Differences Between Values of Australian Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Students
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Southern Queensland ePrints Differences Between Values of Australian Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Students Gerard J. Fogarty and Colin White, University of Southern Queensland Acknowledgements We wish to thank the students - particularly those from Kumbari/Ngurpai Lag - for participating in this study. We also wish to acknowledge the contribution of unknown reviewers who made very helpful suggestions after reading an earlier version of this paper. Full reference: Fogarty, G., & White, C. (1994). Difference between values of Australian Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal students. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 25 (3), 394-408 Values of Australian Aboriginal Students 2 Abstract In this study, the Values Questionnaire developed by Schwartz and Bilsky (1987, 1990) was used to examine differences in the values held by a group of Aboriginal university students (N=112) and a group of non-Aboriginal students (N=106) studying at an Australian university. Results indicated that the Aboriginal group placed greater emphasis on values associated with Tradition, Conformity and Security and significantly less emphasis on values associated with Achievement, Self-direction, Stimulation, Hedonism and Benevolence. These data, in conjunction with a separate analysis of the ten highest ranked values for each group, support the view that the main differences between the groups lie in values serving collective (Aboriginal) as opposed to individual (non-Aboriginal) interests. These findings are consistent with previous research (eg. Christie, 1987) on the world view of traditional Aboriginal people and suggest that even among younger, more "Westernised", representatives of this culture, collective values are likely to be strong determinants of behaviour. 2 Values of Australian Aboriginal Students 3 Differences Between Values Held by Australian Aboriginal and Non-Aboriginal Students The impact of Aboriginal students in Australian universities began to be felt in the mid to late 1980's as the Australian government took steps to increase the participation rates of Aborigines in higher education. During this period of expanded educational opportunity, however, little systematic attempt was made to understand the values of the culture from which these students came, or to determine the extent to which the students themselves held values which might be at odds with modern educational aims. The present study attempted to fill this gap in our understanding by firstly reviewing what is known about traditional Australian Aboriginal values and, secondly, by sampling the values of Aboriginal students participating in a Western-based higher education system and comparing these values with those held by a comparable group of non-Aboriginal students. Researchers in cross-cultural psychology have long stressed the role of cultural outlook in educational achievement. Levi-Strauss (1962/66), certainly a pioneer in cross-cultural studies of cognition, spoke of "magic" and "science" as two parallel ways of acquiring knowledge which are valued differently by different societies. Vernon (1976) proposed that a major part of cultural differences rests on differences in motivation. Goodnow (1976) reminded us that our definitions of what is "good" are based upon our own particular system of values, not necessarily shared by other cultures. Berry (1984) demonstrated that cultural groups differ on dimensions such as preference for holistic rather than analytic problem solving strategies and preference for collective discussion as opposed to individual reflection as the basis for decision making. Berry (1988) further drew our attention to the importance of these background factors when he argued that a special effort should be made to understand cultural values and goals for cognitive development before trying to assess competence in any non-Western community. By and large, this has not happened for the Australian Aborigines. As Christie (1985) has asserted, educating Aboriginal people through formal schooling has been largely a matter of imposing the Western world view upon the Aboriginal one. In examining traditional Aboriginal culture, the concept of world-view often emerges. Although different definitions exist, a world-view can be considered as the set of ideas and beliefs which a group of people hold about the world and the people and things in it (Christie, 1987). In examining differences between Aboriginal and White Australian society, researchers are often struck by the large differences and contrasts in world-view held by the two societies. Christie (1985) noted in particular the emphasis placed in Aboriginal culture upon qualities and personal relationships and responsiveness to the environment. Survival depends on cooperation and coexistence. Harris (1988) found evidence of five major differences between the cultures. These differences were in the following areas: a) Aborigines view knowledge as owned, or looked after, by particular people whereas in Western society knowledge is freely available to those who choose to seek it; b) the Aboriginal culture places a greater emphasis on the quality of personal relationships; c) Aborigines have a more passive view of the environment, preferring to adapt to it rather than manipulating it to suit themselves; d) the Aboriginal view of the world is essentially a religious one, as opposed to Western 'scientific' viewpoints; e) the Aboriginal world view holds that most of the major changes have already taken place and that a perfectly good social system already exists - this again is opposed to Western concepts of progress, development, change and control. These descriptions of world view paint an interesting picture of traditional Aboriginal society but what do they tell us about the values of students, now somewhat removed from this context? Although writers such as Christie and Harris were careful to confine their 3 Values of Australian Aboriginal Students 4 observations in relation to world-views to the more traditional communities in which they worked, they also suggested that there are significant continuities within all Aboriginal groups in Australia (Christie, 1985, Harris, 1990). If this is the case, Aboriginal university students should exhibit value profiles which are compatible with the world views attributed to their traditional culture. Other lines of research suggest that this might be the case. Berry (1970) used the term "marginals" to describe Aborigines caught between cultures. He found that people in this situation tend to reaffirm or retain traditional values. Dawson (1969), in research with groups of semi-traditional, semi-modern, and modern Aborigines, reported that Aborigines in all groups showed a tendency to retain their traditional character and resist the adoption of Western values. These latter researchers were, of course, talking about "values" rather than "world views", but the two are not so different. In many ways the values framework is probably a more familiar setting for cross-cultural research on aspects of cognition. Kearney and Fitzpatrick (1976), in reviewing research on social change amongst Aboriginal Australians, observed that much of the literature emphasises the crucial role of a person's individual value system in shaping the direction of change -towards assimilation or towards ethnicity. Feather (1986) described a long-standing cross-cultural research programme based in Australia which has used Rokeach's Value Survey (RVS) as its main psychometric instrument. In more recent times, this programme has adopted the Values Questionnaire (Schwartz & Bilsky, 1987, 1990), a derivation of the (RVS), for its investigation of cross-cultural value differences (Feather, Volkmer, & McKee; 1992). This was also the instrument chosen for the present study and some comments on its derivation are warranted. Schwartz (1991) describes values as terms that point to the important human goals or motivations about which people communicate. In developing a theory of a universal psychological structure of human values, Schwartz and Bilsky (1987, 1990) proposed that there were three universal human requirements to which all individuals and societies must be responsive. These were (a) needs of individuals as biological organisms, (b) requisites of coordinated social interaction, and (c) survival and welfare needs of groups. They further contended that these requirements must be represented cognitively, taking the form of values and that through socialisation and developmental processes, individuals learn to represent the requirements as conscious goals and values and to attribute varying degrees of importance to them (Schwartz and Bilsky, (1990). Early research by Schwartz and Bilsky (1987, 1990) had identified eight distinct motivational values which could be derived from the three universal human requirements. Further research (Schwartz, 1991), utilising a newly developed 56 item questionnaire, yielded a number of additional motivational values resulting in ten, possibly eleven, distinct motivational categories. This revision was based on the analyses of interrelations among 56 values in 40 samples across 20 countries. In a more recent revision of the theory, Schwartz (1992) settled upon 11 dimensions. The motivational types and associated values of the revised theory are as follows: 1. Self-Direction (creativity, freedom, choosing own goals, curiosity, independence); 2. Stimulation (variety, excitement);