have recently implemented Kurikulum Merdeka (Pratiwi 2022), its policy might offer opportunities for decolonisation in West Papuan education because it gives more autonomy to schools and teachers and it places more emphasis on local context. By incorporating West Papuan perspectives, knowledge, and languages into the curriculum through collaborative decision-making processes involving West Papuan communities and educators, the curriculum can pave the way for a more inclusive and culturally sensitive educational system, fostering diverse ways of knowing and mutual respect between Indonesian and West Papuan students. However, there might also be challenges in implementing it. For example, school personnel might resist significant changes to the curriculum due to existing biases or a lack of familiarity with Indigenous cultures.

In addition to embedding culture into education, mobilising Indigenous knowledge and culture positively impacted teachers’ professional development. For example, a non-Papuan teacher expressed how her culturally responsive communication skills and creativity in designing inclusive classroom practices increased when she learned Papuan culture and language from her Papuan colleague. Notably, all teachers claimed that neither their previous teacher education nor their teaching careers acknowledged the significance of integrating Indigenous culture into their partnerships with parents. The significant influence of mobilising Indigenous knowledge is also reported in Australian literature (Burgess and Cavanagh 2013). It was described that an initiative to integrate Indigenous culture in home-school partnerships successfully produced a significant transformation of professional teacher learning, e.g., teachers established relationships with Aboriginal community members (83%), imbedded more Aboriginal content into their teaching programmes (91%), expanded their knowledge of Aboriginal history, culture, and issues in their communities (98%). Therefore, mobilising Indigenous knowledge and culture is a crucial element to be integrated into teachers’ professional development in West Papua.

Decolonising educational partnerships go beyond mere efforts to involve parents in their children’s schools or homework support. These are the process of disentangling or disconnecting from the structures, ideologies, and legacies of colonialism. The strategies involved breaking away from the dominant systems and narratives imposed by the powers of Indonesian school systems and reclaiming Papuan agency and autonomy. Pathways to decolonising educational partnerships rely on the ability to simultaneously investigate barriers and enablers while raising awareness of Indigenous culture and impacts of colonial legacies and histories, which, in turn, lead to the development of culturally responsive communication, decolonised pedagogical practices, and the provision of emancipatory support. However, currently, there is limited information available to schools regarding how to create such partnerships. Our findings offer a practical framework for culturally responsive home-school partnerships, which was premised on the teachers’ and parents’ bottom-up narratives. Ultimately, valuing the expertise of local communities and parents is the most important element in designing, implementing, and evaluating these partnerships.

Conclusion and implication for practice and future research

What we intended to accomplish in this piece was not only an exploration of the barriers, enablers, and outcomes of current home-school partnerships but also the formulation of a framework, grounded in bottom-up narratives, which outlines Indigenous parents’ leadership within school society in order to foster Indigenous cultural centrality. The core of culturally responsive home-school partnerships is the acknowledgement of Indigenous culture and parents’ life experiences. Although barriers might emerge when building partnerships, these barriers can be offset and high-quality sustained partnerships can be accomplished if teachers exhibit authentic attitudes and firm beliefs towards parents, recognise the values of Indigenous culture in their collaboration and are adequately supported by school leaders and the government.

The findings of this study can have a direct impact on schools and educational authorities in West Papua by enhancing the development of culturally responsive home-school partnerships. This framework, shaped by the unique context of West Papuan communities, provides a roadmap for educators, policymakers, and stakeholders to navigate the complexities of integrating Indigenous culture and language into the educational system, especially in the Kurikulum Merdeka. Furthermore, the findings can be customised for various Indigenous communities in different regions and countries, enabling schools to play active roles in establishing similar partnerships tailored to their specific contexts.

Culturally responsive home-school partnerships require explicit acknowledgement and inclusion of Indigenous culture in educational policies. Policymakers and planners must critically consider embedding Indigenous history, culture, and everyday lives of Indigenous families into the curriculum and education system.

The most significant implication of this study is the provision of strategies to transform tokenistic collaboration into culturally inclusive collaboration. It is an urgent call for teachers, especially non-Indigenous teachers, to openly self-reflect on deficit assumptions, racialised practices, settler-colonial agendas, or any obstacles and how these have obstructed interactions with Indigenous parents and students. As teachers work diligently to identify these barriers, they must cultivate their knowledge of Indigenous culture by consulting elders and community members. When they acquire this knowledge, they might be able to communicate with parents in culturally responsive ways, develop decolonised pedagogical practices, and provide continuous emancipatory support. However, this will be possible if teachers are also supported and equipped properly by school leaders and the government, such as through the provision of training, workshops, guidelines, or policies.

Inviting parents and elders into decision-making is also required during home-school partnerships. By allowing them to affirm the Indigenous cultural value in the classroom, schools not only explicitly show their seriousness about strengthening Indigenous parents’ co-leadership and students’ identity and preserving Indigenous students’ culture and language but also develop teachers’ professional skills. To prepare pre-service teachers with Indigenous knowledge, the education department might consider including topics about culturally responsive home-school partnerships in their programmes. Future research might be extended by adopting this culturally responsive home-school partnership framework as an evidence-based intervention initiative.

Ethical approval

Human research ethics committees at the authors’ university, Indigenous Representative Board in West Papua, and the regional education authorities provided ethics clearance to conduct this study.

Informed consent

The authors obtained informed consent from all participants.

Acknowledgements

Our sincere appreciation goes to all participants, the Indigenous Representative Board, Regional Education and Culture Office, principals of participating schools, and the local support person who assisted during data collection. We also value the feedback from the West Papuan elder and researcher during data analysis.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

Information on data management in the study will be provided by the authors upon request.

Additional information

Funding

The Faculty of Arts, Design, and Architecture, at the University of New South Wales, Australia, financially supported this study.