No Design Without Indigenous Design: Extending First Year Design and Architecture Students’ Understanding of Indigenous Australia

Joanne Paterson Kinniburgh, Alexandra Crosby, Michael Hromek Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building, University of Technology Sydney

Abstract

The design professions have undergone immense shifts over recent decades including an overdue, new receptivity to Indigenous skills and knowledge. Universities in Australia are currently examining approaches to engaging Indigenous knowledge in their degrees. This paper examines a project at at the University of Technology (UTS), supported by the institution-wide Centre for Advancement of Indigenous Knowledges and implemented across the Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building. Specifically, the research asks how first year design students can learn about Indigenous perspectives on design, space, place and Country. We draw from literature on transition pedagogy as well as Indigenous education and analyse the student response to this project as it was implemented in 2015.

Introduction

The design profession has undergone immense shifts over recent decades including a much- needed new receptivity to Indigenous skills and knowledge. Universities in Australia are currently examining approaches to engaging Indigenous knowledge in these degrees, supporting small-scale projects within disciplines as well as implementing institution-wide policies. This paper examines one of these small-scale projects at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS). Specifically, we ask how first year design and architecture students can learn about Indigenous Australians and Indigenous design practice, and be exposed to Indigenous critical perspectives and Aboriginal scholarship. The work is framed by the UTS Indigenous Graduate Attribute Model (UTS:CAIK, 2015).

Firstly, we introduce our project, providing a background to our work by exploring best practices in higher education curricula, drawing from the work of scholars such as Watson (2013), Kift (2012) and Asmar (2011, 2012). In this background section we also discuss these practices in relation to the design profession, referring to examples of interdisciplinary design collaboration such as the critical mapping of Hromek, Hromek and Hromek (2015) and the video resource produced by designers Tessa Zettel and Sumugan Sivanesan (2015). Secondly we discuss the institutional context for this work, and the two modes within which we operated. Student responses to this project are included. Lastly, we reflect on our own efforts to embed Indigenous ways of knowing within our teaching. We draw from experience collaborating over a twelve month period to change curriculum within undergraduate programs to better prepare students to be inter-culturally competent in their professional and community lives. Initiatives include bringing an Indigenous perspective to the mapping component of the interdisciplinary design and architecture programs. In explaining this work, we argue that there a range of manageable changes that can be made in design and

1

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. architecture curricula to expose students to critical Aboriginal perspectives and to engage with Aboriginal communities.

Background: Best Practices in Learning and Teaching

In considering best practices in learning and teaching about Aboriginal culture in Australian universities, we draw from a range of resources, such as those developed by Dr Christine Asmar (2011, 2012) with funding from a national Teaching Fellowship. We acknowledge the important discussions surrounding the differences between teaching about Aboriginal people and by Aboriginal people. We also acknowledge the confusion over the use of Aboriginal perspectives and Aboriginal knowledge, “with the two concepts being widely used to refer to the syllabus content that is taught about Aboriginal people, including for example, Dreaming stories and the Stolen Generations.” (Harrison and Greenfield, p.3). With this project we are concerned with how university teachers of design and architecture, both Aboriginal and non- Aboriginal might include Aboriginal scholarship (both perspectives and knowledge) within their curricula, in ways that redress some of the stereotypical representations students may have come across in their previous learning. In this sense, the project uses an action research methodology where the inquiry is conducted by and for those teaching design and architecture at universities (Sagor, 2000). The authors of this paper, both Indigenous and non- Indigenous, refer to an Indigenous methodological framework within their research and the project under discussion, ‘in order to make intellectual space for Indigenous cultural knowledge systems that were denied in the past’ (Rigney 2001, p.9). While there is not scope to discuss them in this paper, the epistemological aspects of this mean that knowledge is used and shared as it is is revealed through research. The findings presented in this paper include our own reflections on the project’s success as well as qualitative analysis of student and staff responses. This analysis was undertaken collaboratively within the community of practice.

In reviewing the literature for this paper (and project) we found a range of scholars that had organised best practice guidelines into the faculties and schools widely found at most universities in Australia. For example the discipline specific examples of the Indigenous Cultural Competency framework lists the four broad fields of arts, business, education and science (including sub categories of Criminal Justice & Policing, Psychology, Psychiatry, Law, Information Studies, Mathematics, Public Affairs, Medical Practioners, Nursing, Occupational & Physical Therapy, Pharmacy, Social Work, etc. (Universities Australia, 2011). However we found a distinct gap in work that related to the teaching of design. As design and architecture academics we knew that if we were struggling to find resources, others must be also.

The project aims to attend to this gap in knowledge within the University’s teaching curricular by engaging with Indigenous people (practitioners and academic) within the fields of design. It is through this direct engagement that the project aims to address some of the aforementioned shortcomings within these specific areas of knowledge within the University. In considering best practice in learning and teaching, we certainly are not aiming to standardise approaches or evaluate competencies. Rather we want to develop a culture within our faculty, and across Australia, of learning together about Indigenous perspectives on design, space, place and Country and embedding this learning into curricula.

The UTS Approach

2

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. Krause et al (2005) established a new focus on institution-wide approaches to teaching and learning, instead of the then widespread ‘piecemeal’ program based schemes. The work presented here is located within and supported by two institutional Indigenous Australian units, which provided conceptualization and resources, alongside the UTS First Year Experience (FYE) Project, which operates an institution-wide strategy aimed at improving FYE through a third generation (Kift, 2009) approach to transition pedagogies both in- and outside the curriculum (Egea & McKenzie, 2012). The UTS program uses the scholarly principles of third generation first year practice; transition pedagogy; and practices that benefit LSES students; to help staff meet the challenges of larger and more diverse classes so that students effectively transition to and succeed in their studies. All three are underpinned a ‘whole of university’ approach, located with the university’s Equity and Diversity Unit. Without the institutional structures the work of this paper could not occur, or be sound. They are the “starting point and the essential structure for sustainability” (Kinniburgh, 2013, p. 2). “The First Year Experience (FYE) project key themes of the project revolve around students’ identity and sense of belonging; curriculum (engagement in the discipline and embedding transition pedagogies); aligning curricular and co-curricular student support mechanisms; infrastructure and supporting students to navigate the university system.” These themes resonated with the ambition to learn about Indigenous perspectives on design, space, place and Country, and informed the fine grain elements of the project.

UTS has two institution-based Indigenous centres: Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning (IHL) Research Unit; and the Centre for Advancement of Indigenous Knowledges (UTS:CAIK). Both were critical to this project, and provided different aspects of the conceptualization of the current project. Jumbunna IHL Research Unit provides research- based strategic advocacy and support to Indigenous communities, and outreach to Australian Indigenous school students and parents. Within the institution, Jumbunna creates opportunities for Indigenous students, while simultaneously also working to increase understanding of Indigenous Australia for all Australians. As such they have advised team members and funded Indigenous practitioner guests into the faculty.

UTS:CAIK is an Indigenous academic centre of expertise, focused on institution-wide adoption of Indigenous Graduate Attributes (IGA), Indigenous focused postgraduate programs and research. This centre has provided the structure and framework for articulating the work of this paper, in particular the (in-progress) UTS Indigenous Graduate Attribute (IGA) Assessment Model (UTS:CAIK, 2015). The five steps of this model operate cyclically and are listed in the following table. The project was designed around two distinct modes of operation, each mode responding to these five steps.

Step (IGA Assessment Model) Mode 1: Community of Mode 2: Curriculum & Resource Practice 1. Beyond Deficit Orientations Acknowledgements of Country Acknowledgements of Country (in language where (Awareness) Identifying architectural and design possible) practitioners Identifying Australian Indigenous design and architectural practitioners

2. Critical Aboriginal Perspectives Yarning Circle Indigenous involvement in development of (Reflexivity) curriculum Providing aboriginal histories of sites (e.g. Cockatoo Island and Eastlakes)

3

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. 3. Indigenous Community Engagement Jumbunna & following Jumbunna D’harawal knowledge keeper presentations to (Competence) protocol students, and on-going consultation 4. Aboriginal Scholarly Engagement Public Lecture series with 5 Required reading included Aboriginal scholars, (Confidence) Australian Indigenous scholars architects and designers Academics meeting visiting Aboriginal scholars included in lecture series both Aboriginal scholars in curriculum and public lectures

5. Applied Indigenous Knowledges In discussion Opportunity to apply indigenous knowledges in (Engagement) design projects Table 1: Modes of responding to the UTS:CAIK IGA Assessment Model

Mode 1: Community of Practice A community of practice (Adam et al, 2011; Lave & Wenger, 1991) was established in the Faculty by calling for a ‘Yarning Circle’ about Indigenous design. The group was comprised of academics already included Indigenous content in their subjects; academics who wanted to do so; Indigenous academics and research students; members of Jumbunna and UTS:CAIK; Faculty members with Indigenous community engagement projects and one Indigenous community member from one of those projects. Participants shared work already being done and the challenges, in a forum of ‘friendly’ critical and open-ended discussion.

The establishment of a community of practice simultaneously with a ‘Yarning Circle’ was important in ensuring that our work was beginning in a culturally sensitive way. The value of the community of practice model is that it frames learning as social participation, where members are continually creating a shared identity by learning together (Wenger, 1999). For this project, this community, and the way it learned and shared through learning, was a source of information in the form of actual experiences; in other words, best practices. The Yarning Circle was where we talked about what worked and didn’t work in the studio, lecture theatre and on Country. Our community of practice was about finding, sharing, transferring, and organising knowledge. This resonates with the way Brian Martin describes Aboriginal knowledge sharing: “Knowledge about ontology and Entities is learned and reproduced through processes of: listening, sensing, viewing, reviewing, reading, watching, waiting, observing, exchanging, sharing, conceptualising, assessing, modelling, engaging and applying (Martin 2003, p. 209).”

The Yarning Circles uncovered some of the ways that Indigenous content could be prioritised in our disciplines, including within community engagement and curricula. Ideas raised within this community focused on introducing students to Aboriginal ideas of space and place, and to design and architecture practitioners, which have for the large part been historically omitted from design and architecture curricula. The importance of personal relationships between academics and Aboriginal people and communities was foregrounded, so that projects and curricula do not just represent Aboriginal design and architecture, but include it. Some academics in this group expressed anxiety about the possibility of ‘perpetuating the objectified narratives and stereotypical discourses that they are trying to interrupt’ (Harrison & Greenfield, 2011, p.6). There were particular concerns about stereotypical representations of Aboriginal relations to space (for instance the idea of walkabout) and visual language (dot paintings) and the need to expose students to the nuances of Aboriginal design culture and, in the process open up the discourses of design and architecture.

A public lecture series showcased Aboriginal scholars (and one non-Aboriginal) exploring the relationship of Australian Indigenous philosophies of space to contemporary issues in 4

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. design and architecture. This series attracted large numbers of academics, students and external guests, and invigorated internal discussions about critical Aboriginal perspectives with respect to our disciplines. The public lecture series additionally fed into the second mode of the project: Indigenising curriculum and developing learning resources. For some speakers in the program, such as architect Kevin O’Brien, this was explicit. His work questions how a sense of Aboriginality is brought to the city, and argues that architectural thinking is the next frontier, offering challenges to commercial and colonial modes of practice (O’Brien, 2012). His projects are readily accessable and comprehensible for students, and the arguments are passionate and compelling. Because he speaks in the language of our disciplines, as a designer himself, there is relatively little work required of the academics to translate or explain. For others, such as historian Bill Gammage, more work was involved. While Gammage’s writing (2011) decimates colonisers’ understandings of what they encountered, and provides an evidence-based articulation of the management of Country and space in pre-colonial times, it does not ‘design’ in the way students understand their own practice.

Student and staff feedback showed that students enjoyed the readings and videos of Gammage’s work, but struggled to use it. Bringing historical research into design disciplines requires contextualisation for students. Members of the Community of Practice had to collaborate to develop resources in the form of discussion questions (Why did Europeans see Australia as a park? What is a park? How is it different to a garden?) and design activities (Draw the place you are sitting for 5 minutes. Now draw what that place looked like in 1777) that could help students and tutors link the ideas raised by these speakers to their future professions. Following the inclusion of these resources, design students demonstrated engagement with the content in their work, including comments such as this in submissions of their visual research. ‘It’s important to understand the history of the land. In 1788 it wasn’t just a wilderness, there was a design to the land’ (Student Submission, 85503, 2015.2).

Mode 2: Indigenising Curriculum and Resource Development The second part of our project sought to Indigenise first year curricula in several core subjects for all design and architecture students. In our own teaching practice our focus so far has been on core subjects with large cohorts of first year students. In the following sections we explain how these subjects have been transformed by the introduction of Aboriginal scholars and professional design practitioners, promoting critical discussion around the learning resources that exist or could exist in more inclusive design and architecture curricula. We focus in particular on the subject Design Thinking. It should be noted that members of our community of practice have been doing wonderful work in other subjects, which there is not scope to discuss in this paper.

Country and Context In Design Thinking, Acknowledgement of Country was explicitly incorporated in the lecture series and the Cockatoo Island camp. “[The lecturer] set the scene for the semester by doing an Acknowledgement to [sic] Country at the beginning of the very first lecture and in doing that sent a really powerful message about valuing Indigenous knowledge and culture” (SFS, 85503 2015.2). An acknowledgement to Country is a significant act of respect towards Australia’s Indigenous peoples. As explained by Jumbunna “The University campuses are located on Aboriginal lands and it is important that staff and students understand the significance of observing protocols in recognising the Traditional Owners of the relevant 5

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. Lands at University events and ceremonies. Observing agreed cultural protocols demonstrates the respect that the University, its staff and students have for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people” (Guiding Principles for Welcome to and Acknowledgement of Country, University Technology, Sydney).

In Architectural Design: Making the students worked on a site in D’harawal Country, and a welcome to and acknowledgement of Country was delivered in D’harawal language early in the semester, with the lecturer reading an English language translation. The lecturer described the experience as “The single most special moment in my teaching career” and a student responded “I heard a classmate say that they welled up and almost cried during the lecture where xxx and xxx spoke to each other in an Aboriginal language” (SFS, 11209, 2015.2).

In performing an acknowledgement, lecturers talked in ways that were specific to their discipline. For instance, in Design Thinking it was explained that the subject would develop the students’ abilities to engage with place in sophisticated ways and to understand the ways that design can mediate power relationships. Because of its colonial history, such a task in Australia needs to begin with an Acknowledgement of Country. While students may have experienced some Aboriginal education in their schools, they have probably not thought about it in ways that relate to their future professions. Some students noted that they hadn’t considered an urban context such as the UTS campus, as Country, or a heavily industrialised site such as Cockatoo Island as having an Aboriginal history.

A subject and a site: Design Thinking and Cockatoo Island

This section extends the explanation of Mode 2 by detailing the intervention that occurred in one large first year core design subject, Design Thinking. Design Thinking is an interdisciplinary first year foundation subject in the School of Design at University of Technology Sydney. While the intervention discussed in this paper focuses on indigenizing the curriculum, we are doing other work in this subject to improve self and peer assessment (Crosby and Morgan forthcoming) and more generally improve the transition experience of design students. Each time the subject runs (twice a year) Design Thinking includes up to 300 students from all six design disciplines (Animation, Fashion and Textile Design, Interior and Spatial Design, Integrated Product Design, Photography and Situated Media and Visual Communication Design) who come together to build core skills in critical creativity, collaboration and reflection in a studio setting, and to use the transdisciplinary approaches that have come to be known as ‘design thinking’ over the last two decades (Dorst and Cross 2001; Brown 2009; Kimball 2011). Because of the breadth of the cohort, Design Thinking has been a regular site for the application and evaluation of transition pedagogy.

A central focus of the subject is Design Camp where students are encouraged to develop their capacity for self-reflection and collaboration. Self-reflection can enable designers to evaluate options based on anticipated futures and historical understandings (Fry, Dilnot & Stewart 2015) but more importantly to the challenge of understanding Aboriginal design, it can enable students to question their own assumptions and the implications of these to others. To cultivate their reflective skills, students are urged to continually sketch, testing and trying out concepts and ideas, through documentation (actively observe) and visualisation (mapping). These visual research skills form the basis of assessments for Design Thinking.

6

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. In considering the indigenisation of the Design Thinking curriculum, we focused on two assessments. While students were not required to make explicit their learning about Indigenous design during the subject, they were encouraged to do so in these two assessments. The first assessment is a visual research journal, in which students undertake self-directed learning in a book format. Being very much linked to the development of students’ attitudes and values as designers, this assessment is the best place to expect students to diversify their understanding of design. The second assessment is the group assessment held during a three-day design camp is Cockatoo Island, a UNESCO World Heritage site in the middle of Sydney Harbour. UTS considers the camp a key activity in its first year experience strategy addressing engagement, transition and diversity (Jenkins 2014)

Cockatoo Island possesses a rich history that can be traced back to its use as a meeting place by the Aboriginal peoples of the Eora nation and possibly as a birthing place for Eora women1. However, Cockatoo Island is also well known for its convict and industrial heritage. Given its location and up until recently inaccessibility, the site is deliberately unfamiliar to students and aims to take them out of their comfort zones. On the island, students work collaboratively in interdisciplinary groups of four or five to explore the hidden, un-noticed, unexpected features of the island. This place-based exploration and design provided an excellent setting for introducing students to concepts of Country.

Over the five years that camp has run, the teaching team has been discussing the lack of Aboriginal content included in the learning resources leading up to the camp. In 2014, staff began to introduce elements of acknowledgement of the Aboriginal connections to the island. They began using ‘Wareamah’, the Aboriginal name for Cockatoo Island in their information about camp and they began camp with an acknowledgement of Country (since this is not done automatically by the rangers during the compulsory safety briefing). Throughout the subject they also included references to Aboriginal artists and designers who had worked with the island as a site. These include, amongst others, Ghenoa Gela, Kim Hill, Willurai Kirkbright, Colin Kinchela, Caroline Oakley, Lucy Simpson and Bjorn Stewart (Perfomance Space 2015). These gestures received positive feedback from students but staff felt it was not enough. There was so little connection with the Aboriginal stories of this place.

One of those stories is the 2000 Aboriginal occupation. Ten people including Isabel Coe2 use rowing boats to storm the fences of Cockatoo Island. Coe states, ‘Claiming Cockatoo Island for Aboriginal people', they then set up an Aboriginal Tent Embassy. On the island's highest point, the activists light a flame to begin the healing of the island and to assert title to the island for ‘ceremony, healing and to set in place the treaty process’. (Sukovic, S., Read P.) In order to share this important story with first year students, the teaching team secured funding to create a short documentary video about the occupation in collaboration with on of the Aboriginal Tent Embassy activists who occupied the island, Gregory Young.3 Gregory’s film ‘Fire of the Island’ (2000) documents the arrival of the activists and the political claim they make. In the YouTube video produced by Zettel and Sumugan for this project (2015) Greg visits the island fifteen years later and takes the students on a video walking tour.

1 This has not been verified but came up during the research of Hromek, Hromek and Hromek for ‘Covered by 2 Isabel Coe (1951 - 2012) was a Wiradjuri woman and one of the most prominent Australian Aboriginal leaders (Kerrin 2012) 3 This project was funded through a UTS Learning2014 grant. 7

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. This resource provided a critical Aboriginal perspective on the history of Cockatoo Island, but we also needed to engage the community and include Aboriginal scholarship in our curriculum. In the Spring 2015 iteration of Design Thinking, Aboriginal scholar Michael Hromek was included in the lecture series, and tutors were briefed on the indigenisation of the subject in staff meetings. Hromek’s lecture told students the story of ‘Covered by Concrete’, a site specific installation made on the island that engaged with stories ‘Concealed in the strata of Australia’ (Underbelly, 2015). This work demonstrated research methods that could help students design at Cockatoo Island with a consideration of its Aboriginal past. While we did not make this consideration compulsory by aligning it to assessment criteria, by offering it is a research path before they arrived, once they were on the island many students were able to move beyond the debilitating moment in the design process when literal representation seems like the only option. For instance, a number of groups spent time formulating excellent questions about the island’s Aboriginal past rather than trying to represent it with a picture of an Aboriginal person, flag, or tool. We also used Bill Gammage and Kevin O’Brien as key voices in the theoretical underpinning of the subject. ‘I think this was definitely true, especially Bill Gammage's lecture video.’ (SFS, 85503 2015.2). These efforts have been an important part of recontextualising Cockatoo Island as an Aboriginal place for students before they embark on design camp and produce design responses.

Students responded well to having an Indigenous designer and academic speak directly to them with comments such as: “Michael Hromek's lecture gave a lot of insight to this subject. Gave me an interest in Australian design outside the subject” (SFS, 85503 2015.2). In addition we provided more examples of Indigenous designers throughout the subject in studio classes and through the online Pinterest site for the subject. These examples referred to specific design professions with which the first year students were beginning to identify. For example AARLI, ‘an Indigenous upcycled fashion and accessories label’ (AARLI 2015), Gaawaa Miyay, a contemporary Aboriginal Design studio as well as contemporary artists such as Jonathon Jones and Daniel Boyd. These designers provide departure points for students researching for their journals. They are important and inspiring voices for changing the context of design education in Australia.

While we also expected students to find their own examples of Aboriginal designers, this is clearly an area that needs further development. In response to an open question asking whether the subject ‘increased understanding and knowledge of Australian Indigenous design, art and architecture’, one student responded: “I feel this would be better represented through actual Indigenous or Indigenous origin australians, rather than from the perspective of someone else's ideas” (SFS, 85503 2015.2).

We know students want more than just direction to learning resources offering Aboriginal perspectives. They want, like us, direct engagement with Indigenous communities to improve their competence. And we know that students need to be part of the process of engaging communities. They have their own relationships and ideas that can help guide academics in Indigenising curricula. Being able to work together to address these wants requires careful attention to our community of practice; using Indigenous methodologies; acknowledging disciplinary differences, and reminding each other that in Australia, on Country, there is no design without Indigenous design.

8

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. References

Adam, A., Skalicky, J., and Brown, N. (2011). Planning Sustainable Peer Learning Programs. The International Journal of the First Year in Higher Education, 2(2), 9-22. AARLI (2016) Our Philosophy. Retrieved February 4 2016 from aarlifashion.com Asmar, C. (2012) Indigenous Teaching at Australian Universities. Retrieved from http://indigenousteaching.com Bodkin-Andrews, G., and Carlson, B. (2013). Racism, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander identities, and higher education: reviewing the burden of epistemological and other racisms. Diversity in Higher Education, 14, 29-54. Brown, T. 2009, Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation. HarperCollins Publishers, New York. Crosby, A. and Morgan, A. (2016) Levering critical collaboration: The First Year Interdisciplinary Design Experience, Collaboration and Student Engagement in Design Education. IGI Publishing (in press) Dorst, K., & Cross, N. (2001). Creativity in the design process: co-evolution of problem– solution. Design studies, 22(5), 425-437. Egea, K. and McKenzie, J. (2012). Developing a Systematic Institutional FYE Approach from top down and grassroots up. In Proceedings of the 15th International First Year in Higher Education Conference: New Horizons, Brisbane, Queensland. Fry, T., Dilnot, C., & Stewart, S. (2015). Design and the Question of History. Bloomsbury. Gammage, B. (2011). The Biggest Estate on Earth: How Aborigines Made Australia. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Harrison, N., Page, S., and Finneran, M. (2013). Generative methodology: an inquiry into how a university can acknowledge a commitment to its Aboriginal community. The Australian Educational Researcher, 40 (3), 339-351. Harrison, N., and Greenfield, M. (2011). Relationship to place: Positioning Aboriginal knowledge and perspectives in classroom pedagogies. Critical Studies in Education 52 (1), 65-76. Hromek, D., Hromek, M., and Hromek, S. (2015). Covered by Concrete. Underbelly Arts Festival, Sydney NSW. Jenkins, H. (2015). http://newsroom.uts.edu.au/news/2015/05/designing-outside-the-box Kerrin, L. (2012). Determined' Aboriginal campaigner Isabel Coe dies. Australian Broadcasting Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11- 12/aboriginal-campaigner-isabelle-coe-dies/4366472 Kift, S. M. (2009). Articulating a transition pedagogy to scaffold and to enhance the first year student learning experience in Australian higher education. Final Report for ALTC Senior Fellowship Program. http://www.altc.edu.au/resource-first-year-learning- experience-kift-2009 Kimbell, L. (2011), Rethinking Design Thinking: Part 1, Design and Culture, 3(3), 285-306. Kinniburgh, J. P. (2013). A Culture of Success: Building Depth into Institution-Wide Approaches to First Year Transition. In Proceedings of the 16th International First Year in Higher Education Conference, Wellington, New Zealand. Krause, K-L., Hartley, R., James, R. & McInnis, C. (2005). The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from a decade of national studies. Canberra, Australia: Australian Department of Education, Science and Training. http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/37491/FYEReport05.pdf

9

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Martin, B. (2013), Immaterial land, in Carnal knowledge: towards a 'new materialism' through the arts, (pp.185-204) I. B. Tauris, London, England. Moreton-Robinson, A. M., & Walter, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies in social research. Social Research Methods: An Australian Perspective [2nd Edition]. O’Brien, K. (2012). For architecture and Country. Artlink, 32 (2), 62-65. Performance Space (2015). Nula Nura Indigenous Arts Lab on Cockatoo Island. Sagor, R. (2000). Guiding school improvement with action research. Ascd. Schwab, R., and Fogarty, W. (2015). Land, learning and identity: toward a deeper understanding of Indigenous Learning on Country. UNESCO Observatory Multi- disciplinary Journal in the Arts, The University of Melbourne Early Learning Centre, 4 (2), 1-16. Sukovic, S., and Read P. (no year) ‘Claiming Cockatoo Island for Aboriginals’ Retrieved February 4, 2016, from http://www.historyofaboriginalsydney.edu.au/central/claiming- cockatoo-island-aboriginals) Universities Australia (2011) National Best Practice Framework for Cultural Competency in Australian Universities. Retrieved from http://www.indigenousculturalcompetency.edu.au/index.html University of Technology, Sydney. ‘Guiding Principles for Welcome to and Acknowledgement of Country.’ Retrieved May 6, 2016. http://www.gsu.uts.edu.au/policies/documents/guiding-principles-welcome- acknowledgement-Country.pdf Underbelly (2015) Hromek, Hromek and Hromek: Covered By Concrete, artist statement: Underbelly Arts Festival. Retrieved February 4, 2016, from http://underbellyarts.com.au/project/covered-by-concrete/ UTS:CAIK (2015). UTS Indigenous Graduate Attribute Assessment Model. Presentation at the UTS Teaching and Learning Forum, October 2015. Virdun, C., Gray, J., Sherwood, J., Power, T., Phillips, A., Parker, N. & Jackson, D. (2013). Working together to make Indigenous health care curricula everybody's business: a graduate attribute teaching innovation report.', Contemporary Nurse, 46 (1), 97-104. Watson, S. (2013). New Digital Technologies: Educational Opportunities for Australian Indigenous Learners. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 42, 58-67. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press. Young, G. (filmmaker) (2000) Fire of the Island [DVD]. Sydney, NSW: self produced. Zettel, T and Sumugan, S.. (2015) ‘Cockatoo Island: Aboriginal Tent Embassy Consulate 2000–2001’. Retrieved February 4, 2016, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUn_8FDLxwU&feature=youtu.be

10

No design without Indigenous design: Extending First Year Architecture and Design Students’ understanding of Indigenous Australia, refereed paper.