STATEMENT OF SOURCES
I certify that this thesis is my own work except those sections
which have been explicitly acknowledged. I also certify that
this thesis has not been previously submitted for a degree at
this or any other university or institution.
Priscilla Qolisaya Puamau
DEDICATIONS
This thesis is dedicated in memory of my grandmother, Sera Qolisaya Naulumatua.1 e sa qai
oti tu, Bitbu, Vinaka vakalevu na veitokoni kei na nomu loloma. Au na sega ni giulecavi
iko.
It is most especially dedicated to my mother, Eileen Maureen Lidise (nee Simmons): you
always knew I could do it and gave me unconditional love. Your nurturing support and
unshakeable faith have been uplifting and inspirational.
It is also dedicated to my brothers and sisters: Joeli Kete Lidise, Sera Lockington, Debbie
Lidise and Kenny Lidise and their families, especially my nieces and nephews. My
namesake, Maria, Sisilia, Silina, Vesi, Dianne, Sereima, Wiliame and Joeli - aspire always
for the highest things.
And to my husband and children: Sowane, Seini, Lai, Eileen and Manoa - reach for your
dreams, nothing is impossible. Strive always for what is good: qualities such as patience,
perseverance, tolerance and a desire to help others. But above all, walk in God's way and
seek His wisdom and His truth.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A major undertaking like this thesis is not possible without much needed support
from many people at a personal, professional and intellectual level. Consequently, I have
many people to thank. I begin by thanking my husband, Sowane Lutu Puamau, for his
support and encouragement. To uproot and transplant to another culture for four long years
in pursuit of a dream is no easy task and I thank you for enabling the fruition of this dream.
To my children Seini, Lai, Eileen and Manoa—thank you all for your patience and
unconditional love. I also thank my mother for providing valuable assistance in our first ;:
two years in Brisbane.
I especially thank the Fiji and Australian Governments for providing me with an
in-service scholarship, without which this research project would have been an
impossibility. I thank senior staff at the Ministry of Education for recognising that I had
intellectual potential and allowing me study leave with pay. Thank you AusAID, thank you
PSC, thank you MOE for financial support. I also thank the FTA for providing a research
grant of $500 and Mr Alifereti Cawanibuka, Principal of FCAE, for the provision of office
space during the fieldwork.
To the informants of the thesis: those politicians, senior government officials,
academics at USP, community representatives, school principals, CDU officials and
teachers who gave willingly of their time to patiently answer my questions—I thank you
most sincerely for it is your insightful comments, your collective knowledge and wisdom
that have shaped the form and content of this thesis. Vinaka vakalevu, dhanyavad and
thank you. I particularly thank the Permanent Secretary for Fijian Affairs, Ratu Jone
Radrodro, the Acting PS, Mr Isoa Tikoca and staff at the Fijian Education Unit for
providing invaluable data on the implementation of the Special Fijian Education Fund. My
appreciation also extends to Dr Warden Narsey, Reader and Associate Professor in
Economics at USP for taking the time to listen and for offering constructive advice on
methodology, theoretical frameworks and other matters. It is with much sadness that I \
acknowledge the passing away of four informants: Mrs Lavenia Kaurasi, Mr Josevata I
Kamikamica, Mr Ilai Kuli and Mr Valekuta Mateni. i
i
For intellectual support, I thank my supervisors Professor Allan Luke and Professor
Fazal Rizvi, Thank you, Allan, for helping me articulate 'words' that I did not know I had,
for your theoretical insights, for excellent supervision and for facilitating a grant for
interview transcription work, Thank you, Fazal, for guiding me through the initial
quagmire of thesis conceptualisation - you always knew which direction I should take even
before I knew it myself. I thank you both for exceptional support, encouragement,
inspiration and supervision. I also thank Associate Professor Bob Lingard for assisting me
with ethical clearance and other preliminaries prior to data collection. I especially thank
Merle Warry for meticulously proofreading the thesis. I am grateful, too, to my room-mate
Cathie Doherty for giving unstintingly of her time to read the draft and to provide valuable
comments.
I am also grateful to the members of the following research interest groups at the
University of Queensland for interesting, stimulating discussions: Higher Education Policy,
Discourse Analysis, Postmodernism, Philosophy and Globalisation. I especially thank my
Asian-Pacific-African-Australian counterparts and 'experts' who made up the Postcolonial
Reading Group, for some of the ideas in this thesis had begun as a seedling at one of our
meetings.
I would also like to thank family and friends who made my data collection time in
Fiji a memorable one. My thanks go to my sister Debbie and her two daughters for opening
their hearts and home to Manoa and me. And to Kenny and Joe, my brothers, for caring
and providing moral support. I also thank my sister Sera, extended family (Tu Soro, Ane,
Sera, Tarai and their families) and my in-laws (Allan, Meme, Emele) for their loving
support. To all my friends who acknowledged my presence during the field work - thank
you for continued friendship, for shared laughter and delicious food. I am particularly
indebted to Sereana Tagivakatini at USP for uncomplainingly conducting 'mini-researches'
for me in Fiji in the final phase of the thesis, Thank you, Sereana.
My gratitude also extends to those Australian families who have opened their hearts
and homes to my children. In particular, I thank the Asnins, Gwyther and Hogan families.
I thank the principal and staff of Toowong State Primary and High schools for providing
my four children with positive memories of education in Australia.
But most of all, my thanks go to God. For through Him, everything is possible.
Thank You, Lord, for Your guidance, blessings, loving kindness and peace.
IV
ABSTRACT
This thesis is concerned with explaining why Indigenous Fijians in Fiji consistently
underachieve in formal schooling. It is particularly concerned with why affirmative action
policies have not helped to narrow racial inequalities in education. It utilises the conceptual
resources provided by postcolonial theory to critique the devastating impact of colonialism,
to unpick written texts that claim to represent Fiji's history as well as to deconstruct the
interview data. Interview data was collected in Fiji over a fifteen week period in the latter
part of 1996 from 74 informants in the following six categories: Politicians, Bureaucrats,
Community Representatives, Academics, Principals and Teachers. Questions asked
included informants' perceptions of the way affirmative action is thought about,
implemented and its consequences as well as explanations for the underachievement of
Indigenous Fijians in schooling.
To frame and categorise explanations for racial inequalities in schooling, I have
grouped the data into three categories: socio-cultural deficit models, psychological-deficit
models and historical structural models. For the firsl explanatory category, spatial
disadvantage (rurality), home background and cultural deficiencies and school disadvantage
were reported as significant determinants of Indigenous Fijian underachievement in
schooling. Psychological-deficit models posited shortcomings in Indigenous Fijian
attitudes to education and psychological problems that arise when Indigenous Fijian
students live away from their immediate family as two important factors. Historical
structural models point to the negative impact of the colonial experience, manifested in
neocolonial educational structures of the curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and the
language of schooling.
Some key findings have emerged from the thesis. One is that mono-causal
reductionist factors are inadequate explanations for why students fail in school. This is
because racial inequalities in education are a consequence of the constant complex and
multiple interactions of the dynamics of race, gender, class and rurality in the economic,
political, cultural and historical spheres. The issue of rural spatiality has emerged as a key
analytical category in explaining Indigenous Fijian school failure, unsettling the traditional
analytical categories of race, gender and social class.
As illustrated in the interview data on affirmative action, issues of social justice
which accord state-provided resources to specific groups in society are highly contested and
controversial. I argue that affirmative action in Fiji was a strategically essentialist
intervention on the part of a predominantly Indigenous Fijian government to bring about
equality of access and opportunities for Indigenous Fijians who have reportedly been
disadvantaged by a colonial history. Affirmative action in Fiji did not really result in
significant material transformations for the Indigenous Fijian community: raiher, the
outcomes have been mixed. However, in arguing for a rethinking of affirmative action in
Fiji, I make the important point that this rethinking needs to be mediated, contingent and
historically specific. In other words, it needs to be grounded in the social, cultural and
political realities and specificities of the Fiji context. A rethinking of affirmative action
requires a reconceptualisation of the notions of race, success and merit, and hegemony. As
part of this project, categories of class, place and space will be imperative in order to
redefine social justice, social difference and social inequality.
The complexities, ambiguities, multiplicities and tensions evident in affirmative
action in Fiji indicate that there are no clear-cut or easy answers to the problems that beset
Fiji's educational system. I argue that the answers, indeed, cannot be based on idealist
principles of justice and equality of Western academic discourse. Instead, the-answers,
whatever they may be, have to be practical, negotiated social and political solutions and
compromises amongst the peoples of Fiji. I note, in particular, that spaces for radical
coalitions, in some cases unprecedented, have begun to open up at the political level for this
to occur. The challenge is how to fill those spaces so that people are empowered, are given
agency to think and act so that a collective consciousness for the common good becomes
the creed for decisionmaking.
VI
Attitudes
Living Away From Home
Success of Non-Indigenous Fijians in Schooling
Success of Indigenous Fijians in Schooling
Historical Structural Models
Colonial Historical Experiences
Curriculum
Pedagogical Methods
Assessment
Language of Instruction
Interpretations
The Parallelist Theory of Racial Inequalities in Schooling
Space as an Analytic Category
History as an Analytic Category
Symbolic Violence
Success in Schooling
Silences in the Data
Other Unresolved Themes
Summary
CHAPTER SIX AFFIRMATIVE ACTION POLICIES: CONCEPTUALISATION,
IMPLEMENTATION, OUTCOMES
Conceptualisation of AA Policies in Education
Rationales for AA
Poor Conceptualisation
Comparisons in Educational Performance
Implementation of AA Policies
Differentials in Admission to Local Tertiary Institutions
Who Benefits from AA?
Means Testing
Lack of Transparency and Accountability
Lack of Liaison/Communication between Agencies
Tunnel Vision: Lack of Input from Other Communities
Need for Proper Assessment\Review
Provincial Inequalities in Scholarship Awards
Poor Monitoring
Emphasis on Human Resource Development
Why the Educational Gap Hasn't Closed
Outcomes of AA
Positive Outcomes
Negative Outcomes
Interpretations
AA in Fiji: A Postcolonial Response to Colonial Inequalities
Was AA an Historically Appropriate Response?
Better Implementation
Resource Issues
Positive Outcomes of AA
XV
CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
This chapter has three parts. In the first I provide the background context for the study.
In particular, I outline the way racial inequalities in education have been framed and the policy
background of affirmative action in Fiji. The second part details the rationale for the present
study, Here, I discuss the aims of the study, the theoretical frameworks and research
methodology that inform the study, and the assumptions and personal standpoints I bring to
the thesis, I also explicate some of the reasons this study is significant. In the final part of the
chapter, I outline the thesis organisation.
The Background
Race-based affirmative action (henceforth abbreviated to AA) began in Fiji as an
educational strategy in the early to mid-1970s. This was in response to the 'Fijian education
problem', defined by both colonial and postcolonial governments in terms of an educational
gap between Indigenous Fijians on the one hand, and 'other' ethnic communities on the other.
The underachievement of Indigenous Fijian students in formal schooling compared to other
ethnic groups has been identified as a persistent problem since the 1910s (Education
Department Annual Reports 1920-1969; Education Commission, 1926; Mayhew, 1937;
Stephens, 1944). Haifa century later, the 1969 Fiji Education Commission Report highlighted
the large educational gap that existed between Indigenous Fijians and 'other' racial groups in
terms of numbers accessing the higher levels of education and the large attrition and failure
rates at the secondary and tertiary levels.
In order to get a better picture of AA and racial inequalities in education in Fiji, an
understanding of the historical basis of the current educational system is necessary. The
historical documents point out that Fiji was a British colony from 1874-1970. An enduring
legacy of colonialism is the institutionalisation of formal education. Education systems are
shaped not only by the physical and cultural milieu in which they function but also by social
and economic histories. Education can indeed be an insidious and cryptic survivor of
colonialism, a residual institutional memory, while older institutional systems pass into
neocolonial configurations (Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 1995).
Written colonial historical records indicate that Western education was introduced to
the indigenous population soon after the arrival of the first missionaries in Fiji in 1835.
Initially, the people were required to read the Bible which had been translated to the
vernacular language. But English soon became (and still continues to be) the language of
formal schooling, official communication, administration, politics, commerce and law. Some
160 year later, despite decolonisation, the curriculum is still Western-based with an emphasis
on academic-type subjects, English language, English literature, Science and Social Science
subjects still form the main disciplinary bases for schooling. During colonial times, a
Western-type education was imposed on the colonial subjects and so began a process that
would ensure that the colonised subjects became as 'Western' as possible. This process has
continued unabated since formal decolonisation occurred and demonstrates to a large extent
the profound psychological impact of colonialism.
Thus, when Fiji attained political independence after almost a century of colonial rule,
the new nation remained shackled with the legacy of British educational institutions and
practices. This educational inheritance is manifested in the selection and training of local
elites to implement government policy, the establishment of government and provincial
schools in selected areas, the provision of 'imported' curriculum from other colonial social
contexts, and the development and deployment of a network of examinations as selection and
screening devices (Bhindi, 1988). To this day, the pedagogies of the school, school
organisation and management are British-based (Mangubhai, 1984; Thomas and Postlethwaite,
1984) with the institutionalisation of the colonial language English as the language of
schooling,
As a discursive effect of the material processes of colonialism, the category 'Fijian' is
ambiguous. On the one hand, this could refer to the "Melanesian population" who are the
"original inhabitants" of the Fiji group: that is, the Indigenous Fijian populace. This is how
the Government of Fiji defines this category (Bureau of Statistics, 1989: 3). On the other
hand, this category could encompass any person who is a resident or citizen of the country,
including Indigenous Fijians.
The normalised use of the category 'Indian' is also problematic. Not only are the
people included in this category varied, but they also have varying degrees of historical,
contemporary and generational identification with people of the Indian sub-continent. In other
words, the heterogeneity that reflects diversity and differences within, as much as across,
cultures is overlooked when one invokes the binary categories of Fijian or Indian - categories
which, this thesis will show, have dominated educational and social policy debates.
During colonial times, the Indian people who were brought in as indentured labourers
to work the European-owned sugar plantations and their descendants were categorised by
colonial administrators as "Fiji Indians". After decolonisation, the Fiji Government referred to
"the population who are of Indian descent" and "descendants of the indentured labourers and
free settlers of the early part of the twentieth century" as the Indian people (Bureau of
Statistics, 1989: 3). As mentioned above, the use of the category 'Indian' is problematic
because the Indian people are varied, comprising of various sub-categories contingent on their
religion and the state/region (to note but two) from which they originated. In Fiji, for instance,
the Indo-Fijian population "comprises the major religious and ethnic groups of Northern
Hindus, Southern Hindus, Moslems, Sikhs and Gujaratis" with Northern Hindus forming the
majority of the Indo-Fijian population (Chandra, 1990: 12). The diaspora of the people who
can trace their ancestors back to the Indian sub-continent across many countries of the world
has created complex issues of identity. The question of how much allegiance, familiarity or
identification they have with the Indian sub-continent is a complex and far from self-evident
issue. For the purpose of this thesis, the indigenous people of the Fiji Islands will be referred
to as Indigenous Fijians and the people who have origins in the Indian sub-continent as Indo-
Fijians. Yet I do so fully aware of the dangers of categorising heterogenous groups, knowing
also that I may not have their consent.
Discriminatory educational practices were the norm during the period of colonial rule.
As experience has shown in other colonised countries, the Colonial Government was mainly
concerned with the education of European children. For this purpose, government schools
were established for Europeans with the best of qualified teachers, facilities, resources and
supervision. Several government schools were established initially to cater for sons and
daughters of the chiefly Indigenous Fijian elite. Apart from this, the Colonial Government left
the education of non-European children very much in the hands of missions, Provincial
Councils (Indigenous Fijian schools) and local management committees (mainly Indo-Fijian
schools).
In his 1944 study of education in the colony of Fiji, Stephens argued that educational
development was characterised by lack of policy and planning resulting in chaotic conditions
(Stephens, 1944). The annual reports of the Education Department (1920-1969), Special
Government Reports and Development Plans (since the 1950s), and Ministry of Education
Annual Reports (1970-1996), all highlight the fact that the education of Indigenous Fijians
has always been beleaguered with many problems. The more serious of these were identified
as inadequate numbers and quality of teachers, inadequate school facilities and educational
necessities (e.g., textbooks and science laboratories), lack of professional supervision and the
irrelevance of the curriculum to the daily lives of the students (Puamau, 1991). Consequently,
primary education was of low quality, especially in the village, district and provincial schools.
This has had negative implications on the number and academic calibre of Indigenous Fijian ,:
i <
students entering the secondary-system:
The colonial records show that despite making a late start on the educational scene, jjil
Indo-Fijian students were not only catching up in terms of numbers - by the late 1950s more
Indo-Fijians were enrolled than Indigenous Fijians in the school system (Puamau, 1991) - but
their standard of attainment had surpassed that of Indigenous Fijians (Education Department,
1946). The colonial records and statistics consistently indicate that Indigenous Fijians had low
retention rates and a significantly higher failure rate at the upper secondary level which had
implications for access to tertiary level. These were identified as serious national problems by
the new predominantly Indigenous Postcolonial Government when decolonisation occurred in
1970. Colonial discriminatory practices had left huge gaps in the quality of non-European
education.
At the. point of decolonisation, the new Government openly acknowledged the presence
of an imbalance between the educational attainment of Indigenous Fijians and that of 'other
races'. One of the long-term aims of the Government's Sixth Development Plan (Fiji
Government, 1970: 67) which it hoped to achieve by the mid-1980s was "a marked
improvement in the education of Fijians". Five years later in 1975, the Government
emphasised the need for special measures if the nation was to "produce enough qualified
Fijians to occupy a due share of top and middle level positions in the public and private sectors
of the economy" (Fiji Government, 1975: 184). The "special measures" translated into AA
policies. The educational gap between Indigenous Fijians and 'other' ethnic communities in
Fiji, thus, was central to the development of AA policies in education.
Explanations for the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians typically have been
attributed to some shortcoming on the part of the Indigenous Fijian learner, be it psychological
(Stewart, Mulipola-Lui and Laidlow, 1980; Basow 1982; Kishor, 1981,1983) or socio-cultural
(Tierney, 1971; Thomas, 1978; Nabuka, 1984; Elley, 1982). Institutional factors such as poor
quality of teachers and lack of resources (Fiji Education Commission, 1969; Baba, 1983; Bole,
1989) are other explanations posited for underachievement. Logistical issues such as isolation
from urban educational centres and the related issue of distance have also been raised to
explain the relatively poor quality of education in Indigenous Fijian schools (Education
Department, 1967; Naisara, 1974; Ministry of Education, 1992), the bulk of which are situated
in rural areas. Poor economic conditions in the rural areas are another factor that has been
posited as contributing to poor educational performance of Indigenous Fijians (Kallam, Rika,
Rustam and Tukania, 1980; Baba, 1983).
What AA strategies have been put in place to affirm the education of Indigenous
Fijians? Government documents (Ministry of Education Annual Reports, Development Plans)
acknowledge that soon after decolonisation in 1970, the Government instituted a number of
AA policies. One of these was the development of junior secondary schools in the rural area
to provide Indigenous Fijians with access to a secondary education. Another was a public
relations campaign through Fijian language radio and newspapers to assist Indigenous Fijian
parents to recognise the value of an education for their children. However, the two significant
AA policies focal to this thesis are the reservation of 50% of all government scholarships for
Indigenous Fijians since the mid-1970s and the provision of an annual fund of $3.5 million
since 1984. The latter policy has had two foci: provision of tertiary scholarships as well as
the capital development of Indigenous Fijian schools with emphasis placed on infrastructure,
facilities and resources. Since 1994, however, the focus has been almost exclusively on
scholarship provision as a mode of human capital development. It is interesting to note that in
terms of scholarship provision, the category Rotuman1 has been added to Indigenous Fijian as
1 Rotumans are the indigenous people of the island of Rotuma. Rotuma became part of Fiji during the period of
colonial rule. As a category, Rotumans have been included as beneficiaries in the Fijian Affairs Board
administered scholarship fund since its inception in 1984. Appendix D shows that in the 14 year period from
1984-1996, 69 local scholarships and 19 overseas awards have gone to Rotumans.
beneficiaries of AA.
AA policies, then, have been in place since the early to mid-1970s to assist Indigenous
Fyians (and Rotumans) who had been identified as disadvantaged in education and, by
implication, to counter their underrepresentation and lack of participation in the professions,
business and in the private and public sectors of the economy. In a previous study (Puamau,
1991) entitled Fijian Education - An Examination of Government Policy: 1946-1986, I
concluded that AA policies had a negligible effect in closing or narrowing the educational gap
between Indigenous Fijians and 'others', I thus am interested to explore why these policies
had not made a significant impact on the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians. Was it
because the policies were poorly conceptualised in the first place? A matter of poor
implementation? Was AA misdirected? Was it too simplistic to assume that pouring in
resources would result in profound changes to the underachievement equation? Was the
problem of underachievement too complex for AA to make a significant difference? What
role did Fiji's colonial history and consequent neocolonial educational inheritance bring to
bear on the question of underachievement?
& The Research
w' My main research question is: Despite more than two decades of AA to assist
Indigenous Fijians in education, why are these students still underachieving compared to the
non-indigenous population? This research question translates into four main aims for the
r study.
; First, I want to explore reasons for the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians in
schooling. Why do Indigenous Fijians fail? Second, I want to explore possible explanations
* for the ostensive failure of AA policies to narrow the educational gap between Indigenous
Fijians and Indo-Fijians in the manner that the first Postcolonial Government had defined it.
Why did AA fail? Third, I want to expand the dimensions of the debate on the concept of AA,
tar especially in relation to theoretical perspectives that have arisen since the inception of AA in
Fiji. Relatedly, I want to explore whether the Fiji context offers new perspectives on AA in
decolonised sites, particularly when the indigenous beneficiaries have had numerical and
political control since decolonisation.
While developing an empirically documented and theoretically innovative study of AA
is the visible focus of this thesis, it remains a project fraught with the problems and potentials
of any postcolonial academic intellectual work. Thus, its fourth and perhaps most significant
aim is to make a broader contribution to the deconstruction of Fiji's colonial history with the
purpose of reconstructing, re-inventing or reclaiming indigenous voice, space and dignity
which had been silenced or negated during the period of colonial rule. Throughout this study,
I have asked: Is it possible to write a thesis that would be heard over and above the
representations of indigenous people in colonial historical and imaginative accounts, and
material and discursive practices?
The two theoretical frameworks that underpin the thesis are previous scholarly work on
AA and postcolonialism (See Chapter Two). In terms of the latter, two concepts are
particularly salient: strategic essentialism and voice. This thesis itself has come to be an
exercise in strategic essentialism. Here, I take up a strategic positionality to claim there is a
material essence in the concept of an Indigenous Fijian, that there is a 'reality' of Indigenous
Fijian cultural identity. This thesis, therefore, is an attempt to give Indigenous Fijians a voice
to write and talk back to colonialism. Not only is my voice being heard but just as
importantly, this project is a forum for the Indigenous Fijians who are the subjects of the
study. If there is silencing of other ethnic communities in Fiji, this is neither intentional nor
done in malice. This deliberate strategy of essentialism sets out to generate agency for
Indigenous Fijians to recover their historical voice and to assert their postcoloniality.
However, at the same time, I recognise and wish to expand understanding of the
heterogeneity of Indigenous Fijians. Colonial administrators wrongly assumed that
Indigenous Fijians were a homogenous group, They (mis)appropriated this mythical
homogeneity for their own purposes, mainly for ease of administration. Previous colonial (and
postcolonial) policies were based on an unstrategic essentialism, one intended to keep the two
major ethnic groups in Fiji separate and apart. I will show how difference or diversity within,
and across Indigenous Fijian populations, is highlighted and problematised as a key
unresolved issue in AA.
Where I stand in the world, my values and attitudes and my thinking on matters that
concern indigenous people, were influential in my choice of research topic, aims, questions,
methodology, analysis and interpretation. For me, there is no such thing as an impartial,
value-free scientific educational research. What we are, our gender and our social positions,
our cultural backgrounds, our belief systems and attitudes - taken together, these contribute to
the way we approach research. They influence what we see and hear - our interpretations and
our textual representations. I am not advocating the common, yet romantic, view that we
should control against bias in research. Rather, what I am saying is that bias is unavoidable,
' ^ particularly in a research method that utilises the researcher as the principal research
t
F instrument or tool.
I am an Indigenous Fijian woman and this standpoint is central to this project. The
formulation of my research question arose not only out of personal and political interests, but
also out of the theoretical interest that had been roused in my first year of studies. At the
personal level, I was concerned about why students of my 'race' consistently continue to do
badly in the education system, particularly as reflected in their high failure and attrition rates at
the upper secondary and tertiary levels. I was concerned at the way the policy documents,
Development Plans, Education Department Reports and the media consistently portrayed
Indigenous Fijians as underachievers in the school system. I am a recipient and 'product' of
AA policies, a beneficiary of the policy of awarding 50% of government tertiary scholarships
* to Indigenous Fijians that enabled me to complete two degrees at the University of the South
* Pacific (USP) in Fiji.
At the political level, I wish to generate collective thinking at the institutional, local
and national levels to find solutions. My main readers, hopefully, will be Indigenous Fijians
in key positions of power, authority and influence in government, academic and private
organisations. This text is a deliberate attempt to raise critical issues that may influence
political discourse and, ultimately, political will.
* At the theoretical level, postcolonial discourses have led me to reconsider and reframe.
Initially, I had not considered that colonialism might be an explanation for the
underachievement of the indigenous students in schooling. It was only after reading some of
•* the postcolonial literature that I began to seriously consider how neocolonial educational
structures such as curricula, school organisation, pedagogies and assessment systems may be
contributing factors to the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians.
This research study, therefore, is a product of these interests. Added to these is the
intellectual or academic interest that becomes the all pervasive focus when one embarks on a
PhD study. In fact, some of the burning questions that agitated me for months in my first year
of studies were: Why am I studying in a Western university when I could obtain a PhD from a
* local Pacific university? Who told me that studying in Australia was the best way to go? Why
am I doing a PhD anyway? Why is this paper credential of importance in my life and in the
life of my country? Who decided for me that this was the best way to go? If I decided this,
^ what and who influenced me to think this way?
On contemplation, I came to realise that I had been conditioned through written
English texts, through formal schooling modelled after Western educational structures and
traditions, through the media and generally through the way institutional life was organised in
Fiji, Our psyche was still very much colonised by neocolonial structures that the leaders
continued with after Fiji became politically independent. We might have been politically
independent in the literal sense that the people of Fiji could decide for themselves what they
s wanted, but in every way we remain colonised particularly where it counts most—in out-
thinking. For me personally, doing this PhD study is symbolically a deconstruction of this
colonial mentality and a reconstruction of who and what I am in the bigger picture of the
thesis. The issue of identity is, therefore, preeminent.
« While I realise that my personal standpoint will influence every facet of the thesis, I am
' also aware that this will be influenced and mediated at every turn by the rigid academic
standards required by this very Western institution of thesis production. While I may strain at
the noose of Western academia with its almost totality of focus on theoretical knowledge,
fa
while I may groan at the precision required, again by Western standards, of PhD research and
all the other guidelines required by this Western institution - 1 am aware continually that if I
want to attain a Western PhD, I will have to undergo the 'test' the Western way. On the other
t hand, by utilising interviews of people in key positions of power and authority in Fiji and by
privileging their voices in this thesis, I hope to open the way for the emphasis of Western
theses to move from purely analytical pieces to the privileging of narratives (see Chapter
a Eight).
I consider it critical to discuss these self-reflexive issues to lay the groundwork thai
would enable the reader to situate and locate this particular research project. In claiming a
strategic essentialism, I foreground my personal, political and theoretical interests in the
research study. It is these that influence the genesis, development and production of this
thesis. I now turn to explain the significance of this text,
No detailed research has been carried out on AA policies in Fiji. The present study is
the only piece of work that systematically critiques AA in Fiji. It argues that AA in Fiji is a
postcolonial response to social and educational inequalities that British colonialism left in its
wake. In providing a richly textured and detailed description and analysis of AA in a specific
historical micro-context, this study hopes to yield a broader comprehensive understanding of
AA in decolonised, postcolonial societies.
This research study has theoretical and practical implications (See Chapter Eight) that
are important in enabling better policy, practice and decision-making. Just as importantly, I
hope to show through this research that colonial representations of Indigenous Fijian
underachievement need to be critiqued and dismantled, I am living proof, as are other
Indigenous Fijians who have attained professorship, doctoral and masters level qualifications,
that many Indigenous Fijians can indeed act as rcle models. At this historical juncture,
Indigenous Fijians are showing that they can perform and work on par with other citizens in
any arena of social and economic life.
This study, as noted, is a piece of Western intellectual work. But in utilising
postcolonial critique, it constitutes a strategy for talking and writing back to colonial
representations. It is a strategy of providing a voice for Indigenous Fijians (See Chapter
Eight), with Indigenous Fijian informants. Apart from its function in university credential ling,
its main readership will be Indigenous Fijians in positions of power and authority who affect
the life trajectories of many people in Fiji, Yet the thesis itself is certainly not a subaltern text:
it is both an act of power and resistance (See Chapter Eight), with substantial political and
social consequences. I need to make the point that epistemologically, the thesis is not written
from a colonial or decolonised perspective; neither does it take the standpoint of indigenous
nationalism leading up to and after the coups of 1987. Instead, the epistemological standpoint
of the thesis is that of a Fiji in New Times (Hall, 1996c). It is a postcolonial thesis, one
writing of Fiji in the late 1990s, on the eve of the new millennium as it faces the prospect of
redefining itself and its peoples yet again.
10
The Organisation
The thesis comprises eight chapters. Chapter Two, "Theoretical Framings", explicates
the theoretical frameworks that underpin the thesis, namely postcolonial and AA discourses. I
argue that traditional notions of viewing AA in the West are limited and that postcolonial
conceptual frames are more appropriate for understanding AA in decolonised sites, First, I
explicate the meaning of AA, discuss the philosophical debate on AA, explore the concepts of
educational opportunity, equality and inequality and outline the limitations inherent in
traditional notions of AA, Second, I define those postcolonial concepts that are particularly
salient to these issues: concepts such as neocolonialism, hegemony, Other, voice, identity,
strategic essentialism, hybridity, and then turning to redefine the postcolonial curriculum.
Third, I compare the way AA is used in the West and in Fiji, Accordingly, I conclude Chapter
Two with a discussion of the value of this research in terms of a better understanding of AA in
decolonised, postcolonial conditions, particularly in instances where the indigenous population
holds political and numerical control,
In Chapter Three, "Contextualising the Study: Pre-Colonial, Colonial, Postcolonial
Fiji", I provide an account of Fiji's colonial history in order to set the groundwork that would
lead to an understanding of the state of Fiji's educational system and the thinking that led to
the development of AA at the point of decolonisation, There are five emphases in this chapter.
First, to counter the forceful presence, impact and authority of colonial historical
representations and discursive practices, I provide space and voice for Fiji's pre-contact
history and an explication of resistance to colonial rule. Second, I argue that Fiji is a colonial
construct. Political decolonisation occurred almost four decades ago but colonial political,
economic and social structures and institutions are sustained in neocolonial hegemonic
configurations. Third, the education system is an instrument of colonial control with colonial
reproduction continuing in neocolonial formations at this historical juncture. Fourth, I provide
a detailed analysis of AA in Fiji. In my view, AA is a counter strategy by indigenous people
to negate the effects of their colonial history. It is my contention that AA in Fiji was a
strategically essentialist intervention on the part of a predominantly Indigenous Fijian
Postcolonial Government to assert its postcoloniality, to counter the social and educational
inequalities that colonial rule left in its wake, Fifth, I provide an overview of contemporary
conditions in Fiji,
11
Chapter Four, "Methodological Considerations", provides a description of the research
methodology utilised in this study. First, I review the literature on qualitative research,
^ particularly the case study approach and the interview method of data collection. This is
followed by a review of the literature on policy analysis. I then provide an account of the
decisions and explanations for the decisions made during the gathering of the interview data.
& In the final section of Chapter Four, I describe the processes of transcribing, analysing and
interpreting the interview data. In total, I conducted 74 interviews with six categories of
informants: Politicians, Bureaucrats, Academics, Community Representatives, Principals and
Teachers. The data from these interviews formed the basis for Chapters Five, Six and Seven—
the main data chapters of the thesis.
In Chapter Five, "Explanations for Racial Inequalities in Schooling", I explicate my
informants' representations of Indigenous Fijian underachievement in schooling. They
^ provided three explanatory models: socio-cultural deficit, psychological-deficit and historical
structural. Under socio-cultural deficit models, spatial disadvantage (rurality), home
background, cultural deficiencies and school disadvantage were identified as major
determinants of Indigenous Fijian underachievement in formal schooling. In terms of the
* second explanatory category—psychological-deficit models, Indigenous Fijian attitudes and
the impact on children when they live away from home when attending school were identified
as two important factors to explain school failure. The third explanatory model—historical
structural—refers to the negative impact of the colonial experience which is manifested in
neocolonial educational structures of the curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and the language
of schooling.
There are several key findings emanating from the data in Chapter Five. First,
* explanations for underachievement cannot be reduced to mono-causal, essentialist arguments.
Racial inequalities in education are a consequence of the constant, complex and multiple
interactions of the dynamics of race, gender, class and space in the economic, political,
s cultural and historical spheres. Second, the issue of rurality or spatiality has emerged as a key
factor that problematises the usual categories of race, gender and social class. A third key
issue is the reproduction of hegemonic colonial representations of Indigenous Fijian
underachievement in decolonised sites. These last two points are further discussed in the final
chapter.
12
Chapter Six, "AA Policies: Conceptualisation, Implementation, Outcomes", explicates
the informants' representations of the way AA policies in education were conceptualised and
implemented. There were significant contradictions and ambivalences in views of Indigenous
Fijians and the non-Indigenous Fijians on AA. While all the informants supported the
principle behind the development of AA, the emergent consensus is that AA needs to be
reviewed. A key finding of this chapter is the view that AA needs to change from race to
class,
There have been many criticisms of the way AA policies have been administered. One
reported explanation for the ineffectiveness of these policies is to do with their conceptual
limitations. Furthermore, poor implementation of AA policies was cited as another reason
why they were ineffective in reducing the educational gap that existed between Indigenous
Fijians and other ethnic groups. Consequently, according to the informants, the outcomes of
AA for Indigenous Fijians have been rather mixed. Chapter Six also explicates what
informants have identified as positive and negative outcomes of AA.
In Chapter Seven, "Reforms: School, Policy and People", I explore the descriptions of
the informants of desirable changes in AA policy redirections, pedagogical practice as well as
people-change. Adult or community education has emerged as an important agent for the
change of Indigenous Fijian cultural orientations, epistemology and value systems. There is
recognition that if there is to be a curriculum overhaul, a change in teacher-training curriculum
and pedagogy also needs to be considered, Informants acknowledge that any policy
redirection or curriculum reform is difficult to carry out unless there is a national vision and
the necessary political will on the part of leaders.
The implications of the study on a postcolonial methodology, policy, pedagogical
practices, leadership, research and theory are discussed in Chapter Eight. In particular, the
issues of voice(s), mine and those of the informants, and the creation of speaking and writing
spaces are discussed under the heading of a postcolonial methodology. Moreover, the
implications of the study on AA policies are spelt out. This is followed by a detailed
examination of implications for pedagogical practice. In particular, I provide an alternative
view to curriculum reform.
13
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL FRAMINGS
In this chapter, I discuss the theoretical frameworks that underpin and inform the
thesis. The chapter has three sections. The first examines traditional ways of thinking
about AA in education in Western capitalist democracies with the principal purpose of
demonstrating their limitations in understanding AA in the Fijian context. First, I
examine the way AA has been defined and the ethical debate surrounding the discourse
on AA. I then focus on AA in education as it is described in the literature on equality of
educational opportunity and racial inequalities, particularly those studies that have tried
to explain underachievement in formal schooling. This section concludes by drawing out
the limitations in the way AA has traditionally been viewed. :
There is a need to broaden the notion of AA. For 'Third World' nations or \
'postcolonial' societies2 like Fiji, recent postcolonial theory may provide conceptual and ]
analytical resources and insights that are useful in providing a comprehensive notion of j
AA that is more appropriate. The second section of this chapter, thus, examines the i
I
literature on postcolonial theory/discourse with specific emphasis on key concepts that ]
play an important role in this research project. Neocolonialism is one such concept. j
Although many postcolonial nations have gained decolonised status, a new form of
colonialism (neocolonialism) demonstrates the continuing power and authority that ex-
colonisers have over their ex-colonies. The concept of hegemony explains how and why
'domination by consent' continues in the postcolonial moment. This is particularly
relevant to contemporary education, for instance, where educational structures such as the
curriculum, the pedagogies of the school, the assessment systems and school organisation
continue in neocolonial hegemonic formations after decolonisation occurred.
The concepts of strategic essentialism, voice and the 'Other' are also examined
because of the salient role they play in understanding the response of colonised people to
being 'othered' by the essentialist discriminatory and racist institutional, material and
discursive practices of colonialism. An examination of the concepts of cultural identity
and hybridity is also undertaken. The search for a cultural identity (whether ethnic/racial
2 1 don't know what to call nations like Fiji. Concepts like 'Third World', 'Developing' or 'Underdeveloped'
assume some lack or otherness. The concept 'postcolonial' is also unsatisfactory because it implies the
necessary presence of the colonising agent. Given that there is no better replacement, I will use the lerro
postcolonial to describe ex-colonies.
or national) is intensified in postcolonial nations to counter the hybridising processes of
colonialism, westernisation and globalisation.
The third section of this chapter attempts to draw the two theoretical frameworks
together by explicating the value of the current research in a broader understanding of
AA. In particular, I discuss the value of the research study in terms of the contribution it
hopes to achieve in an understanding of AA in decolonised states where the indigenous
people are the beneficiaries of AA and where they hold numerical and political power.
Theorising Affirmative Action
I am aware of and sensitive to the dangers of uncritical acceptance of the
American literature on AA (Bacchi, 1996), However, it needs to be remembered that
American models of AA have been imported to postcolonial sites like Fiji. Here, I
discuss traditional ways that Western capitalist nations have thought about AA. First, I
provide a contextual background to the concept of AA before providing an analysis of the
ethical and moral rationale of AA. In so doing, a discussion of the concept as it applies
especially in the United States of America, will ensue as well as an examination of the
theoretical positions for and against AA. This is followed by a description of the way
AA is thought about in education and a critical review of studies that have attempted to
provide explanations for educational inequalities (both empirical and theoretical). The
last section will address the limitations in traditional ways of looking at AA.
The Concept of Affirmative Action
What is affirmative action? AA in the Western construction entails some
deliberate action or intervention taken by a government or private institution in response
to material disadvantage faced by minority racial/ethnic groups and women that has
arisen out of past and/or current discrimination. As feminist Roberta Johnson (1990) has
put it,
Affirmative action is a generic term for programmes which take some kind of
initiative either voluntarily or under the compulsion of law, to increase, maintain,
or rearrange the number or status of certain group members usually defined by
race or gender, within a larger group, (p. 77)
This thesis is concerned specifically with AA developed for racial/ethnic groups.
In the United States, it was acknowledged that Afro-Americans had historically been
discriminated against by the legal and institutional legacies of slavery (Taylor, 1989;
15
Graham, 1992). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 recognised the oppression of slavery and
attempted to make legal amends (Graglia, 1994). It is interesting to note that in the
United States, the indigenous people - the American Indians - are silenced and
marginalised in all the debate about AA because of the prominent political positioning
and lobbying of Afro-Americans and ethnic migrant groups. Indeed, American Indians
are subsumed under the general category of'minorities'.
Initially, AA meant to "seek out and prepare members of minority groups for
better jobs and educational opportunities"; that is, early efforts involved advertising
(Glazer, 1975: 197), But as Glazer explains, in the early 1970s AA developed to set
statistical requirements and quotas based on race, colour, and national origin for
employers and educational institutions. "Preferential treatment", "hard affirmative
action" or "reverse discrimination" are terms that have been used to describe AA with
"special rights", "racism", "quotas" and "qualifications" additional terms repeatedly
invoked in discussions on AA (Tierney, 1997). In her study of gender-based AA in six
major Western countries reputed to be leading the world in AA - the United States,
Australia, Canada, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands - Bacchi (1996) notes that many
policy activists and administrators outside of the United States have distanced themselves
from the American terminology because of the negative connotations associated with the
experiences with AA in the United States.
Why is AA deemed to be necessary, even desirable? AA is a reaction against
racial inequalities that exist in society. The main reason behind the need for AA lies in
"the perceived under-representation or under-utilisation of the affected groups in certain
occupations, professions, statuses and positions and their over-representation among the
unemployed" (Edwards, 1995: 7). The main step therefore for AA arises "with the
recognition of the part that systemic discrimination plays in creating and replicating the
relative deprivation of some groups by denying access to goods and services, and by
compromising opportunities that ought to be equal to those of the majority members"
(Edwards, 1995: 3). Inequality of opportunity and access for groups as well as social and
economic disadvantage are the results of this systematic discrimination, be it direct,
indirect, intentional or unintentional. The basic purpose of AA, therefore, is "to shift the
balance of burdens and benefits between morally arbitrarily defined groups in society"
(Edwards, 1995: 154). Or as philosopher Iris Marion Young (1990: 198) has put it, the
primary purpose of AA is to "mitigate the influence of current biases and blindnesses of
institutions and decisionmakers". For the American context, AA is thus a remedial
16
strategy whose ultimate purpose is to reestablish the elements of fair competition that are
embedded in the ideal of equality of opportunity (Feinberg, 1996).
The Moral and Philosophical Debate
The critical question that has been asked is what moral, philosophical and ethical
justification can there be for government policies that benefit specific minority groups at
the expense of the majority? What are the moral reasons for the existence of AA policies
given the many arguments that run counter to the perceived benefits accruing from AA?
Despite the perceived injustice of AA to the white/dominant population, why are AA
preferential policies still being pursued, especially in the United States?
Race-based AA is a policy that is highly controversial (Bacchi, 1996; Mills, 1994)
particularly with regard to whether a group of people should benefit from taxpayers'
money to the exclusion of those who fall outside of the beneficiary category. Western
nations, like the United States, place a lot of emphasis on the rights of the individual
(Dovidio, Mann & Gaertner, 1989; Goldman, 1979). The thinking that every individual
starts life with equal chances and that one can be successful through hard work and the
sweat of one's brow is prevalent in egalitarian societies which assess the success or
otherwise of an individual on his/her efforts (Smith, 1991). For this group of people, it
would be anathema to give any individual or group of individuals what they may perceive
to be a head start in opportunity and access. This group of critics (e.g., Goldman, 1979;
Glazer, 1975) feel that AA is unfair to groups not protected by the policy and that this
works against the establishment of a race-blind society (Tierney, 1997). Tierney has
identified two other groups of AA critics: those who feel that AA is in fact harmful to the
beneficiaries of AA (e.g., Carter, 1991; Steele, 1994) and those who argue that AA has
diluted standards by admitting into the higher educational institutions unqualified
individuals (e.g., D'Souza, 1991). On the other hand, those who favour AA, especially
with regard to preferential treatment, believe that it is an appropriate and effective social
justice strategy to give disadvantaged groups of people an opportunity to catch up with
the dominant group in terms of providing the former with more opportunity and access to
material societal benefits, such as employment and education (e.g., Green, 1981; Pincus,
1994).
17
Much of the debate on the morality of 'hard' AA or preferential treatment has
occurred in the United States where AA is legally compulsory in some states3 , Ezorsky
(1991) argues that the benefits of AA for the Afro-Americans can be examined from both
a forward-looking and backward-looking moral perspective. The purpose of AA in the
forward-looking perspective is to facilitate "occupational integration" by the reduction of
institutional racism. This would not only enable many Afro-Americans who had been
discriminated against by the impact of a racist history to access employment benefits but
would enable the easier acceptance that Afro-Americans did not automatically belong at
the bottom of the employment hierarchy, The backward-looking perspective -
compensatory justice - believes that Afro-Americans have a moral right to compensation
for past injustice brought about as a result of slavery. The institutionalised and legal
discrimination they faced for centuries would give them the moral claim to compensation
for the discrimination and injustices they faced at the hands of the dominant white
population. Ezorsky (1991: 94) claims that preferential treatment is essential as
"opportunities created by preferential treatment should symbolise an acknowledgment of
such injustice and a commitment to create a future free of racism".
On the other hand, Glazer (1975) has argued against the necessity of preferential
treatment because of the inherent conflict over justice for the individual as opposed to
that of a group. He points out that there is increasing resentment against that group of
people benefiting from AA by the disfavoured groups. Nevertheless, Glazer does
concede that there is great morality in the application of preferential treatment to
compensate the Afro-Americans for past discrimination and injustices brought about by
the institution of slavery. Compensatory justice therefore is one moral argument that is
put forward by proponents of preferential treatment or 'hard' AA as a remedy for past
societal discrimination.
Moens (1985), in discussing AA programmes for Australian Aboriginals, ethnic
minorities and women, contends that compensatory justice does not seem as superior as
the social utility argument (called the "forward looking" argument by Ezorsky, 1991). As
Ezorsky and Moens have noted, the social utility argument views preferential treatment
as necessary not only to improve career prospects of beneficiaries but also to bring about
proportional representation. Moens' key argument is that "the key issue involved in the
affirmative action debate is the attempt by policymakers and legislators to replace the
3 California abolished AA in 1997. Some other states in the United States are thinking of following California's
example.
18
ideal of equality of opportunity with the ideal of equality of results" (Moens, 1985:15).
He also notes that the debate on AA has been on the legal, ethical and philosophical
aspects of two forms of 'hard' affirmative action: namely, in preferential admissions
(higher education) and hiring programmes (employment). Moens argues that preferential
hiring does not contribute to an "ideal" society. He believes that the argument for
preferential hiring for an "ideal" society is flawed because it is inconsistent with the
equality of opportunity principle. Rather, he argues, the proponents of preferential hiring
f pretend to be implementing the equality of opportunity or anti-discrimination principle
when in fact they are replacing the equality of opportunity principle with the equality of
result principle. The crux of this argument, therefore, is that preferential treatment would
discriminate or provide inequality for individuals outside of the target groups.
Nevertheless, as Edwards (1995) has noted, proponents of race-related AA
policies have argued for their necessity, giving the following reasons as worthwhile
j? goals: they promote equality of opportunity as a means to greater minority representation;
f they promote diversity; they enhance the general status and quality of life of minorities
and, in so doing, enhance distributive justice and racial equality. And as Cornell West
(1994: 95) describes it, AA should be viewed as neither a major solution to poverty nor a
<g. sufficient means to equality but rather "as primarily playing a negative role—namely, t o
i ensure that discriminatory practices against w o m e n and people of color are abated". P u t
\ another way, then, the rationales for the creation and implementation o f A A h a v e
included; compensation which addresses past discrimination; correction which refers t o
'- the correction of present discrimination; and diversification which is concerned with t h e
importance of creating a multicultural society (Tierney, 1997). These rationales h a v e
provided the moral justification for race-based AA.
ir* I have laid the groundwork b y defining A A and discussing some o f the arguments
' p u t forward by proponents and critics of race-based AA. Opponents of A A have based
i their arguments against the morality of A A b y drawing on the principle o f justice which
states that meritocracy should b e the criteria for the distribution of social benefits. A s
I.M. Y o u n g (1990: 195) has put it, "Those w h o oppose affirmative action policies usually
do so o n t h e ground that they discriminate. For them a principle of equal treatment, a
principle o f nondiscrimination, has absolute moral primacy". F o r these critics
discrimination occurs when what they term non-relevant criteria such a s race, gender,
religion and so on are used as the basis for decisionmaking in matters o f public policy.
The perception of A A as a group right as opposed to an individual right, is another area
of contention in the AA debate. On the other hand, supporters of AA have posited their
moral arguments based on righting a wrong, whether it was caused by past discriminatory
and oppressive practices or by correcting present inequalities. An additional moral
argument forwarded is that distributive justice promotes diversity and the celebration of
difference in the public (and private) sphere of society. Having thus explicated the
philosophical debate on the morality of AA, I now turn to a discussion of AA as it relates
specifically to education.
Equality of Educational Opportunity
How has AA been applied and theorised in education? What do we mean when
we talk of educational equality and educational inequality? Are the terms equality of
opportunity and AA synonymous? Smith (1985) has pointed out that the notions of
educational equality and educational inequality are difficult concepts to define precisely
because different Western researchers/writers use them differently. Additionally,
different discourses are used for the two concepts (Smith, 1985; Tyler, 1977), For
instance, the assertion has been made that sociologists have defined educational
inequality as inequality of opportunity (Smith, 1991), Suffice it is to say that to talk of
attaining educational equality is to assume that inequalities exist.
What does equality of educational opportunity mean and does it have the same
meaning as AA? To answer this question, it is important that we understand the way
equality of opportunity is understood in Western democratic states. In so doing, we need
to be aware that the concept of equality of opportunity has been variously interpreted at
different times by different people (Goldman, 1979; Sadurski, 1985). As Goldman
explains, there are extremes to the way this concept has been interpreted. At one end of
the scale is the belief, in its most conservative form, that equality of opportunity can
ameliorate great inequalities in the status quo distribution of goods, while at the other
extreme, the radical egalitarian view is a call for equal chances at goods or advantages.
In fact, there seems to be an inherent contradiction in the concepts of equality of
opportunity and AA.
On the one hand, equal opportunity means not discriminating against a particular
group because of that group's race, sex, religion, ethnicity, disability and other categories
(Holloway, 1989). On the other hand, AA does just that: it is based on racial preferences
to ensure that particular groups are not disadvantaged by the principle of
nondiscrimination inherent in the principle of equality of opportunity. Holloway explains
20
that AA goes beyond doctrines of equal opportunity. As Clayton and Tangri (1989: 177)
have put it, AA policies "are perceived to violate two basic principles underlying
individual achievement in American society: equal access to opportunities and equitable
assignment of rewards based on individual merit rather than on immutable status
characteristics". Iris Marion Young (1990) also points out that AA challenges the
primacy of a principle of nondiscrimination and the conviction that persons should be
treated only as individuals and not as members of groups. We can see, then, that equality
of opportunity is not the same as AA (Holloway, 1989; Hacker, 1994). In fact, we might
say that AA is a strategy that attempts to bring about equality of opportunity by providing
those disadvantaged groups with a head start to counter their disadvantage and hence
equalise their opportunities. As Goldman (1979; 200) has put it, the avowed purpose of
many AA programmes is to "ensure present and future equality of opportunity for women
and minority-group members".
In terms of education, AA is the strategy that reduces educational inequalities by
providing disadvantaged groups with educational opportunities to equalise their situation.
Equality of opportunity has been defined as "the right to be socially successful if one is
able to" (Shklar, 1986: 22) and the educational system is the means whereby everyone
has an equal chance "to compete for the national cake" (Patterson, 1978; 22). As Green
(1981: 204) has put it, "Affirmative action is necessary to combat not only the cynicism
or hopelessness of the disadvantaged but the expectations of assured success of the
advantaged: in other words, to put everyone on an equal footing".
Race-related AA policies in education in the West have been a response to the
perceived educational disadvantage faced by people of colour/minority populations. In
other words, disadvantaged racial/ethnic groups were identified as facing educational
inequalities while AA was defined as a strategy to promote equality of educational
opportunity by reestablishing the elements of fair competition, as Feinberg (1996) has
argued, In a recent commentary on AA and higher education, Tierney (1997) maintains
that AA in America was a result of the fact that American campuses were White, male
centres of learning. The purpose of AA, according to Tierney, was to help not
individuals but groups who had been discriminated against. Tierney makes the point that
throughout this century, public higher education has been perceived as a central vehicle
for increasing equity in society. For those who have been disadvantaged by societal
circumstances, education, then, is conceived as a major vehicle to equalise relations by
21
expanding opportunity. Access to higher education, therefore, has been seen as a major
path to expand access and equality of opportunity for the disadvantaged.
It is interesting to note that apart from quotas in student admissions and faculty
employment, AA in education historically has been class-based. For instance in the
United States, Project Headstart, which was first implemented in 1965, was aimed at
changing children and their families in order for them to adapt better to the school culture
(Smith, 1991). In this government initiative in education, children from economically
and culturally deprived backgrounds took part in a comprehensive pre-school programme
presumably to break the poverty cycle. In Britain, the establishment of Educational
Priority Areas was intended "to break into the vicious circle of deprivation" and was an
attempt to "overcome perceived problems in one environment (the family) by initiating
changes in another (the school), i.e. using the school to compensate for perceived
deficiencies in the family" (Smith, 1991: 29). In Australia the establishment of the
Disadvantaged Schools Program in 1975 saw funds being allocated to both government
and non-government schools which served the greatest concentration of poor children
(White and Johnson, 1993). It is interesting that these policies were not really race-based
AA but were more class-based. Nevertheless, it would be fair to say that the beneficiaries
would have included children of colour or those from disadvantaged ethnic groups.
Commenting on class-based AA in the American context, Smith (1991: 30)
maintains that "official reform programs like Headstart did not directly address the
problem of working-class or minority group poverty and oppression nor did they
critically examine the structure of the school, its programs and resources of schools in the
poorest neighbourhoods". She argues that "The resources allocated for reform were
inadequate and the content of the programs succeeded only in enmeshing the poor in yet
another layer of welfare bureaucracy, and in subjecting them to sociological scrutiny
which blamed them for being failures" (Smith, 1991: 30).
Educational inequality has been a major focus of research for several decades with
the main focus placed on the impact of poverty, social class, gender or ethnicity on the
educational opportunities and outcomes of young people (Angus, 1993). Tyler (1977)
highlights the ambiguity inherent in the term 'educational inequality' and identifies six
different definitions of this term. He lists the first four as inequality in achievement, in
educational background, in aptitude or ability, in school environment, identifying these as
unequal inputs. The last two definitions are to do with unequal outcomes in terms of
inequality in credentials and in life chances (which relate to status and income).
22
The debate on educational inequality has centred around two opposing positions.
The first is that of'nature', the traditional viewpoint, which identifies the most significant
input variable as inherited aptitude or ability. This viewpoint sees school success as
largely a result of innate intellectual capacity which is affected by a learner's home
background. On the other hand, the 'nurture' position maintains that environmental
factors (economic, cultural and school) are important to school success (Smith, 1991). In
general, explanations for inequality in schooling have been posited by mainstream
(conservative and liberal) educators as well as neo-Marxist and radical neo-Marxist
sociologists (McCarthy, 1990), Mainstream educators, who Smith above has referred to
as proponents of both the 'nature' and 'nurture' viewpoints, have argued that biological
or cultural deficiencies on the part of the underachiever were adequate explanations for
racial inequalities in schooling. In other words, what Smith and McCarthy are pointing
out here is that mainstream educators blame the victim in some way for failure in school.
Some innate deficiency either in intelligence or social, economic and cultural
environment (i.e., family circumstances) was responsible for underachievement.
On the other hand, neo-Marxists theorists have aigued that inequalities in society
are reproduced and perpetuated in schooling. McCarthy (1990: 58) notes that dominant
themes in the literature in the late 1960s and 1970s centred on "the contradiction between
capital and labor and the role of schooling in the maintenance and the reproduction of the
economy". Bowles and Gintis (1976), for example, formulated the correspondence thesis
which posits that a "structural correspondence" exists between the social relations of
schooling and the social relations of production. In her study of the hidden curriculum,
Kathleen Lynch (1989) observes that many conflict theorists have deliberately ignored
issues of race and gender when analysing the school's hidden curriculum because they
consider class relations as the major factor in the reproduction of inequalities. Similarly,
as McCarthy (1990: 134-135) has pointed out in his commentary on race and the
curriculum, neo-Marxist educators "have tended to subordinate racial inequality to what
they see as the more general problem of class oppression, thereby suppressing the
importance of race in the project of social emancipation".
However, there are serious limitations in these conceptions of racial inequalities in
education, McCarthy sums up the debate succinctly by arguing that essentialism and
dogmatism are two characteristics of current debates in the educational literature on the
theoretical status of racial inequality. He notes:
23
Mainstream educators reduce the problem of racial inequality to the issues of
underachievement and minority social and cultural deficits—in some ways
blaming minorities themselves for the problems associated with race and social
disadvantage. Neo-Marxist educators, on the other hand, have tended to
subordinate racial inequality to what they see as the more general problem of class
** oppression, thereby suppressing the importance of race in the project of social
emancipation. (McCarthy, 1990: 134-135)
It is pertinent to note that AA policies for ethnic/racial minorities in the West are
developed and implemented based on some lack or deficiency on the part of these
minorities. Even the critics of AA operate on the paradigm of whether the policies work
or not. Western measures are then used to assess the relative success of the policies
a--- according to whether the policies succeed to do what they set out to do in a quantitative
fashion. How are AA policies framed, what assumptions do they bear and how are they
implemented in Fiji? How effective have they been? What criteria are used to measure
their effectiveness? Are the AA policies in Fiji a historically appropriate response to
iff
;. Fiji's colonial history? The answers to these questions will be fully discussed in
Chapters Three and Six.
This far, I have engaged with the discourse on equality of opportunity in
education. I have argued that AA was a response to educational inequalities faced by
•.«?•
minority groups in the form of equality of opportunity (and access). I have pointed out
that AA in education in Western democracies has basically been class-based with the
exception of race-based higher education quotas in student admissions and staff
pfe employment. In the next section, I review some of the literature on underachievement in
* formal education, both in the 'Western' and Fiji contexts.
Explanations for Racial Inequalities in Schooling: the Western Context
, There does not seem to be a coherent, satisfactory theory to explain the
reproduction and persistence of racial inequality in schooling in the educational literature
of Western nation states such as Great Britain, the United States and Australia. Rather,
< racial inequality in education has been explained either in terms of social and cultural
deficit models or in terms of class oppression. However, despite this limitation, Western
theorists themselves have attempted to retheonse racial inequalities in education and have
produced various alternatives (e.g., Hatcher and Troyna, 1993; McCarthy, 1990).
Racial/ethnic groups, including indigenous groups, have faced problems of
underachievement and have been marginalised and alienated from an academic core
24
curriculum. Examples of these groups are the Indigenous Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islanders in Australia as well as migrant minority groups such as the West Indian children
in Great Britain and the Maltese background students in Australia, It is obvious that the
persistence of racial inequality cannot be attributed to a single variable but should be
viewed as a complex, multi-causal phenomenon.
In what follows I discuss two key studies that explain why minority children have
failed in schooling in other distinctive contexts, the first of West Indian children in
Britain and the second of Maltese-background children in Australia. They have been
selected as key studies because of potential correlation in the findings of these studies
with the situation in Fiji. First of all the situation is similar viz a viz a post-independent
people coming to terms with an imposed Western-oriented curriculum. In the case of
Fiji, the indigenous people are subjected to a neocolonial curriculum of their own choice
(people in power had the choice to develop different curricula content but chose not to);
in the case of minority children in Britain and Australia, their parents have no say in what
their children learn in school. In both contexts, however, Western forms of cultural
knowledge, pedagogies and assessment play a dominant role in identity formation and in
deciding which student should pass and which should fail. In both cases, the students are
marginalised and disadvantaged by the Western (-type) educational system in place.
Second, these two studies were selected because they both reiterate the point
which McCarthy (1990) makes that studies which reduce explanations for racial
inequalities in education to single causes are essentialist and dogmatic. Third, Sultana's
1993 study is important because he clarifies the concept of "symbolic violence", a
concept first introduced by Bourdieu and Passeron (1977), I argue in Chapter Five that
education systems which deliberately exclude the knowledge systems, cultural values and
language of a group, particularly of indigenous origins, are guilty of symbolic violence.
Parekh (1986) summarises the literature on the underachievement of minority
children in Britain, particularly West Indian children. First, he undermines the genetic
intellectual inferiority explanation, pointing out that IQ tests as well as the concept of
intelligence are too problematic to be valid. He points out that some West Indian
students perform as well or even better than their white counterparts. He notes as well
that the academic performance of middle-class West Indian children is much better than
that of white working-class children and they perform almost as well as white middle-
class children. Parekh demonstrates that the notion of underachievement is complex and
can be class-contingent,
25 ;
i
1
The traditional structure of the family is the second conventional explanation cited
for the underachievement of West Indian children. Specifics include inconsistent patterns
of discipline, acute inter-generational conflict, lack of commitment to and willingness to
make sacrifices of time, energy and money for children's education, and failure to provide
a supportive environment. Parekh critiques these findings, commenting that while the
family is an important factor, it should not be exaggerated. He examines research that
demonstrates the significance of the school and argues that students who have high
achievements whilst at boarding school demonstrate the higher significance played by the
school rather than the family. Parekh (1986: 117) contends that much of what is said
relating to the structure of the West Indian family is "either mistaken or unrelated to
education".
Material and cultural disadvantage associated with poor socio-economic
conditions of the West Indian home is an additional explanation for the
underachievement of West Indian children. The majority of West Indians have been
identified as "relatively poor, ill-educated, engaged in low-paid, dull and unskilled jobs,
working at odd hours and living in over-crowded houses" (Parekh, 1986: 111). Parekh
agrees that the socio-economic conditions of the family are of significant importance
with much research demonstrating the significance of class to educational performance.
However, he cautions that while class in an extremely important variable, it is not the
most important. Racism, as well as school factors (e.g., teachers, school ethos), mediate
the influence of class.
The structure and ethos of the school is another explanation Parekh picks out from
the literature review. Parekh (1986: 120) agrees that this is another very important factor
but claims that "the socio-economic conditions of the child, racism, etc., exert
independent influence on the school, and foster or frustrate its academic ethos". As well,
the failure of educational authorities to identify and meet the basic educational needs of
the West Indian child has also been posited as a cause of underachievement. Parekh
responds to this argument by saying that that is an important but limited explanation for
the overall underachievement of West Indian students.
Parekh concludes that socio-economic conditions, racism in the school, and the
academic ethos of the school, "in their complex interaction explain to a considerable
degree why the bulk of West Indian children underachieve" (1986: 121). This study is
important in that it is highly critical of studies which attribute failure to succeed at school
to a single factor. This is an important point that I will take up later, when I argue that
26
studies in Fiji that have attempted to correlate underachievement to one factor/variable
are methodologically flawed. They fall into the category of the "fallacy of the single
factor", to use Parekh's terms.
Sultana's (1993) paper on the education of Maltese students in Australia
emphasises that underachievement cannot be reduced to simplistic, reductionist causes.
Like Parekh, he repudiates the theories held by researchers that explained
underachievement in terms of "deficiencies in intelligence, genetic stock of a particular
race or group, cultural environments, diets or parenting" and maintains that these views
were useful "to those who sought to legitimise their colonial, imperial, class policies by
referring to 'objective' and 'scientific' findings!" (Sultana, 1993: 3).
Sultana suggests that in order to understand why racial inequality persists in
schools, we need to examine the institutional and social contexts in which the learning
process takes place. He argues that schools which do not value the "realities, language
and dignities" of their students are guilty of "symbolic violence". These schools are
violent and powerful in their labelling of who is a school failure and thus, provide
experiences which marginalise and exclude. Borrowing the term from Bourdieu and
Passeron, Sultana defines symbolic violence as:
...the violence perpetrated by systems which unilaterally impose themselves,
representing as they do the dominant frame of reference, on one and all. You
either accept this curriculum, this pedagogy, this world view, this language, or
else you are labelled a failure. It is violent because, so powerful are the people
who do the labelling, that we end up internalising those labels, and become deeply
convinced that we are, indeed not capable of ever achieving anything in life. It is
a powerful form of violence because the rules of the game are set by the system
itself according to its own criteria, and thus it becomes difficult to resist. (Sultana,
1993:5)
I believe that this study is an important one too because it reiterates the important
point that studies that explain school failure in terms of one variable are seriously flawed
and do not deserve any serious attention. Moreover, this study is important in that it
explores a feature that is prominent in all imposed educational systems—the symbolic
violence perpetrated against minority and indigenous populations by a system that is
based on a foreign material and cultural world view. My understanding of symbolic
violence is the imposition of colonial (and neocolonial) views of 'reality', 'truth',
'rationality' and language on a society. Symbolic violence occurs in schooling when the
"realities, language and dignities" of students are not valued by schools, as Sultana
(1993) argues, It occurs when those who do not adapt or conform to standards required
27
by the dominant ideologies and practices are labelled as failures. Western schooling,
thus, because it is based on a foreign world view, is symbolically violent when those
subjected to the system internalise the label of failure. I will revisit Parekh's (1986) and
Sultana's (1993) studies in Chapter Five.
Studies on Racial Inequalities in Schooling in Fiji
In this section, I review studies on Indigenous Fijian underachievement in Fiji.
My concern here is whether they have been essentialist and dogmatic in their findings
(McCarthy, 1990). Do they suffer from the "fallacy of the single factor" as Parekh
(1986) has described it? Indeed, do these studies place the blame on the underachiever
and his/her social, economic and cultural circumstances?
Tupeni Baba (1982) recommended three categories of variables for use by
interested researchers as the bases for investigations on racial inequalities in education in
Fiji, They are; psychological factors (e.g., motivation/aspiration, need achievement,
locus of control, cognitive style), social-cultural factors (e.g., individualism/cooperation,
cultural conflicts, tradition of academic scholarship) and institutional factors (e.g.,
urban/rural, facilities, teacher quality). The areas that attracted a great deal of
investigation were the psychological and institutional domains.
In terms of psychological studies, Basow (1982) and Kishor (1981; 1983) have
concluded that Indigenous Fijians have lower levels of self-concept and a more external
locus of control than Indo-Fijians. Kishor also found that Indigenous Fijians valued
education less than Indo-Fijians and had lesser academic motivation. In relation to the
socio-cultural research domain, Tierney (1971) concluded from his ethnographic study
that cultural explanations for the low academic achievement of the rural Indigenous
Fijian students lay in these areas: lack of privacy in the home, lack of desire for
competition due to societal preference for cooperative individuals, lack of mobility, and
pressure for conformity. Veramu (1990), working within an ethnographic paradigm,
found that rural Indigenous Fijian students had low self-esteem and that their parents did
not seem to be committed to their children's education, Veramu also noted two
institutional explanations for the poor performance of Indigenous Fijian students: boring
and seemingly irrelevant content coupled with the insensitivity and brutality of teachers.
Another study which sought socio-cultural explanations is Joeli Nabuka's (1984)
study of ten home background variables to explain racial inequalities in schooling.
Nabuka concluded that the most significant variables which differentiated Indigenous
28
Fijian and Indo-Fijian students were the people with whom students reside whilst at
school (a significant proportion of secondary-aged Indigenous Fijians students lived with
relatives in urban centres or in boarding institutions compared to Indo-Fijians), the
educational level of the student's father or guardian, the availability of reading books in
the student's home (Indigenous Fijians had significantly fewer story books) and the
availability of the prescribed text books for the students. On these factors, Nabuka
emphasised that Indigenous Fijians came out negatively. Nabuka, like Elley (19S2),
concluded that Indigenous Fijians have more disadvantages in their home circumstances
thanlndo-Fijians.
Baba (1983) summarised the institutional variables which could explain the poor
performance of Indigenous Fijians, particularly in the science, mathematics and
commerce disciplines, First, he identified a lack of qualified teachers teaching in these
disciplines. Second, Indigenous Fijian secondary school principals were less experienced
than their Indo-Fijian counterparts. Third, Indigenous Fijian schools offered an
integrated science compared to the pure sciences offered in Indo-Fijian schools. Finally,
the infrastructural development of Indigenous Fijian schools was not so adequate in terms
of laboratories, library and supportive office equipment. What is clear from Baba's
summary is that Indigenous Fijians are also disadvantaged when it comes to issues of
quality - in teaching, school leadership and resources.
It would seem that explanations for racial inequalities in schooling may be
essentialist and dogmatic in that explanations for Indigenous Fijian underachievement
have been sought in one domain (e,g,, either psychological, institutional or socio-
cultural). To my knowledge, there has not been one study in Fiji that recognises and
acknowledges the complexities associated with underachievement. This research project
will attempt to fill this vacuum.
Given the inadequacies of many explanations for racial inequalities in education,
what could be an alternative theoretical model? McCarthy offers the parallelist position
theory to explain racial inequalities in education (See Figure A). The parallelist position
...presents us with a theory of overdetermination in which the unequal processes
and outcomes of teaching and learning and of schooling in general are produced
by constant interactions among three dynamics (race, gender and class) and in
three spheres (economic, political and cultural). (McCarthy, 1990: 80)
29
Spheres
Economic Cultural Political
Dynamic of Class
Dynamic of Race
Dynamic of Gender
(Source: Adapted from McCarthy, 1990: 81)
Figure A: The Parallelist Theory to Explain Racial Inequalities in Schooling
In this chapter, I have explored the way AA is viewed in Western contexts, such
as the United States, and discussed the debate between proponents and critics of race-
based AA. I then narrowed the framework to a discussion of the way AA has been
viewed in relation to education, particularly in terms of equality of educational
opportunity, This was followed by a critical review of studies that attempt to explain
raci?l inequalities in schooling. In particular, I focussed on two studies in the West
explaining why minority students have failed, the first of West Indian students in Britain
and the second of Maltese-background children in Australia. I followed this with a brief
review of the literature on explanations for the poor performance of Indigenous Fijians in
Fiji. Then, based on McCarthy's work, the parallelist theory to explain racial inequalities
in schooling was outlined. This theory posits that racial inequalities in schooling are
produced by the constant interactions among the dynamics of race, gender and class and
in the economic, political and cultural spheres. I bring these sections together by now
outlining the limitations in the traditional Western way of thinking about AA to set the
groundwork for the next major section of this chapter which is an explication of the
theoretical resources that may provide a more appropriate and comprehensive notion of
AA in decolonised, small island states like Fiji.
Limitations
There are some limitations in the way AA is traditionally thought about in
Western liberal democratic nations. These arise out of the assumptions made about AA
which make problematic their application to decolonised societies like Fiji.
AA is a postwar phenomenon, This arose out of the principle of redistributive
social justice which was facilitated by the expansion of the welfare state. In the United
30
States, for instance, an expanding economy, sufficient tax bases and welfare
infrastructures made possible the redistribution of capital (Dworkin, 1998). The first
assumption, then, that underpins AA is the notion that states have unlimited resources
that can be spread around to benefit disadvantaged groups. Western capitalist states like
the United States, Great Britain and Australia, which have significant natural and material
resources, are better able to afford large financial outlays for AA programmes
By contrast, Fiji is a small island state with all the challenges that beset nations of
this status. Distinctive local problems include: development and over-concentration,
open economies and overdependence, high public expenditure, distance costs, the
dominance of public employment, problems of finance, aid dependency, and patronage
and nepotism (Bacchus & Brock, 1987: 2-4). Agriculture, notably sugarcane, forms the
backbone of Fiji's national economy with tourism following very closely. The country
has limited natural resources and a very small industrial base, Consequently, the gross
national product is minimal compared to Western industrialised states. Fiji's economy is,
therefore, more dependent on the vagaries of the global market economy. This reflects
the vulnerability of small island states to external socio-economic world forces. The
problems associated with smallness that encourage dependence may help explain the
continuation of neocolonial hegemonic structures in Fiji after political self-rule became a
reality. Fiji's status as a small island state thus emphasises its lack of resources. For
national resources, therefore, to be set aside for AA for a particular group would
demonstrate the view that AA in Fiji was perceived to be an urgent national need that had
to be addressed.
However, the point needs to be made that within globalisation and these new
times, it is becoming increasingly obvious that internally, governments are moving to
economic tightening with the resultant reduction in the distribution of resources.
Historically, we have hit a period where countries in both 'developing' and 'developed'
worlds follow the rationale of economic rationalism, where there is tighter management
of national budgets. And with fewer taxation bases, there are less resources to
redistribute. Notwithstanding the global trend of economic rationalism, it must be noted
that small island nations like Fiji are extremely vulnerable, not only environmentally but
more particularly in economic terms.
A second assumption that underlies AA in Western liberal capitalist states is the
notion that nations which institute AA have considerable control over their sovereignty.
Again, large industrial nations which carry the status and prestige of 'developed'
31
industrial states like the United States, England (and maybe Australia) are sovereign
states that even have the capacity to provide financial and other aid to less fortunate
'underdeveloped' or 'Third World' societies. The historical fact is that these Western
industrial countries have managed to maintain their sovereignty through the process of
colonialism where they amassed great wealth and appropriated many resources from their
colonies to run their economies. As Albert Memmi (1965: 149) has put it, "Colonization
is, above all, economic and political exploitation". After all, capitalism and its
worldwide spread through the process of colonialism "instilled in the white men a
constant yearning for the material benefits and power which they believed money alone
can bring" (Gladwin, 1980: 26-27).
When decolonisation of British, French and German colonies occurred after the
first world war, these countries had firmly established not only their sovereignty, but also
neocolonial power and control over politically independent states through the process of
foreign aid and financial assistance/loans. Gladwin (1980) argues that foreign aid is such
a powerful weapon that no Western government is keen to abandon it. He maintains that
many 'Third World1 countries carry substantial foreign aeot on foreign aid which mostly
comes in the form of loans from international financial institutions like the International
Monetary Fund, the World Bank, various regional development banks, and agencies of
the United Nations. Fiji depends for its economic existence on loans from international
financial institutions as well as economic and other aid from 'big brother' 'developed'
countries like Australia, New Zealand and Japan. A United Nations report in 1977
estimated that by the end of 1978, servicing the foreign debt of 'developing' countries
would cost the equivalent of 25% of the total export earnings of these same countries
(Gladwin, 1980). Given that foreign aid and loans are primarily tools of control and
economic exploitation, and not simply business transactions as Gladwin puts it, how then
can small island states like Fiji maintain their sovereignty given their economic
vulnerability? In fact, if economies like the Asian economic 'tigers', Indonesia and
Malaysia that were internationally perceived to be invincible can collapse, as the events
of 1997-1998 have demonstrated, what does this reflect about the fragility of small island
states like Fiji and their supposed control over the affairs of their countries?
An additional factor that demonstrates quite clearly the vulnerability of small
island states is the emergent power of multinational and transnational corporations.
These corporations not only have the mandate of their governments to spread their
32
capitalistic tentacles but also hold much control over 'Third World1 countries. As
Gladwin (1980) has argued:
The national interest of the industrialized countries is indeed intimately linked
with that of the multinational corporations. These corporations are the spearhead
of the new imperialism, able to reward or punish Third World countries for their
behavior, providing an intelligence network to watch them, and convincing both
leaders and their people that the home country is their best friend, their model to
copy, and their protector, (pp. 66-67)
Additionally, the income from many of these corporations easily outstrips many
'Third World' economies (Castells, 1996). Castells seems to be describing the Fiji
context quite aptly when he notes that "countries that are left exclusively to the impulses
of market forces, in a world where established power relationships of governments and
multinational corporations bend and shape market trends, become extremely vulnerable
to volatile financial flows and technological dependency" (Castells, 1996: 89). Examples
of multinational corporations in Fiji include the ubiquitous MacDonalds and Coca Cola.
Supermarket chains include Woolworths and petrol stations include Shell, Mobil and
British Petroleum. Asco Motors also operate in Fiji, Multinational corporations also
have a hand in garment factories, brewery, cigarette, hotel chains and insurance
companies. Given the financial power that these multinational companies wield, how can
the sovereignty of a small island state like Fiji be maintained?
Third, another limitation in the traditional way of thinking about AA in Western
liberal capitalist democracies is the development of social movements which assume
equal representation before the state. The rise of new group-based social movements ,1
associated with left politics such as feminism, Black liberation, the lesbian and gay
movements and the peace and green movements have challenged traditional conceptions
of justice (I. M. Young, 1990) and indeed as Yeatman (1990) has argued, these new
social movements have placed new political claims on the democratisation of social,
economic, political and cultural resources of the state. In arguing for the need for the
state to recognise and affirm group difference as well as specific representation of
oppressed groups, Iris Marion Young (1990: 160) points out that oppressed groups "have
seen self-organization and the assertion of a positive group cultural identity as a better
strategy for achieving power and participation in dominant institutions". Iris Marion
Young notes that in attending to group-specific needs and providing for group
representation, the state would be promoting social equality and providing the
recognition that undermines cultural imperialism. Or as Laclau and Mouffe (1985: 191)
33
have argued, the discourse of radical democracy is one where new social movements are
representative of a "polyphony of voices, each of which constructs its own irreducible
discursive identity". In arguing for a radical democracy, they note:
Juridical institutions, the educational system, labour relations, the discourses of
the resistance of marginal populations construct original and irreducible forms of
social protest, and thereby contribute all the discursive complexity and richness
on which the programme of a radical democracy should be founded. (Laclau and
Mouffe, 1985: 192)
The potential for a new hegemony that arises out of the formations of coalitions
of these new social groups poses challenges for those in power. It is this hegemony that
can constitute a fundamental tool for political analysis on the left. And as Laclau and
Mouffe (1985: 192) have also noted, this hegemony is only possible when the "open
unsutured character of the social is fully accepted, when the essentialism of the totality
and of the elements is rejected".
We can see, then, that in Western liberal states like the United States, Great
Britain and Australia, equal representation before the state is something that is constantly
negotiated by new political movements who want some stake in state resources and as
Yeatman (1990) has put it, the state has been unable to cope. As Yeatman explains, it is
the multiplication of these claims which have put a lot of pressure on the state, prompting
top-down styles of state management. However, with regard to small, supposedly
sovereign states like Fiji, the issue of equal representation before the state is one that
cannot be assumed. For one, the population is too small (the total population is three
quarters of a million) for the development of radical social groups and two, even if these
groups were developed (e.g., gay and lesbian movements), the populace (and the
government) is too conventional to be as justice-oriented as Western liberal nations. And
three, the indigenous people currently hold political and land power so the context which
arises in Western nations regarding oppression of, and the resultant protest by indigenous
or the Black movement, does not apply. The multiplication of claims by social
movements on the state as Yeatman puts it is a rare occurrence in small island societies
like Fiji.
The fourth limitation of traditional notions of viewing AA is the assumption made
by its critics that everyone is equal and should be judged strictly by a 'neutral' standard
like merit (Tierney, 1997). Iris Marion Young (1990), a proponent of AA for
marginalised groups, argues persuasively against the merit principle. She questions two
34
assumptions which underlie discussions on social justice and equal opportunity. She first
criticises the assumption of "a hierarchical division of labor with scarce positions of high
income, power, and prestige at the top, and less privileged positions at the bottom" which
is assumed as a given and therefore not unjust (I, M. Young, 1990: 193). She also
criticises what she describes as the "myth of merit" which assumes that positions are
distributed according to merit "by measuring the individual technical competence of
persons and awarding the most competitive positions to those judged most qualified
according to impartial measures of such competence" (I. M, Young, 1990: 193). Iris
Marion Young argues that is not possible to use criteria that are normatively and
culturally neutral since criteria used to evaluate individual performance are normative and
cultural rather than neutrally scientific. She maintains that the basic purpose of AA is "to
mitigate the influence of current biases and blindnesses of institutions and
decisionmakers" (I. M. Young, 1990: 198). The assumption of traditional notions of AA
that merit should be the basis for AA is, therefore, problematic.
At the onset of this chapter, I pointed out the problems associated with an
uncritical acceptance of AA from one socio-historical site like the United States to Fiji.
Here, in this section, I have identified four specific difficulties that arise when we try to
transport the assumptions of AA to the Fiji context. These are: the notion of unlimited
resources, the notion that states have control over their sovereignty, the rise of social
movements which introduces heterogeneity, thus resulting in complex confusion, and the
notion that merit and AA are incompatible and mutually exclusive.
Clearly, these assumptions are problematic if they are literally transposed to
decolonised vulnerable small island sites. First, Fiji does not have unlimited resources.
Second, because of its substantial dependence on foreign aid/loans and the significant
impact of multinational corporations, Fiji does not have control over its sovereignty.
Third, the population in Fiji is too small for the emergence of new social groups to
demand a rethinking of the notion of social justice. And fourth, the notion of merit as an
argument against AA is problematic because the assumption that merit is a scientifically
neutral phenomenon is a misnomer. However, the point needs to be made that Western
democracies do not have unlimited resources or absolute control over their sovereignty.
As well, not all social groups within them are 'large enough' to gain recognition nor are
all large groups (e.g., women) duly recognised. In this section, then, I have established
that traditional notions of viewing AA are inappropriate in understanding AA in the Fiji
context. Given the limitations in traditional ways of thinking about AA, I now turn to the
35
theoretical framework that may provide a more appropriate way of broadening the notion
of AA in decolonised or postcolonial societies.
Theorising the Postcolonial
Underpinning the whole study is the conceptual and analytical lens provided by
postcolonial theoretical resources that will be utilised to theorise and critique the failure
of AA to make a significant inroad into the underachievement in education of Indigenous
Fijians in Fiji. Specifically, it will use postcolonial conceptual resources to critically
analyse the interview data. As well, these resources will be used to critique texts on
Fijian history (see Chapter Three) and curriculum and government documents.
The theoretical discourses that arise out of postcolonial issues such as universality
and difference, representation and resistance, hybridity, language, history, education as
well as production and consumption of postcolonial literature underpin the thesis. The
issue of textual representation and resistance of non-Western people, for example, is an
important one— language and written history in the form of texts are two instruments of
control of colonised subjects which continue long after countries gain political
independence, Education is another form of control institutionalised as part of
colonialism. A neocolonial curriculum assures the maintenance of dominant Western
values. The production and consumption of texts is particularly critical given that the f
proliferation of texts on non-Western cultures has taken place in metropolitan capitals.
Language is indeed a critical domain of power because the colonial process itself
begins in language (Ashcroft et al., 1995). Written history by the West of the non-West in
the language of the coloniser, not only presented the non-West with the way they should
view themselves and the West, but legitimised and institutionalised myths and
misconceptions of the West that became regarded as the gospel truth by the non-West.
Edward Said, in his much acclaimed text Orientalism, illustrates this point very aptly by
emphasising the power of Western discourses which invented the Orient. In Said's words,
Orientalism is "a Western style for dominating, restructuring, and having authority over the
Orient" (Said, 1978: 3). The Orient in Said's case refers to the East, to the racial 'Other' of
the West. I would argue that the Orient can be extended to the Pacific, or the South Seas
as the Western literature so romantically called the region, because it was Western literary
discourse that invented and created the myths and misconceptions associated with the way
this region was (mis)represented. In terms of discourse, Allan Luke (1995-1996: 38)
makes the point that for minority categories such as indigenous peoples and women, "the
36
historical movement has been from an outright namelessness and invisibility to an
inclusion in public discourses and human sciences as colonised, deficit human subjects".
What is clear from this discussion is that Western discourses reflected in the use of
language is an effective instrument of control to keep the 'native' subjugated and within
knowable grounds, even after the point of decolonisation.
The issues of universality and difference are important also in considering "the
similarity of colonialism's political and historical pressure upon non-European societies,
alongside the plurality of specific cultural effects and responses those societies have
produced" (Ashcroft et al., 1995: 56). The remainder of this chapter may be taken then as
a postcolonial interrogation of what the literature says about the key concepts used in the
thesis: hegemony, neocolonialism, the 'other', voice, strategic essentialism, identity,
hybridity and the postcolonial curriculum.
The issue of recovering voice is an important one to negate the essentialist
representation that colonial discourse had instituted about the 'natives' or 'others', In the
project nf recovering voice, it <<* sometimes necessary to utilise essentialism as a strategy
in order to be heard above the silences and contradictions caused by colonial
representation of the 'others'. At the point of decolonisation, the emphasis on Indigenous
Fijian cultural identity, for instance, was spurred by nationalistic aspirations as a response
to the hybrid identity that had been mediated by the colonial experience and the attendant
processes of change. Another response to the hybrid identity 'created' by colonialism is
the need to re-create a postcolonial curriculum that would not only affirm the cultural
identity of Indigenous Fijians, for example, but also would accommodate the hybridity in |
cultural practices of 'New Times' (Hall, 1996c),
Hegemony
Antonio Gramsci, an Italian Marxist theorist, is credited with first using the
concept of hegemony. In an examination of Gramsci's political thought, Joseph Femia
(1981: 24) points out that hegemony is where the supremacy of a social group or class
manifests itself through "intellectual and moral leadership", not through domination or
coercion. In this case, hegemony is "the predominance obtained by consent rather than
force of one class or group over other classes" which is "attained through the myriad
ways in which the institutions of civil society operate to shape, directly or indirectly, the
cognitive and affective structures whereby men perceive and evaluate problematic social
reality" (Femia, 1981: 24). Not only should hegemony be ethico-political, "this
37
ideological superiority must have solid economic roots". Femia (1981: 25) further argues
that for Gramsci, hegemony is conceived purely in terms of ideological leadership, that
when Gramsci speaks of "political hegemony" or "political leadership", he means "the
consensual aspect of political control".
A simpler way of defining hegemony is '"moral and philosophical leadership',
leadership which is attained through the active consent of major groups in a society"
(Bocock, 1986: 11). In any given historical situation, hegemony is only going to be
found as "the partial exercise of leadership of the dominant class, or alliance of class
fractions" in only some of the following spheres "but not in all of them equally
successfully all the time": in the economy, factories and offices, law and the legal
process, state educational institutions, civil society, mass media and the arts, and in
r
religions (Bocock, 1986: 94).
Mouffe (1979: 181) contends that for Gramsci, hegemony is not simply a question
of political alliance "but of a complete fusion of economic, political, intellectual and
moral objectives". This fusion, according to Mouffe, "will be brought about by one
fundamental group and groups allied to it through the intermediary of ideology when an
ideology manages to [quoting Gramsci] 'spread throughout the whole of society
determining not only united economic and political objectives but also intellectual and
moral unity'" (Mouffe, 1979: 181). She points out a hegemonic class is one which "has
been able to articulate the interests of other social groups to its own by means of
ideological struggle" and according to Gramsci, the nature of hegemony is not totally
antithetical to working class interest (Mouffe, 1979: 181), Similarly, Bocock (1986: 37)
points out that:
Hegemonic leadership involves developing intellectual, moral and philosophical
consent from all major groups in a nation. It involves an emotional dimension too,
in that those political leaders who seek hegemonic leadership must address the
sentiments of the nation-people and must not appear as strange or alien beings
who are cut off from the masses.
Other theorists have analysed Gramsci's use of the concept of hegemony and have
tried to apply it to other contexts apart from Gramsci's original usage of hegemony in
terms of legitimating the privileged position of one economic class over another. For
example, Laclau and Mouffe (1985) examined the concept of hegemony in their search
for a radical democratic politics. According to Bocock (1986: 109), the most important
element of Laclau and Mouffe's analysis of hegemony is their move away "from
38
economistic and politically oppressive, versions of communism, towards radical political
issues" which "entails reconstructing a socialist dimension to the fundamental values in
radical liberal philosophy: justice, equality, liberty, freedom of expression, peace, and the
enjoyment of life". Laclau and Mouffe view the possibility of radical coalitions, then, as
a positive feature of this new hegemony. In a similar fashion, Michael Apple (1996: 15)
argues that while hegemonic relations have usually been considered in terms of class, and
it is important to continue to think of hegemony along these lines, it is also "essential that
we always recognise the multiplicity of relations of power surrounding race, gender,
sexuality and 'ability'".
Raymond Williams' analysis of hegemony is very useful. Pointing out that
Gramsci's contribution provided an insightful emphasis on hegemony, Williams (1976:
204-205) notes:
[H]egemony supposes the existence of something which is truly total, which is
not merely secondary or superstructural, like the weak sense of ideology, but
which is lived at such a depth, which saturates the society to such an extent, and
which, as Gramsci put it, even constitutes the limit of common sense for most
people under it sway, that it corresponds tc the reality of social experience very
much more clearly than any notions derived from the formula of base and
superstructure....This notion of hegemony as deeply saturating the consciousness
of a society seems to be fundamental. And hegemony has the advantage over
general notions of totality, that it at the same time emphasizes the facts of
domination, (italicised versions my emphasis)
This notion, then, of domination by consent is critical in an understanding of the
working of hegemonic processes in education. Williams (1976: 205) makes the
important point that "educational institutions are usually the main agencies of the
transmission of an effective dominant culture, and this is now a major economic as well
as cultural activity". In his discussion of the curriculum and ideology, Apple (1979: 5),
who draws heavily on Raymond Williams' analysis of hegemony, emphasises that
hegemony "refers to an organized assemblage of meaning and practices, the central
effective and dominant system of meanings, values and actions which are lived" (sic)
Apple (1979: 6) stresses that schools not only process knowledge, they also process
people by acting as "agents of cultural and ideological hegemony". He asks the
following pertinent questions regarding the supposedly "legitimate knowledge" that is
taught in schools. Whose knowledge is it? Who selected it? Why is it organised and
taught in this way? Why is it taught to this particular group? (Apple, 1979: 7), He
further makes the point that one should be guided by linking the answers to these
questions to "competing conceptions of social and economic power and ideologies" in
order to get a clearer picture of "the linkages between economic and political power and
the knowledge made available (and not made available) to students" (Apple, 1979: 7).
Apple (1979) argues that a critical examination of the following questions also
needs to be undertaken: How does a student acquire more knowledge? Why and how are
particular aspects of the collective culture presented in school as objective, factual
knowledge? How may official knowledge concretely represent ideological configurations
of the dominant interests in a society? How do schools legitimate these limited and
partial standards of knowing as unquestioned truths? These questions are all in response
to the inescapable fact that schools are agents of social and economic reproduction and
are consequently "agents of cultural and ideological hegemony", as aptly put by Apple
(1979: 6).
This section has examined the concept of hegemony as it applies, particularly in
education, in terms of the hegemonic curriculum which is selected and framed by a
particu'^r dominant group. The next section will examine the literature on
neocolonialism. It is pertinent to note that the concepts of hegemony and neocolonialism
are related as will be demonstrated in the next section,
Neocolonialism
Altbach and Kelly (1978: 29-40) identify neocolonialism as the "highest stage of
colonialism" where a politically independent nation that was once under colonial rule,
continues to be bound, whether voluntarily or through necessity, to a European or
American society, or to a Western derivative society such as New Zealand or Australia.
Neocolonialism can range from the open distribution of foreign textbooks to the more
subtle use of foreign technical advisers on matters of policy as well as the continuation of
foreign administrative models and curricular patterns for schools with very little
alterations to the curriculum that was in place before independence (Altbach, 1995: 453).
The most insidious element of neocolonialism is that relatively little change to the
education system occurs after ex-colonised nations attain political independence.
While making the point that the concept of neocolonialism is difficult to describe
and analyse, Altbach (1995: 452), nevertheless defines the concept in two ways: first as a
continuation of old practices and second as "a planned policy of advanced nations to
maintain their influence in developing countries". Both these conceptions of
neocolonialism apply in nations which were once colonised, particularly in the
40
educational system. "Education is perhaps the most insidious and in some ways the most
cryptic of colonialist survivals, older systems now passing, sometimes imperceptibly, into
neo-colonial configurations" (Ashcroft et al., 1995: 425). In this sense, educational
apparatuses can be described as hegemonic because education occurs through
"domination by consent", in Gramsci's terms. Once structures such as the curriculum,
assessment and school organisation become entrenched and institutionalised, they have a
totalising effect on the society, Education deeply saturates "the consciousness of a
society", as Williams (1976: 40) emphasises, and becomes unquestionably what parents
want for their children, The formal education structures that were put in place during
colonial rule become the norm with the society not really critically questioning whose
knowledge it is and whether it is relevant at a particular point in time,
I argue that Fiji is in a neocolonial condition, despite decolonisation occurring in
1970, because of its continued dependence on the hegemonic social, political, economic
and educational structures that had been instituted during the period of colonial rule.
These structures were maintained and perpetuated by the local elites who had power after
political independence was attained. In any case, it is important to realise that these local
elites had no other models to work from/with. Ninety six years of colonisation is more
than enough to allow colonial hegemony to saturate the consciousness of any society.
It is pertinent to note that the works discussed in the section on hegemony are
written in the contexts of capitalist liberal nations such as in the West/Europe/America,
While they may be applicable to the situation in what is known as the Pacific Islands,
defined as 'developing' or 'underdeveloped' by the West, it may be appropriate at this
stage to discuss some of the questions raised specifically in a colonial or postcolonial
educational context.
In a volume entitled Schooling in the Pacific Islands, Thomas and Postlethwaite
(1984: 15-17) ask fourteen important questions regarding educational institutions
alongside six dimensions:
Dimension I: The Purpose or Role of Schooling:
1. Who determines the purposes?
2. From what culture are the purposes derived?
3. Whose welfare is served by the purposes?
Dimension II: The Administrative Structure of the Education System
4. Who determines the administrative structure?
5. From what culture does the structure derive? ;
Dimension HI: Educational Personnel f
6. Who decides what system will be used for recruiting, training, and promoting |
educational personnel?
41
7 What influence do people's ethnic or cultural origins have on their chances of being
recruited, trained, and promoted?
Dimension IV: Composition of Student Population
8. Who decides what system will be used for selecting and for channelling students
through the school system?
9. What influence do youths' ethnic or cultural origins have on their opportunities to be
selected and channelled?
Dimension V: Curriculum and Instructional Methodology
10. Who determines the nature of the curriculum and teaching methods?
11. What are the cultural sources of the curriculum and teaching methods?
12. Whose welfare is served by the curriculum?
Dimension VI: Financing the Education System
13. Who determines how the system will be financed?
14. What influence do people's ethnic or cultural origins have on their role in financing
education?
4
These questions enable Thomas and Postlethwaite (1984) to compare those
countries that are still colonies with those that have obtained independent status, In
theory, after independence the residents of the region, through their selected
representative, are to make the decisions. However, in a case like Fiji where political
decolonisation occurred peacefully rather than the conthctual decolonisation processes
that occurred, for example, in India and Algeria, these questions are important. They are
important because the complexities associated with neocolonialism make it difficult to
give definitive answers to these questions. Maybe it is more a question of a continuum
rather than a binary yes/no.
Perhaps it is not so much an issue over what the answers are to these questions
but, more importantly, how these questions get reframed so they are more appropriate for
the postcolonial moment. It is pertinent that Thomas and Postlethwaite asked these
questions regarding educational institutions in 1984. Since then, there has been a shift in
postcolonial theorising. As well, there have been substantial material changes in
postcolonial conditions. It is therefore appropriate to find out what these questions will
look like in the postcolonial moment. Will they remain the same? Will they be
significantly reframed to counter the effects of colonialism? Given that the curriculum
should take cognisance of postcolonial and postmodern conditions, will these questions
significantly change? In short, how can these questions be reconceptualised and reframed
in order to be appropriate for postcolonial conditions? This set of questions will be dealt
with in the section on the postcolonial curriculum and in Chapter Eight.
Frantz Fanon (1967b), in The Wretched of the Earth, warns of the pitfalls of
national consciousness when the local elites which Fanon calls the "national middle
42
class" or "national bourgeoisie" take over the hegemonic control from the imperial power
at the point of decolonisation and then replicate the conditions they had rebelled against
in the first place. Fanon (1967b: 119) cautions:
National consciousness, instead of being the all-embracing crystallization of the
innermost hopes of the whole people, instead of being the immediate and most
obvious result of the mobilization of the people, will be in any case only an empty
shell, a crude and fragile travesty of what it might have been,.., These are the
cracks in the edifice which show the process of retrogression that is so harmful
-a*
and prejudicial to national effort and national unity. We shall see that such
r
retrograde steps with all the weaknesses and serious dangers that they entail are
the historical result of the incapacity of the national middle class to see into the
reasons for that action, (italicised sections my emphases)
Fanon describes so aptly the process of neocolonialism whereby the local elites,
who may be the intellectuals or the national middle class, assert the same kind of
hegemonic control over the masses in a similar way to the domination that the coloniser
had asserted over the colonised subjects. The "cracks in the edifice" highlight the
"process of retrogression" which is what happens when the "national middle class" fails
to mobilise the people at the point of decolonisation because of the powerful impact of
neocolonialism. Fanon (1967b: 36) also describes these local elites as vigilant sentinels
ever so ready to defend "the essential qualities of the West". In a neocolonial situation
then, it is a case of one of the 'other' othering the others. Thus, all "post-colonial
societies are still subject in one way or another to overt or subtle forms of neo-colonial
domination" with the "development of new elites within independent societies, often
buttressed by neo-colonial institutions" and independence has not solved this problem
(Ashcroft et al., 1995:2).
The 'Other'
Colonised people have always been considered the 'other' of Europe not only
because of their difference but more importantly, in stressing the cultural and racial
difference of the 'other', the colonisers asserted their domination and superiority over
them. This occurred in every possible facet of the lives of the colonised. Not only was
this evident in daily life in terms of (non)relations and (non)interactions between the two
groups of people, but stereotyping and discrimination against the colonised people
became institutionalised in the structures of colonial society. As well, the 'other' was
captured in the coloniser's imagination and discursive practices. Ashcroft et al. (1995:
85) put it this way:
43
In both conquest and colonisation, texts and textuality played a major part.
European texts - anthropologies, histories, fiction, captured the non-European
subject within European frameworks which read his or her alterity as terror or
lack. Within the complex relations of colonialism these representations were
reprojected to the colonised - through formal education or general colonial
cultural relations - as authoritative pictures of themselves. Concomitantly
representations of Europe and Europeans within this textual archive were situated
as normative. Such texts - the representations of Europe to itself, and the
representation of others to Europe - were not accounts of different people and
societies, but a projection of European fears and desires masquerading as
scientific/'objective' knowledges.
Both Abdul JanMohamed (1995) and George Lamming (1995) emphasise the
importance of colonial literary texts as sites of cultural control by colonialists.
JanMohamed argues that the colonialist literary text is highly effective in determining the
'native' by fixing him/her under the sign of the Other. "Faced with an incomprehensible
and multifaceted alterity" due to differences in race, language, social customs, cultural
values and modes of production, the colonialist literary text "valorizes the superiority of
European cultures, of the collective process that has mediated that representation"
(JanMohamed, 1995: 18-19). With his military superiority, the colonialist "ensures a
complete projection of his self on the Other: exercising his assumed superiority, he
destroys without any significant qualms the effectiveness of indigenous economic, social,
political, legal, and moral systems and imposes his own versions of these structures on
the Other" (JanMohamed, 1995: 22). Through the text, the moral authority of the
coloniser is articulated and justified by seeing the 'native' and representing him/her as
inferior in every regard, what JanMohamed terms the Manichean allegory. JanMohamed
contends that those in the category of Third World writers are in fact writing back in
terms of negating "the prior European negation of colonized cultures" as well as the
"adoption and creative modification of Western languages and artistic forms in
conjunction with indigenous languages and forms" by these writers (JanMohamed, 1995:
23).
Zia Sardar, Ashis Nandy and Merryl Davies (1993) describe how colonised
people were always defined as barbaric, uncivilised, savage, as 'them' rather than 'us' in
the European colonial literature. They point out that the process of generating Otherness
became a global project after Columbus first landed in the Americas in the late fifteenth
century. The colonised people became more "distorted and fictional", the further they
were from the European mainland. "Western tendency was to consider terra incognita as
44
being either empty or demonic" (Sardar et al, 1993: 40). These writers describe the
encounter between Europe and the Others of Europe as deadly because "Europe's
imposition of itself on the New World unleashed a myriad cultural and psychological
forces, many of them not yet fully manifest even after 500 years" (Sardar et al., 1993:
83), They identify three such forces: one, the social engineering of the natives' culture
and human nature to be as close to that of Europe in their manners, habits, mind and
impulses. The second is identified as the West portraying itself as the measure for
everything valuable both culturally and psychologically which the Others need to emulate
for progress and development. Third, the sense of identity of the Others in the modern
world has been displaced, Sardar et al. (1993; 90) sum it up this way: "In the modern
world,...the others have now been confronted by a dual incomprehensibility: the
difference between the West and their actual self; the difference between their actual self
and the invented self Europe gave them". Gayatri Spivak (1995: 24-25) describes the
Western project of constituting the colonial subject as Other as "epistemic violence".
T* is interesting and altogether not surprising that in cases where the ex-colonised
nation gains political independence, the non-indigenous people, if they are not the
dominant group, are othered more or less in the same way that the 'natives' had been
othered under colonial rule. After all, after many decades of being subjected to
discrimination and the blatant and subtle displays of power and domination, once the
roles are reversed for the colonised subjects, they in turn will display similar
characteristics they had learned from their colonial 'masters'.
Voice
Who can speak for the oppressed, the suppressed, the exploited, the marginalised,
the colonised? Who or what is the legitimate voice that can represent the history of a
people, a nation? These are critical questions in postcolonial studies. Colonialism
deliberately did not allow 'natives' or 'others', that is the colonised subjects, any space to
speak for themselves and of themselves in any form, whether in material or discursive
practices, in order to maintain domination and power over them. The postcolonial
project, therefore, is to provide colonised subjects with 'voice' to speak, to talk back to
the Western representation of them in the history books, in imaginary texts and in
colonial discourse and to be heard above the silencing that is characteristic of colonial
texts.
45
Commonwealth literature or Third World Literature for example, is a site where
postcolonial writers can have voice and can speak back to colonial representations of
them. It is also an important site for resistance to and subversion of colonial oppression.
Postcolonial theory is another site where postcolonial subjects can write back. However,
it is my view that the only ones privileged enough to get their work into print are those
'white' theorists and those 'black' intellectuals/writers who write from the metropolitan
centres that had once colonised them. They are either exiles or diasporic migrants who
have trained in the intellectual ways of the West. The privileging of text production, in
my view, automatically marginalises those who reflect on matters postcolonial in
disadvantaged production sites by denying them the written or speaking voice. But does
this mean that there are no other voices out there than can be heard, that can speak?
Spivak (1995), in her breakthrough article "Can the Subaltern Speak" argues that
the subaltern cannot know or speak itself because of its heterogenous identity. By
"subaltern", Spivak meant the oppressed subject or more generally, those of "inferior
rank" (Gandhi, 1998). Spivak says: "For the 'true' subaltern group, whose identity is its
difference, there is no unrepresentable subaltern subject that can know and speak itself
(Spivak, 1995: 27). Spivak is concerned here with articulating the difficulties and
contradictions associated with constructing a "speaking position" for the subaltern and for
her, the subaltern is in no position to "know and speak itself and if it did, it would
amount to essentialist fiction (Ashcroft et al., 1995: 8).
In contrast, Benita Parry (1995) is very critical of Spivak's theorisation on the
subaltern which disables the colonised and effectively renders him/her voiceless, She
puts it this way: "Spivak in her own writings severely restricts (eliminates?) the space in
which the colonized can be written back into history, even when 'interventionist
possibilities' are exploited through the deconstructive strategies devised by the post-
colonial intellectual" (Parry, 1995: 40). She adds "For Spivak, imperialism's epistemic
bellicosity decimated the old culture and left the colonized without the ground from
which they could utter confrontational words" (Parry, 1995: 43).
Dipesh Chakrabarty (1996: 223) problematizes "the idea of'Indians' representing
themselves in history", He argues that "in so far as the academic discourse of history -
that is, 'history' as a discourse produced at the institutional site of the university - is
concerned, 'Europe' remains the sovereign, theoretical subject of all histories, including
the ones we call 'Indian', 'Chinese', 'Kenyan'" and by extension, 'Fijian'. He adds:
"There is a peculiar way in which all these other histories tend to become variations on a
46
master narrative that could be called "the history of Europe". In this sense, 'Indian'
history itself is in a position of subalternity; one can only articulate subaltern subject
positions in the name of this history". What Chakrabarty seems to be saying is that all
histories outside of Europe are subordinated to European 'history' and can never really
stand on their own or have an 'authentic' position. It is clear to me that the hegemony
that is present in this instance is just an additional example of the neocolonial practices
that continue in ex-colonies despite political decolonisation but this time in 'natives'
representing their own histories. What this seems to suggest is that the power and
authority of Europe is still so subtly pervasive that one can only articulate one's voice
within a European framework, never outside of this.
I am particularly concerned about the written or spoken voices of the once-
colonised subalterns themselves who reside in their own countries. As Leela Gandhi
(1998: ix) has pointed out, postcolonial theory currently addresses the needs of the
Western academy and "what counts as 'marginal' in relation to the West has often been
central and foundational in the non-West", For ex-colonised subjects, the insider/outsider
and the self/other binarisms attacked and defended in Western academic discourses are
ones I would like to critique, I would particularly like to examine these binarisms from
the viewpoint of information and power and from the viewpoint of knowledge
production, publication and dissemination, Is it possible for subaltern voices to be heard
in the centres of intellectual debate such as England, America, New Zealand and
Australia, for example? I have no doubt that if they pushed hard enough, they would be
able to get their works published locally. However, in terms of making an impact on
postcolonial theory from the margins of empire so to speak, in privileged publication
centres, is it possible that works of indigenous intellectuals which are grounded in local
contexts, for instance, can be recognised as contributing to postcolonial theory? Can this
occur without using the weapons of the West such as the strict adherence to theoretical
and rigidly analytical papers that appear in academic journals? Is it indeed possible for
different ways of knowing and telling to be accepted in Western academic discourse?
For me, something of critical importance that I feel should be addressed by this
Western discourse artefact called postcolonial studies or theory is for it to branch out
from the academic arena to the public sphere. I would like to see people who are not
academics or writers participate more in postcolonial discourse. I think postcolonial
theory would have more credibility if, in addition to the theorising about the effects of
colonisation, we actually hear the voices of those colonised. An example of this would
47
be indigenous people talking or writing about their life experiences or life histories, or
specific excerpts which describe one particular experience. Of course, all this needs to be
grounded in the effects and after-effects of the colonial experience. I think it is the moral
responsibility of the intellectual, both locally and globally, to encourage, support and
facilitate the dissemination of works on the margins of production to the centre.
I thus would like to see more tangible contributions from people talking or
writing about the continual conflict in identity that they are undergoing as a result of the
effect that colonisation and today, modernisation/globalisation has on their lives. I would
also like to get the views of the older generation and their comparisons of the old and the
new way of life. I would like to see the once colonised subject talking or writing their
way through how they might in fact effect agency for themselves in order to understand:
• the process and effects of colonisation on their lives;
• how they have resisted this if at all (eg,, subversion, hybridity, opposition, duplicity);
• that they are empowered to do something about it.
The issue of voice is one of critical importance in postcolonial discourse. As bell
hooks (1989: 9) puts it, "moving from silence into speech for the oppressed, the
colonized, the exploited and those who stand and struggle side by side a gesture of
defiance that heals, that makes new life and new growth possible". While recognising the
ambiguities and tensions that are inherent in questions of representations, my thesis is a
deliberate strategy to create a space for speaking/writing voices for Indigenous Fijians; on
matters concerning their local contexts. 1 argue in Chapter Eight that this thesis is one
that enacts hybridity, is one where the academic binarism of analysis/narratives needs to
be dismantled, where it is possible, in fact, for indigenous voices to be spoken and be
heard, both in local and international sites. For as Gandhi (1998: 4) has put it:
Postcolonialism can be seen as a theoretical resistance to the mystifying amnesia
of the colonial aftermath. It is a disciplinary project devoted to the academic task
of revisiting, remembering and crucially, interrogating the colonial past. The
process of returning to the colonial scene discloses a relationship of reciprocal
antagonism and desire between coloniser and colonised.
It is the process of "interrogating the colonial past" to provide voice and space for
colonial subalterns in Fiji that is one of my concerns in this thesis.
Strategic Essentialism
Gayatri Spivak (1990, 1995) is credited with the term "strategic essentialism".
Essentialism is a characteristic that postmodernism shuns, In the multiplicities and
complexities that abound in every aspect of the postmodernist moment, it is
unfashionable to be essentialist, totalising or deterministic. So what does essentialism
mean in postcolonial theory? "Essentialism is the assumption that groups, categories or
classes have one or several defining features exclusive to all members of that category"
(Ashcroft, Griffiths and Tiffin, 1998: 77). Peter Childs and Patrick Williams (1997; 159)
identify three instances, the first to do with language having an essential meaning; the
second where there is a need by postcolonial groups or nations "to achieve an identity
uncontaminated by universalist or Eurocentric concepts and images"; and the third is in
terms of Spivak's consistent questioning of essentialism as a "globalizing, ahistorical
approach". With regard to the language example, Childs and Williams (1997: 159) note
that esccntialism is the belief that "language has an essential meaning—that there is a
concrete, specific, unchanging meaning for a term such as 'British' or 'West Indian': as
opposed to a belief that words take on their meanings through usage and discursive
power", They add that "Such essentializing becomes the basis for exclusion and
exploitation through a rhetoric of verisimilitude and authenticity that asserts what is 'real'
or 'true'".
However, at some contingent, historic-specific moment, it may be strategic to be
essentialist in order to effect agency or voice for disadvantaged or marginalised groups,
Spivak (1990: 109), in an interview, puts it this way: "It is not possible to be non-
essentialistic...; the subject is always centred". She adds that because of this point, a
person "can self-consciously use this irreducible moment of essentialism as part of one's
strategy" which can be used as part of a "good" as well as a "bad" strategy and "can be
used self-consciously as well as unselfconsciously" (Spivak, 1990: 109). A strategy is
not the same as a theory: it is directed, combative and particular to a situation (Childs and
Williams, 1997). Spivak (1990) also argues that no representation can take place without
essentialism.
Strategic essentialism is therefore "the political use of categories rooted in the
natural and the universal" and Spivak's argument is that one can make a choice "when
interrogating the border between the theoretical and the practical in certain situations"
(Childs and Williams, 1997: 157). A strategic use of essentialism is when "You pick up
49
the universal that will give you the power to fight against the other side, and what you are
throwing away by doing that is your theoretical purity" (Spivak, 1990: 12). However, a
key problem for postcolonial theory and historiographical practice is as follows: "When
almost all available accounts and documents are written by the colonizers, or an
indigenous elite, how does the historiographer give a voice or an agency to those sections
of the colonized who participated in anti-colonial resistance?" (Childs and Williams,
1997: 162). Notwithstanding this limitation, the strategic use of essentialism is one
which postcolonial theorists (for example, a written speaking voice in academia) and the
indigenous people, elite and otherwise (recovery of historica! voice), can use to effect
voice and agency for themselves in order to recover the voice, space and the dignity of
what I would call "knowing themselves and of themselves by themselves".
Cultural Identity
A person can have different identities: personal, physical, social, cultural,
economic, political and religious (Tagi, 1991). To these categories can be added ethnic,
racial and national identities. Linnekin and Poyer (1990; make the distinction between
Western nations and Pacific Island nation states regarding a person's identity. They
argue that the Europeans and Americans tend to see ethnicity as a matter of 'blood' and
ancestry (called the Mendelian model) whereas Pacific Island people generally identify
themselves according to the environment, behaviour and performance of others (called
the Lamarckian model). The latter is very much interactional and emphasises
relationships with others whereas the Western "paradigms of group identity rely both on a
biological theory of inheritance and on a psychological model of a discrete, bounded
individual" (Linnekin and Poyer, 1990: 7). However, the processes of colonisation and
westernisation have encouraged Pacific Islanders to define themselves according to the
Western model when it comes to defining themselves as ethnic groups. We can say that
the processes of colonisation, westernisation and now globalisation have produced (and
will continue to produce) hybrid human subjects
By contrast, Stuart Hall (1996a: 2) responds in two ways. First, he makes the
point that identity is a concept "operating 'under erasure' in the interval between reversal
and emergence; an idea which cannot be thought in the old way, but without which
certain key questions cannot be thought at all". Second, Hall asks "where, in relation to
what set of problems, does the irreducibility of the concept, identity, emerge?" (Hall,
1996a: 2). Hall sees the answer to this question "in its centrality to the question of
50
agency and politics". He emphasises that the concept of identity is not "an essentialist
but a strategic and positional one" (Hall, 1996a: 3).
In his discussion on cultural identity, Hall (1996b: 110420) offers two different
ways of thinking about it; the first in terms of one shared culture which "already exists,
transcending place, time, history and culture" and the second in terms of undergoing
constant transformation "subject to the continuous 'play' of history, culture and power".
In the first category, Hall (1996b: 110-111) defines cultural identity as:
a sort of collective 'one true self, hiding inside the many other, more superficial
or artificially imposed 'selves', which people with a shared history and ancestry
hold in common. Within the terms of this definition, our cultural identities
provide us, as 'one people', with stable, unchanging and continuous frames of
reference and meaning, beneath the shifting divisions and vicissitudes of our one
actual history.
Hall points out that his second conception of cultural identity refers to the
intervention of history which constitutes "what we have become". In this sense, cultural
identity "is a matter of 'becoming' as well as of 'being'. Cultural identities belong to
both the future as well as the past". And "Far from being eternally fixed in some
essentialist past, they are subject to the continuous 'play' of history, culture and power",
For Hall, then, cultural identities "are the names we give to the different ways we are
positioned by, and position ourselves within, the narratives of the past" (Hall, 1996b:
112). In an interview with Kuan-Hsing Chen (Morley and Chen, 1996), Hall makes the
point that cultural identity is not fixed, that it is always hybrid. He puts it this way:
I think cultural identity is not fixed, it's always hybrid. But this is precisely
because it comes out of very specific historical formations, out of very specific
histories and cultural repertoires of enunciation, that it can constitute a
'positionality', which we call, provisionally, identity. It's not just anything. So
each of those identity-stories is inscribed in the positions we take up and identify
with, and we have to live this ensemble of identity-positions in all its
specificities". (In Morley and Chen, 1996: 502)
According to Padmini Mongia (1996: 11), Hall "emphasises the necessity of
understanding different notions of identity that remain sensitive to specific locations and
moments; he is thus able to argue for a strategic essentialism that has served a crucial role
in anti-colonial struggles of the past and continues to do so today". The notion, then, of
cultural identity and its relationship to a strategic essentialism is an important one.
What is obvious from the above discussion is that notions of identity need not be
essentialist as Hall (1996b) has put it. Rather, identity can be invoked in "a strategic and
51
positional" way. The important point that I feel Hall is making is that identities are
always hybrid because they are continuously subjected to the interplay of history, culture
and power. As he said, identity is "becoming" as well as "being". If one is, and is still,
in the process of becoming, the resultant effect would have to be a hybrid identity. If we
accept the above, then it is increasingly clear that there is no such thing as a 'pure' or
fixed identity, that in fact, each person lives an "ensemble of identity positions in all its
specificities" as Hall has described it. Cultural identities are therefore "always hybrid".
Hybridity/Third Space
Homi Bhabha's theorisation of the concepts of hybridity, ambivalence and
mimicry "have become touchstones for debates over colonial discourse; anti-colonial
resistance, and post-colonial identity" (Childs and Williams, 1997: 123-124). Bhabha
(1994: 112) defines hybridity in the colonial moment in this way:
Hybridity is the sign of the productivity of colonial power, its shifting forces and
fixities; it is the name for the strategic reversal of the process of domination
through disavowal (that is, the production of discriminatory identities that secure
the 'pure' and original identity of authority)....For the colonial hybrid is the
articulation of the ambivalent space where the rite of power is enacted on the site
of desire, making its objects at once disciplinary and disseminatory - or, in my
mixed metaphor, a negative transparency.
Bhabha (1994: 114) further notes:
Hybridity is a problematic of colonial representation and individuation that
reverses the effects of the colonialist disavowal, so that other 'denied' knowledges
enter upon the dominant discourse and estrange the basis of its authority - its rule
ofrecognition.
For Bhabha, hybridity does not indicate corruption or decline but rather, it is "the
most common and effective form of subversive oppositions since it displays the
'necessary deformation and displacement of all sites of discrimination and domination'"
(Ashcroft et al., 1995: 9). Ashcroft et al. note that Bhabha's argument is that the colonial
space is an agnostic one because the relationship between the coloniser and the colonised
"becomes one of constant, if implicit, contestation and opposition" (p. 9). In a paper
titled 'Cultural Diversity and Cultural Differences', Bhabha (1995) introduces the notion
of the Third Space of enunciation in this manner:
The pact of interpretation is never simply an act of communication between the I
and the You designated in the statement. The production of meaning requires that
these two places be mobilized in the passage through a Third Space, which
52
represents both the general conditions of language and the specific implication on
the utterance in a performative and institutional strategy of which I cannot 'in
itself be conscious. What this unconscious relation introduces is an ambivalence
in the act of interpretation....(p. 208)
According to Bhabha, it is this Third Space, this "in-between space" which
"makes it possible to begin envisaging national, anti-nationalist, histories of the 'people'.
It is in this space that we will find those words with which we can speak of Ourselves and
Others. And by exploring this hybridity, this 'Third Space', we may elude the politics of
polarity and emerge as the others of our selves" (Bhabha, 1995: 209). Robert Young
(1995: 22) says this about Bhabha: "For Bhabha, hybridity becomes the moment in which
the discourse of colonial authority loses its univocal grip on meaning and finds itself
open to the trace of the language of the other, enabling the critic to trace complex
movements of disarming alterity in the colonial text". Young (1995: 26-27) elaborates
on Bhabha's concept of hybridity by arguing that hybridity "makes difference into
sameness and sameness into difference, but in a way that makes the same no longer the
same, me difference no longer simply different". He further notes that hybridity
"consists of a bizarre binate operation, in which each impulse is qualified against the
other, forcing momentary forms of dislocation and displacement into complex economies
of agonistic reticulation" (Young, 1995: 26-27).
How does the theorising on hybridity or third space relate to cultural identity for
decolonised peoples in postcolonial sites? As Hall (1996b) has argued, cultural identities
are continuously transformed by the interaction of history, culture and power. One's
identity is, therefore, never static or fixed as such but is being continually transformed.
So while one can have a shared culture with a "shared history and ancestry" which
provide "stable, unchanging and continuous frames of reference and meaning" (Hall,
1996b: 111), at the same time, one's sense of identity is undergoing transformation. As
Hall (1996b: 112) so aptly describes it, "Cultural identity...is a matter of 'becoming' as
well as of 'being'". For me, Hall's conception of cultural identity fits in well with what
Bhabha is saying. Although Bhabha is talking about the hybridity in identity and power
relations when the colonised person subverts the authority of the colonial text and makes
the relationship an ambivalent one, one can apply this to postcolonial contexts in the
manner I have interpreted Hall, My interpretation of Bhabha is that the colonisers failed
to completely inscribe subservient subject positions on the colonised because the
53
outcome of any colonial-colonised situation will be a hybridised one: neither identity
staying quite the way the other perceived it to be.
The approach to third space or hybridity that is most appropriate for this research
project is provided by bell hooks (1990), an Afro-American intellectual. In her
discussion about issues of space and location she talks about "spaces of radical openness"
where one chooses to resist against notions of domination and oppression. In this
conception, "this space of radical openness is a margin - a profound edge" which is "also
the site of radical possibility, a space of resistance". And it is this marginality which she
names "as a central location for the production of a counter-hegemonic discourse"
(hooks, 1990: 149), hooks emphasises that for oppressed, exploited, colonised people, it
is critical to understand marginality as a position and place of resistance. She makes the
distinction between the marginality that is imposed by oppressive structures and the
choice of marginality as a site of resistance, She aptly describes it in this manner:
I am located in the margin. I make a definite distinction between that marginality
which is imposed by oppressive structures and that marginality one chooses as
site of resistance - as location of radical openness and possibility. This site of
resistance is continually formed in that segregated culture of opposition that is our
critical response to domination. We come to this space through suffering and
pain, through struggle....We are transformed, individually, collectively, as we
make radical creative space which affirms and sustains our subjectivity, which
gives us a new location from which to articulate our sense of the world, (hooks,
1990: 153)
Edward Soja (1996), a geographer, describes bell hooks' work on "Thirdspace" as
"the new cultural politics of difference and identity that is re-awakening the
contemporary world to the powerfully symbolic spaces of representation, to struggles
over the right to be different, to a new politics of location and a radical spatial
subjectivity and praxis that is postmodern from the start" (Soja, 1996: 84), It is works
such as this that create a space of radical openness from which "to build communities of
resistance and renewal that cross the boundaries and double-cross the binaries of race,
gender, class, and all oppressively Othering categories" (Soja, 1996; 84).
Postcolonial Curriculum
There has been very little theory and practice on the concept of the postcolonial
curriculum. For me, there are two critical issues that a postcolonial curriculum must
address. First, it must take into account the need to value the cultural identity of every
student in the class including particularly, Indigenous Fijian students (Hall's first
54
conception of cultural identity that is of "being"). As well, it should be concerned with
addressing the question of how all students, Indigenous Fijians included, are going to
reinvent themselves as hybrid, complex and dynamic human subjects in these new,
changing times. This would take cognisance of Hall's second conception of cultural
identity as a state of "becoming".
At this point, I refer the reader back to Thomas and Postlethwaite's questions on
educational institutions at the point of decolonisation (See page 43). I had asked whether
these questions were still applicable in the postcolonial moment or whether they should
be reframed, My view is that they need to be transformed into the following set of
questions:
• What constitutes a postcolonial curriculum?
• Why is there a necessity to reinvent such a curriculum?
• What values and ideals would it uphold? What would be the rationale of the
postcolonial curriculum?
• What are its aims?
• What knowledge, attitudes and skills would this curriculum emphasise?
• What language would this curriculum be taught in?
• Who would decide what the content is?
• Whose interests would such a curriculum serve?
• Who benefits from such a curriculum?
• What are the social, educational, economic and political implications of developing
and implementing such a curriculum?
The answers to all the questions I have raised here would form the framework for
a model of the reinvented postcolonial curriculum which will be discussed in the final
chapter.
After these questions are answered, another set of issues needs to be to addressed
to ensure that the curriculum is a democratic one that does not marginalise the knowledge
and cultural systems of any ethnic/cultural group living in Fiji. One such question has to
do with whether the needs and aspirations of all the communities living in Fiji are met.
Another critical issue concerns hegemony. How does a society ensure that the
hegemonic practices of the colonial past are not perpetuated and maintained in this
reinvented curriculum? As well, how does the society ensure that hegemony favouring
one group over another does not replace the old hegemony?
55
The curriculum in Fiji has gone through two phases: colonial (1835-1970) and
neocolonial (1970 to the present). My firm conviction is that the curriculum should
undergo another phase. I will argue in Chapter Eight that Fiji's present curriculum does
not meet the needs of all the communities and consequently needs to be overhauled and
transformed. I will also argue that another justification for this transformation or
reinvention is the need to meet the challenges of the 'New Times' that the global
community is facing, particularly in view of the dynamic technological and
communication 'revolution' sweeping the world. The Fiji school curriculum should
reflect the inescapable 'truth' that the people are living in different times.
Theorising Social Justice and AA in Postcolonial Contexts: the Case Study Proposed
I have argued in the first section of this chapter that traditional notions of AA in
the way they have been applied and theorised in Western educational contexts (and aped
in postcolonial societies) are limited. I argued in the second part that recent postcolonial
theory/discourse may provide conceptual and analytical resources and insights that
provide a more comprehensive notion of AA that is more appropriate for the Fiji context.
I now turn to a tentative exploration of how we might theorise AA and social justice in
postcolonial contexts with specific reference to the Fiji context.
In Western liberal democratic nation states, the concepts of AA and social justice
are intricately bound up with groups who comprise the minority population in terms of
numbers and opportunities open to them (Edwards, 1995). Not only are ethnic migrant
groups included in this minority category but indigenous groups also, The debate on AA
and social justice, internationally, has centred on whether or not specific legal and
institutional interventions aimed at increasing access for minority groups are desirable
and indeed essential. The idea of social justice, of which AA is part, as applied in the
West, is a contested and controversial concept (Rizvi and Lingard, 1996). Indeed,
proponents of AA are now arguing for a politics of difference that acknowledges and
affirms rather than marginalises difference, that promotes a heterogeneity of perspectives,
that is liberating and enabling for affected groups (I.M. Young, 1990, Yeatman, 1994).
However, the concept of AA as understood in Western countries is somewhat
different in the context of Fiji. It is true that AA was considered by two Postcolonial
Governments as necessary to provide equality of opportunity and access for the
indigenous population who were identified as disadvantaged in education and
employment. However, target groups in Fiji differ in two respects from that of minority
56
populations in Western countries. First, Indigenous Fijians are not a subaltern minority
like the Aboriginals in Australia, Maoris in New Zealand or American Indians in the
United States of America. At the point of decolonisation, Indigenous Fijians, together
with the Indo-Fijians, were the two dominant population groups in Fiji. Second,
**• Indigenous Fijians have always held political power from the point of political
decolonisation. In this regard, the question of AA in the Fiji context may or may not
have parallels with its framing in those contexts where the group seen to be the
.„> beneficiary o f A A is 'diasporic', or politically disenfranchised.
H o w then might w e theorise A A and s o c i a l justice i n postcolonial contexts? W h a t
n e w insights c a n this research project provide? This thesis is n o t only a critique o f A A
but, j u s t as importantly, it attempts to re-envision A A specifically in the Fiji context.
U s i n g a process of historical analysis and d r a w i n g o n the c o n c e p t u a l resources p r o v i d e d
by postcolonial theory, the thesis attempts to reconceptualise A A in n e w conditions in
n e w times, Using the case study approach, I h o p e to p r o v i d e a detailed and textured
»* description and micro-analysis cf AA in Fiji. T h e concept o f situated knowledges is o n e
that is critical in postcolonial theory, thus b y using the c a s e study approach, it is m y
intention to offer insights and new meanings that m a y b e useful in the generation o f
h y p o t h e s e s and theory building.
^ In t h e next chapter, I provide a detailed description a n d analysis of Fiji's colonial
history in order to set the contextual background of t h e s t u d y . Since t h e issue o f
representation is critical in postcolonial theory, I explore t h e w a y Fiji's pre-colonial a n d
colonial history have been textually represented. T h e i s s u e of resistance is also
1 important , thus , in th e next chapter, questions o f resistanc e a n d agenc y are also explored .
Since the primary instruments of colonial p o w e r a n d control a r e history, language a n d
i education, I particularly emphasise these in t h e next c h a p t e r t o show h o w they w e r e
^ manifested in the Fiji context, I also provide s o m e b a c k g r o u n d information on w h a t I
, perceive to b e important aspects of Fiji's c o n t e m p o r a r y c o n d i t i o n s , arguing in particular
I that Fiji is a colonial construct and that the neocolonial configurations of w h a t is h a s
arisen o u t o f what was, demonstrating that it is primarily F i j i ' s colonial history that h a s
shaped its past and present and will no doubt i m p i n g e on i t s future. In t h e last section o f
the next chapter, I specifically discuss Fiji's educational s y s t e m , focussing o n racial
inequalities in schooling and how A A was thought about, t a l k e d about, implemented a n d
w h a t s o m e o f its outcomes have been.
57
There are some important questions that this thesis attempts to answer. Was AA
in Fiji an historically appropriate response to the social and educational inequalities
created by its colonial past? Is it morally just for AA to be instituted for a majority
group? What are the implications for social justice when AA is race-based, rather than
based on gender and/or class? How was AA implemented and what have been its
outcomes? How does one counter the hegemony that is sure to creep in when race-based
policies are decided by the dominant beneficiary group? Are there other alternatives for
AA in Fiji that may be more appropriate for Fiji in the 1990s? The answers to these
questions will be addressed in Chapters Six and Eight.
Other questions also need addressing. For instance, what has been the basis for
AA in Fiji? The category of race continues to hold dominance in the social and political
fabric of national life. Since comparisons in the educational performance of Indigenous
Fijians and 'Others' have underpinned AA practices, the important questions to ask are:
How relevant or appropriate is the use of comparisons based on race in the 1990s
compared to the 1970s and 1980s? What is the nature of the 'educational gap' and is this
still an appropriate national strategy to use as an argument for the continuation of AA?
What are the underlying causes of racial inequalities in schooling? How useful are
explanations given for the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians and how do they hold
theoretically? This set of questions will be answered in Chapter Five.
Indeed, what should be done to counter inequalities in schooling? What reforms
to policy, people and school should be undertaken to improve on the lot of Indigenous
Fijians? What can different agencies do to improve on the educational performance of
Indigenous Fijians? Chapter Seven deals with reforms that informants have decided are
necessary if AA is to work and if Indigenous Fijians are to do better in schooling,
For a postcolonial thesis, issues of voice and agency are of critical importance.
As stated in Chapter One, one of the aims of the study is to enable informants to speak
and be heard. Just as importantly the questions of whether this is a subaltern thesis and
where it is heard and not heard are addressed in Chapter Eight. Other critical questions
asked in the thesis are how salient is the use of neocolonial educational structures to
explain underachievement, how colonially hegemonic is the current curriculum and can
there be another more appropriate and culturally democratic curriculum that is not
symbolically violent? These questions are addressed particularly in Chapter Eight.
In this chapter, I have explicated the theoretical frameworks that underpin the
thesis. I highlighted the limitations of traditional ways of thinking of AA in Western
58
capitalist nations and argued that postcolonial theoretical resources may be more useful
and appropriate in providing a broader and more comprehensive conception of AA in
postcolonial societies like Fiji, In the next chapter, I undertake a postcolonial
interrogation of Fiji's pre-colonial, colonial and postcolonial contexts to lay the
groundwork for a better understanding of the way AA in Fiji was conceptualised,
implemented and talked about.
59
CHAPTER THREE
CONTEXTUALISING THE STUDY: PRECOLONIAL, COLONIAL,
POSTCOLONIAL FIJI
In the previous chapter, I laid out the theoretical frameworks that underpinned the
thesis. I first outlined the discourse on AA and demonstrated its limitations in
understanding AA in Fiji. I then explicated the postcolonial theoretical framework as it is
postcolonial conceptual resources that provide a broader and comprehensive
understanding of AA in decolonised or postcolonial sites. However, in order to
understand the origin and background of AA in education in Fiji, one needs to understand
Fiji's history because the need for AA arose in response to the educational and other
social inequalities created by Fiji's colonial history. This chapter, then, will explicate the
impact of Fiji's colonial history to lay this understanding. It has five foci.
First, I critically re-explore representations of Fiji's pre-colonial history, not only
as a privileging act, but more importantly as an act of resistance against the primacy of
colonial representations and discourses that constructed the category and entity called
Fiji. Second, I provide a brief overview of contemporary social, political and economic
conditions in Fiji. Third, I provide an analysis of Fiji's colonial history, including
resistance to colonial rule. Fourth, I argue that despite political independence, Fiji's
educational system is an instrument of colonialism and the practices of colonial
reproduction are still in play at this historical juncture. In particular, I analyse colonial
and postcolonial representations of Indigenous Fijian underachievement. Finally, I will
show that AA in education was a deliberate intervention on the part of a newly
independent government to assert Fiji's postcoloniality.
This chapter, therefore, will be a review of economic, political and social
conditions in precolonial, colonial and postcolonial Fiji. My principal intention is to
critically discuss Fiji's history using conceptual resources provided by postcolonial
theory. I will make the case that colonialism did not end at independence but that
neocolonialism continues to pervade all structures—economic, political, social, and
cultural. I will argue particularly that colonial reproduction is still part of Fiji's education
system which has maintained colonial structures of curriculum, pedagogy, organisation,
administration and assessment. AA policy, therefore, in education was Fiji's way of
countering the effects of its colonial history and asserting its postcoloniality.
60
Precolonial Fiji
Since there is no written historical record by Indigenous Fijians, information on
pre-contact conditions can be gleaned from the writings of Western historians,
anthropologists, archaeologists as well as the earlier writings of the colonialists in Fiji,
mainly in the form of missionaries and those working in the colonial services such as
governors and bureaucrats. Whether these writings are an 'authentic1 reflection of what
existed before contact with the white man is contested. There are no written records in
the language of the Indigenous Fijians by the Indigenous Fijians themselves to verify this
because they did not have a form of writing prior to Western contact. These writings by
non-Indigenous Fijians would also be problematic because their interpretations are drawn
from a perspective informed and influenced by Western cultural values, norms and
attitudes. They would also be problematic in the sense that what they write would be
accepted by the Indigenous Fijians themselves as an authentic and authoritative view of
themselves. In other words, what is represented by the English written word becomes
internalised as the 'real' and '[me1 representation of the history of the indigenous people.
While Western representations of Indigenous Fijian culture and world view are
problematic, the irony is that they nevertheless will be used, albeit critically, in this
attempt to try and describe what it must have been like during pre-white-man-contact
times.
It is erroneous to believe that Fiji had no history prior to contact with the white
'man'. The history books written from the perspective of the 'West' refer to the pre-
colonial period as 'pre-history'. This is problematic because it assumes a history relative
to contact with Western man. The pre-colonial history of Fiji is still being reconstructed.
However, archaeological and other evidence show that Fiji could have been settled as
early as 1290 BC (Frost, 1979: 65).
Where did the ancestors of the first Indigenous Fijians come from? This is still an
area of educated speculation, but archaeological and linguistic evidence seem to indicate
that they migrated from the direction of South East Asia, with Indonesia being the hiving
off point of the people in Oceania (Tudor, 1962; Derrick, 1946). One source postulates
that the ancestors of the present Fijians were first Papuan, then Melanesian and finally,
Polynesian, in that order (Tudor, 1962: 47). According to Tudor (1962), the Papuans
were the first to populate the Melanesian chain of islands, beginning with New Guinea
and continuing eastward. It is not certain whether they reached Fiji. Tudor (1962)
postulates that maybe seven thousand years ago, the Melanesians migrated further east,
61
reached Fiji and became the forefathers of the current Indigenous Fijians. Still according
to Tudor (1962), the Polynesians, sailing along on a different route, arrived in Fiji some
thousands of years later and settled mainly in the coastal areas of Fiji as well as in the
eastern islands of the island group. The first Indigenous Fijians sighted by the first
Westerners seem to be the products of the mingling of Melanesian-Polynesian 'stock'.
Other sources (e.g., Howard and Durutalo, 1987), drawing their conclusions from
archaeological and linguistic evidence, are in agreement that the ancestors of today's
Indigenous Fijians were 'Melanesian' and 'Polynesian' in origin,
Many Indigenous Fijians generally believe that they are directly descended from a
migration that brought the God chiefs Lutunasobasoba and Degei from the ancient
homeland and landed on the north-west coast of Viti Levu (Gravelle, 1980, Bk One;
Derrick, 1946). Indigenous legends report that Lutunasobasoba died and that Degei's
many sons founded families with the original Melanesian women and migrated to other
parts of Fiji. According to Peter France (1969), this widely known legend only made its
appearance in 1892 when a Fijian paper, Mar Mata, organised a competition to trace the
origins of the Indigenous Fijians and so out of the winning entry, the legend of Degei was
born. France (1969: 4) argues that this "myth" of Indigenous Fijian origins "seems to be
a product of acculturation and the growing Fijian national consciousness rather than an
indigenous tradition, and is significant of the needs, rather than the history, of the society
which produced and accepted it". But according to Tudor (1962), many Indigenous
Fijians are able to trace their descent back eleven generations to this migration. However,
this indigenous belief is in dispute because the so called 'experts* believe that this is too
short a period of time for the Indigenous Fijians to have reached the homogeneous state
that they were found in by the first Europeans (Tudor, 1962). Whatever the case may be,
it seems correct to conclude that the Indigenous Fijians had their origins in the many
migrations from Melanesia and Polynesia. In areas of Fiji where the Polynesian
influence was minimal, for example in the interior of Viti Levu, the 'Melanesian'
physical traits as well as social organisation are significantly evident. In other areas,
such as some of the eastern islands, the Tongan influence is physically, socially and
linguistically evident. What is also evident is that given the lack of 'evidence', it is
difficult to be certain about the origins of the Indigenous Fijian people. For as France
(1969: 8) describes it, "The thin mist persists in Fiji, and prehistorians are making
renewed attempts to penetrate it",
62
What of the social, economic, and political conditions of pre-contact Fiji? One
Westerner, discussing the plight of Indigenous Fijians soon after contact with the West,
has this to say about the effect of this contact on the old social structure (Coulter, 1942:
20):
The Fijians at this time had a stable social, political, and economic organization of
their own - one little understood by missionaries and other Europeans who visited
their shores or came to reside in their islands. So much of their old ways of living
has been misunderstood by Europeans, abandoned by them, modified, and spoiled
by Western contacts that we shall never know or appreciate the finer points in
their old social structure.
It is widely accepted that the education of the Indigenous Fijians was carried out
informally as part of day to day living. Learning was contextually derived and was
therefore relevant and meaningful. Indigenous Fijian children learned through listening,
observing, imitating and practising what their elders did. Cultural knowledge, values and
norms were transmitted from one generation to the next by the elders, be they
grandparents, parents, older siblings or other members of the extended family. The elders
would relate stories and legends to the young which would explain their history, their
origins, their value systems and their view of the universe (Baba, 1991). Cultural
knowledge was therefore passed on through these means with a lot of emphasis placed on
listening and memory, especially for knowledge of the past, lineage history and so forth.
My paternal grandmother (to whom this thesis is partially dedicated) - recently
deceased, the result of a union between an American beachcomber and an Indigenous
Fijian lady from one of the eastern islands - could trace my father's family tree back six
generations. She was almost ninety before she passed on but she still had a phenomenal
memory which had been trained acutely in the oral traditions, In contrast, the written
tradition is what indigenous people of my generation are trained in through the formal
schooling system and we lack the minute attention to oral detail that our forefathers and
foremothers were trained in. Knowledge and cultural values were therefore transmitted
in pre-contact times via the family and members belonging to the same community in a
rich oral tradition, This process, however, is now so mediated by the process of formal
schooling that many Indigenous Fijians, for example, are losing out on their cultural
knowledges and wisdoms, This is a consequence of the undermining and undervaluing of
indigenous cultural knowledges that began during colonial rule and continues in this
postcolonial moment. School learning is foreign, abstract and in many cases, irrelevant
for daily living and there is far too much emphasis placed on 'book learning'.
63
Brij Lai (1992), an Indo-Fijian historian, points out that limited evidence disables
us from describing the diverse social and political organisation of the early Indigenous
Fijians, However, he notes that albeit risking some distortion and oversimplification,
early Fijian society can be said to be "hierarchical and based on the principle of
patrilineal agnatic descent" (Lai, 1992: 4). Deryck Scarr, a Western historian (1984: 3),
likewise notes that Indigenous Fijians "favoured definition of status and authority by
descent" with society ascribing functions whether it be chief, craftsman, fisherman,
warrior or priest. According to the Bauan dialect, which was the indigenous dialect
standardised during colonial rule, every Indigenous Fijian belonged to a yavusa 'clan'
defined by as an "extended patrilineal kin-group claiming descent from a vu, or founding
father" (Scarr, 1984: 5). This was regarded as the major building block of society. The
other units of Indigenous Fijian society have been identified in descending order as
mataqali or "family groups" where rank and power were determined by linear proximity
to the founding father (Lai, 1992: 4), and the / tokatoka, the smallest unit, comprised of
"the cicely related households living in a defined area of village and cooperating to
perform such communal undertakings as the building and maintenance of houses and the
preparation of feasts" (Lai, 1992: 5). Several yavusa might join forces to form a
confederation defined as the vanua or state. By the end of the eighteenth century,
according to Lai, many vanua had united into a larger state called the matanitu.
Lai points out that the leading matanitu were involved in a great struggle for
political supremacy complicated by external forces encroaching on Fiji at the beginning
of the nineteenth century. The point I would like to emphasise here is that the social and
political organisation of pre-contact Fiji varied substantially across the Fiji group- This
variation is not accounted for in many accounts of social and political organisation of the
Indigenous Fijian which assumes cultural homogeneity for all indigenous groups.
Another point also worth making is that the social and political organisation of pre-
contact (as well as post-contact) Fijian society is complex and well-developed and that
this brief definition does not do justice to the elaborate patterns of familial and political
relationships and allegiance that were well in place before the arrival of the first 'white
man', These complex relationships continue to play a significant role, not only in the
organisation of Indigenous Fijian social life, but also in the political structures of
postcolonial Fiji.
The early writings of the Christian missionaries describe Indigenous Fijians as
living in a state of spiritual darkness (France, 1969), as backward, uneducated,
64
uncivilised and ignorant. They were represented as evil heathens and savages: "the very
dregs of Mankind...quite unfit to live, but more unfit to die" (quoted in France, 1969: 29).
Writing in 1858, James Calvert (1858: 1) described Indigenous Fijian nature as "the
worst deformities, the foulest stains, disfiguring and blackening all the rest". It is
interesting that very little is known of what the Indigenous Fijians thought of these 'white
intruders'. France (1969) makes the point that the journals of traders, missionaries and
planters are filled with complaints that the natives did not appreciate the advantages of
adopting European ways. France records that some beachcombers were described as
"blind", "as resembling a pig with all the hair scorched off and the like. This
observation negates the ethnocentric and Eurocentric view that Indigenous Fijians, on
first contact, greeted the Europeans like "jubilant, awe-struck savages". As France (1969:
20) explains, the error of this view "lies in assuming that the natives of the Pacific judged
Western civilization, on its first appearance, by its own values". And as Coulter (1942:
20) observes, the social and religious practices of the 'natives' "can be understood only
witiiin ihe framework of their uwn social order" with European society on ihe continent
of Europe "no less obviously cruel" ,
Coulter describes pre-contact Fijians as a religious people with their own gods,
priests, witch doctors and temples. While what took place in the temples would be
termed barbaric, heathenistic and utterly cruel from the Western perspective, Coulter
explains that the "sacred beliefs and practices of the people were a function of their whole
economic and social organization" (Coulter, 1942: 20-21), In terms, therefore, of
Western civilisation these practices were absolutely evil, However, from the perspective
of the indigenous people, their practices were socially derived, accepted and practised.
The question arises, then, of which perspective can be deemed the 'right' one if
there can be such a thing. In the case of Fiji, Westerners came in with preconceived ideas
of the indigenous people viewed against their own cultural values. The missionaries, for
instance, were determined to change the existing practices so that they were closer to
Western ideals/ideas. They imposed their own moral/religious framework on the people
with scant regard for the repercussions on the old way of life that had been developed
over a period of time. I argue that the dramatic changes imposed on the Indigenous
Fijians beginning with Western contact is just as violent, cruel and barbaric as the cultural
practices that Westerners found so abhorrent.
What I have done is to describe some representations of the features of pre-contact
Fiji, with two principle motivations. First, it is a deliberate attempt to privilege this
65
neglected aspect of Fiji's history. As well, I have done this as an act of resistance against
the portrayal in Western history books of a 'pre-history', against the notion that Fiji's
history began at the point of contact with the coloniser, against the inherent assumption
by the colonisers (colonial bureaucrats, missionaries, etc.) that Indigenous Fijian history
prior to colonial contact was insignificant.
In so doing I am creating here a hybrid space, a 'Third Space' (Bhabha, 1995)
where "the discourse of colonial authority loses its univocal meaning" enabling me, the
postcolonial critic, "to trace complex movements of disarming alterity in the colonial
text" (R. Young, 1995: 22). Or better still, what I am creating is a Thirdspace (Soja,
1996) where I have chosen a space "of radical openness" to resist against notions of
colonial domination and oppression, as bell hooks (1990) so succinctly put it, that is
inherently reflected in the silence prevalent in colonial (non-)treatment of Fiji's 'pre-
history'. This "margin" which I have chosen to write from is one which is also "the site
of radical possibility, a space of resistance" against hegemonic colonial (and postmodern
academic) discourses. It is one that deliberately takes on a posHlonality that is
strategically essentialist, using Spivak (1995), and one where I hope to produce "a
counter-hegemonic discourse", in bell hook's words.
Having explicated what little is known of Fiji's history prior to the arrival of the
"white man" as a point of resistance to colonial hegemonic discourses, I now turn to a
brief description of 'contemporary Fiji' in order to set the 'present' scene before I carry
out an analysis of 'colonial Fiji'. In this section, I make the important point that Fiji is a
colonial construct. I then situate and locate Fiji on the 'global map' for those who have
very little idea of where Fiji is, I also describe the current economic, political and social
conditions that I feel are pertinent to mention in order to set the context for the
substantive discussion that will follow on colonial and postcolonial conditions in Fiji.
Contemporary Fiji
I have not included this section in the last section of this chapter on Postcolonial
Fiji for several reasons. The most important one is that at the outset, I wish to emphasise
that many current institutional, ideological, social, economic, political and cultural
practices are hybrid amalgamations resulting from the colonial encounter between
coloniser and colonised. Second, it is important to provide a brief general introduction to
Fiji's place in Western conceived notions of place and space, its population composition
and other information that does not quite fit into the specificities of Fiji's educational
66
system that I describe in great detail later. Third, a contextual description of
contemporary Fiji in terms of the bigger picture of economic, social and political life is
important to frame up later discussions on 'Colonial' and 'Postcolonial Fiji'. I must
admit that my primary intention to provide the information I have selected for this section
of the chapter is as much for convenience as for any analytic purpose. The principal
reason why the section on Fiji's colonial history sits in the nexus between the present
(Contemporary Fiji) and the recent past and continuing present (Postcolonial Fiji) is to
demonstrate that it is Fiji's colonial history that has shaped its past, present (and future).
This is my analytic starting point.
Fiji: A Colonial Construction
What constitutes the category commonly known today as 'Fiji? It is my view that
colonial practices—including the historical, imaginative, material, institutional and
discursive practices—constructed the phenomenon called Fiji. The impact of almost one
century of British colonialism on Fiji's physical, social, cultural, political and
psychological landscape has been enormous and far reaching. The process of
colonisation transformed many facets of life for Indigenous Fijians who, together with
peoples of Asia and the Pacific, were treated as the 'Others' of Europe. This othering
process manifested itself in many ways. For instance, the Indigenous Fijian traditional
learning systems changed from relevant, contextualised ones to foreign, abstract forms
that emphasised academic book learning. Their religious institution was transformed
with many Indigenous Fijians converting to Christianity so that in this postcolonial
moment, the majority are Christians. The political system follows the democratic ideals
of the British-based Westminster system of governance. The economic structure is
modelled on the capitalist market system. As a consequence of colonisation, many
people have internalised the 'Western' ways of doing things. The fact that English is the
language of schooling, official communication, administration, commerce, law and
politics speaks of the extent to which colonial structures still permeate the local in this
postcolonial moment, confirming the observation that one of the main features of colonial
oppression is control over language (Ashcroft et al., 1989). It is possible to argue,
therefore, that Fiji itself as we know it, perceive it, and indeed, name it, is a colonial
construct.
The process of naming and categorising the place and the people is one which
makes the unknown 'knowable' to the colonisers. This process constructs certain images.
67
The image of an 'underachiever' or 'failure' in the school system is a constructed one for
Indigenous Fijians (see, for example, Education Reports during the colonial period)
which has continued in this postcolonial moment. The Christian missionaries and the
white community in general 'imaged' them as "savages" (Tudor, 1962) who had "the
worst deformities, the foulest stains" in character and they "stood unrivalled as a disgrace
to mankind" (Calvert, 1858: 1-2). At other times, Indigenous Fijians have been
constructed as "lazy" (Coulter, 1942), "happy-go-lucky" and "irresponsible" (Belshaw,
1964: 269) with "a lack of drive", "a lack of competitive spirit" which, according to
Belshaw (1964: 3-4), "constitutes a dangerous and destructive myth", In other words,
Indigenous Fijians are imaged as very much like irresponsible and playful children by a
colonising people whose assumptions of moral superiority evoke what JanMohamed
(1995) calls the "economy of the Manichean allegory". Through the written text, the
moral authority of the coloniser is articulated and justified by seeing the 'native' and
representing him/her as inferior in every regard. It is when images o f evil' are associated
with 'natives' that "fetishize a nondialectical, fixed opposition between the self and the
native" that evokes the economy of the manichean allegory (JanMohamed, 1995: 19). So
through the processes of categorisation, 'imaging* and 'naming', Indigenous Fijians are
effectively othered and constructed in discursive, institutional and material practices of
Fijian colonial formations.
Another manifestation of Fiji's colonial construction is what I want to term the
'homogenisation of heterogeneity'. Before the colonial encounter, Fiji consisted of a
diverse group of Indigenous Fijians and yet, for the purposes of control and ease of
administration when this encounter did take place, Indigenous Fijians were homogenised
through colonial methods of surveillance and categorisation: exploitation of an elite
group and the establishment of an Indigenous Fijian police constabulary to maintain
control over the local people, standardisation of the Fijian language so that one particular
dialect became the hegemonic language, and the creation of institutional structures such
as the Fijian Administration System and the Vola ni Kawa Buta (literally the Book of the
Living). The latter is a colonial structure that determines the identity of an indigenous
person. By implication, those not entered in this book cannot claim to identify as
Indigenous Fijians. We can see, then, that the colonial encounter attempts to make the
colonised visible, knowable and controllable: colonial administrative and institutional
practices are created and maintained to see that this occurs. Principal among these
practices is the construction of Indigenous Fijian identity.
68
And yet, while the colonisers were homogenising the great variety that existed in
the indigenous human landscape, they were also emphasising the notion of difference as a
form of power play during the period of colonial rule. Those that were not European
were 'othered'. Colonial racialising practices ensured that there was a clear social
hierarchy with the white community at the top with all their power and authority,
followed by the local hand-picked indigenous 'elite'. The rest of the indigenous people,
the Indo-Fijians and other ethnic groups were at the bottom of the social pecking order
such that there were various layers of 'othering1. From the preceding discussion we can
see that domination and oppression, the twin colonial controlling strategies, played a
dominant role in the creation and maintenance of colonial power, authority and control.
We can also see that racialising processes ensured the maintenance of colonial power and
authority. It is my contention, then, that the Fiji of today is a colonial construct because
what it is at this historical juncture is a direct result of the colonial encounter. Many
institutional, ideological and epistemological structures instituted during colonial times
have continued in neocoloaial, hegemonic forms. Brij Lai (1992: 3), succinctly sums it
up in this manner:
Fiji entered the twentieth century firmly tethered to colonial policies put in place
in the late nineteenth century. The structures of Fiji's economy, polity, and
society were fixed by decisions made soon after the reluctant but unconditional
cession of the islands to Great Britain on 10 October 1874. The task, and the
tragedy, of modern Fiji has been to confront the twentieth century and the forces
of change it has brought while hobbled by political and social structures and
habits of thought that outlived their usefulness long ago.
Fiji's Place in Space
Having ascertained that colonial discursive and material practices constructed the
category 'Fiji', I move on now to a brief description of Fiji's place in space and of the
people that populate this space. According to the Western atlas (See Figure B),
determined by Western conceptions of measurement, place and distance, Fiji is located in
the south-west Pacific Ocean between longitudes 178 degrees 12' west and 176 degrees
53' east and latitudes 15 degrees 42' and 22 degrees south. The written records show that
Fiji is made up of 332 islands, approximately one third of which are inhabited, which
vary in size from 10,000 square kilometres to tiny islets a few metres in circumference.
Fiji's total land area is estimated to be 18,272 square kilometres with 87 per cent of this
total land mass made up of the two principal islands of Viti Levu and Vanua Levu.
69
Fiji has been described as a small island state (Bacchus and Brock, 1987) with all the
problems associated with this status. Principal among these problems is its physical,
political and economic vulnerability which places it at great risk in the face of global
capitalism.
Who populates Fiji? On the basis of a census taken in 1986 (Bureau of Statistics,
1987), Fiji's total population in that year was recorded as 715,375. It is not possible to be
precise about these matters, but according to this census, the two major ethnic groups
were identified as the Indo-Fijians who comprised 48.7% of the total population and
Indigenous Fijians who constituted 46%. The 1986 census records the remaining 4.7
percent of the population as made up of Europeans, Part-Europeans, Chinese, Rotumans
and other Pacific Islanders. In fact, Indo-Fijians have predominated in numerical terms
since the 1946 census which has been a matter of concern for Indigenous Fijians.
However, the 1996 census has seen a shift in population. Indigenous Fijians have
outnumbered Indo-Fijians and this is a result of the continuing exodus of mainly Indo-
Fijians to metropolitan centres overseas. The coups of 1987 have probably been the
principal cause of these migrations. I will discuss the effects of these coups as well as
other social and political issues that have occupied bodies and minds in Fiji society in the
following section.
The Contemporary Social and Political Context
There is a huge body of literature on social, economic and political conditions in
Fiji, particularly for the post-coup period from late 1987 onwards. My intention in this
section is to develop an interpretation of post-coup social and political developments
based on my own experiences and my reading of some of the literature, As I will argue,
an understanding of these developments will be crucial to prognosticating the future of
AA in Fiji.
Fiji continues to be a racially divided society. From the racialising discriminatory
practices of British colonialism to the creation of state institutions, including educational
and political practices, the all pervasive thread running through these is the notion of
'race'. As Michael Ward (1971: 29) has observed,
Although the Fijians and Indians have lived together (but not, in most cases
literally side by side) in the same country for almost a century, a wide cultural and
attitudinal gulf still exists between them. Both groups have retained their separate
languages and dialects as well as religions.
71
Social, cultural and political decisions are, as a matter of course, based on race
(AA policies in education and raced-based schooling are two such social examples; in the
area of politics, political parties are still formed on racial lines). The binary opposition of
European/non-European, coloniser/colonised, has been replaced by that of Indigenous
Fijian/Indo-Fijian, Indigenous Fijian/Other. This binary opposition has never been
manifested as clearly as it was immediately after the 1987 coups.
Despite the pluralism that is evident in Fiji, racialising practices continue to be
reflected in the hegemony that is inherent in the Indigenous Fijian political leadership
that has been maintained since decolonisation in 1970, Since this time, two
predominantly indigenous political parties have handled the reins of government which
operate along the principles and structures of the British Westminster political system,
The two coups carried out in 1987 by indigenous army personnel seemed to represent the
fear of the Indigenous Fijian community that they would lose control over their land and
destiny when the predominantly Indigenous Fijian party in power at the time was
defeated by a predominantly Indo-Fijian party in the 1987 General Elections.
Indigenous Fijians own the bulk of the land and it is generally believed that Indo-
Fijians are more involved in capitalism in terms of their more involved participation in
the market economy. According to government statistics, Indigenous Fijians own close
to 84% of all land with 10% being privately-owned freehold and the remaining 6% held
as Crown Land by the Government. It has been recorded that the best arable land was
owned by Westerners after contact with the indigenous people. Today, as in the past, the
Indo-Fijians own very little land but are categorised as independent, successful farmers
and businessmen, so much so that they are known to "dominate the economic activity of
the country" (Bureau of Statistics, 1989: 2).
Political (and academic) discourse in Fiji have highlighted the perceived success
of Indo-Fijians in education, the professions and business. The perception that Indo-
Fijians are successful business people and have a relatively better standard of life has
created a lot of resentment on the part of Indigenous Fijians. Indigenous Fijians have
been represented as the underdogs, as the victims in their own land. And as Fijian
nationalists like politician Sakeasa Butadroka (Leader of the Nationalist Party) and
academic Professor Asesela Ravuvu have consistently pointed out, Indigenous Fijian
interests needed to be protected. At least, that is one of the rationales put forward for the
coups of 1987. With a predominantly Indo-Fijian party winning the 1987 General
72
Elections, the thinking that led to the coups was that Indigenous Fijian rights had to be
protected whatever the cost.
However, it has been argued that this view may be too simplistic and that the
coups were really "a strike against democratic government by elements associated with
Fiji's traditional oligarchy seeking to hide behind a mask of populist communalism"
(Howard, 1991: i). According to this viewpoint, the composition of this oligarchy under
British colonial rule was the colonial administration, a large expatriate business elite and
the eastern Indigenous Fijian chiefly elite (Howard, 1991: 6). The contention here is that
after independence, the oligarchy necessarily changed hands to comprise of eastern elite
chiefs and wealthy Indian businessmen. Whatever the 'truth' of the matter is, the
material reality is the coups occurred, and they have had negative effects on all Fiji's
peoples, some of which continue to reverberate even as I write.
There is no doubt that the 1987 coups have had profound and long lasting effects
in all spheres of life - personally, nationally and internationally. First, the racial tensions
and policical instability in ihe period following the coups led to Fiji's expulsion from the
Commonwealth (Fiji was readmitted in 1998) and a downturn in the national economy
due to a lack of or withdrawal of investor confidence. In fact, unemployment and the
concomitant social problems have accompanied Fiji's poor economic performance and !
have intensified in the late 1990s. Second, the coups have led to a massive migration
pattern that has left huge gaps in the quality and quantity of available professionals, I
technocrats and other skilled workers. As an example of this, there was an estimated 'i
50% of unqualified and untrained teachers in the educational system in the mid 1990s
(from transcripts of interviews with officials of the two teachers' unions). Third, the so-
called peaceful co-existence of the different ethnic groups resulted in intense racial i
resentment and recriminations. The Indo-Fijian community was vilified, threatened and
made to feel unwelcome in a land which they had called home. Inter-racial relationships
that had been shaky since colonial days were under strong attack in the name of
Indigenous Fijian nationalism. Fourth, AA for Indigenous Fijians was intensified in
education, employment and business. Many Indigenous Fijians took up positions of
authority and power and state funding was expended to assist Indigenous Fijian !
participation in education and business,
Perhaps, an indication of the extent to which Indigenous Fijian power had :I
materialised in powerful (and dangerous) ways is evident in cases of corruption and abuse |
of power that have been brought to light in the last two years. The National Bank, the j
73 I
Ports Authority, the Housing Authority and other state-owned institutions faced financial
difficulties when it was revealed that through nepotism, bribery and corruption,
Indigenous Fijians in positions of power were able to exploit their positions to borrow
large amounts of money without following procedures that ensured accountability and
good economic sense. The National Bank of Fiji, for instance, ran up a debt of over
Fijian $220 million and there are still cases of corruption before the courts.
The new constitution drawn up after 1987 was a deliberate political intervention
that was not only AA at its extreme but also strong affirmation of postcolonial
nationalism and identity by the indigenous people, The post-coup constitution
guaranteed Indigenous Fijian paramountcy in government with the stipulation that the
majority of seats were to be held by Indigenous Fijians and the positions of Prime
Minister and President to remain in Indigenous Fijian hands in perpetuity. The logic
seems to be that if Indigenous Fijians held the mantle of government, then Indigenous
Fijian interests would always be protected. This view is problematic. The assumption
that Indigenous Fijians are a hegemonic, stable group with shared beliefs and values is
contested. What was overlooked in the post-coup constitution is the heterogeneity
inherent in Indigenous Fijian society. One such manifestation is the political affiliations
the people have outside of the Western mode of government. The allegiance people have
to their chiefs will determine who they vote for.
An Indigenous Fijian belongs to one of three matanitu or confederacies, already
predetermined by colonial and indigenous history, which is headed by a paramount chief,
What island or part of Fiji s/he originates from will determine which of these
confederacies and paramount chief s/he owes allegiance to. A postcolonial reading of
historical records implies that Indigenous Fijian chiefs were deliberately given
government positions that brought them in contact with their people by the colonial
government. It is generally accepted that these chiefs were deliberately cultivated by the
Colonial Government because of the control they exerted on their people. The allegiance
to chiefs by the indigenous people continues at this historical juncture and forms
undercurrents in the affairs of a country that is governed according to the political system
of the West and one where issues of race are pervasive. Another factor also overlooked
in the drawing up of the new constitution after the coups is that educational exposure,
particularly in overseas countries, would produce more and more citizens with a more
critical, analytical viewpoint that is Western in nature and would inevitably contradict
traditional frameworks. The perception of a unified, stable Indigenous Fijian group is
therefore a myth.
A safeguard inserted in the post-coup constitution, as a compromise to the non-
indigenous population, was a review of the constitution after a period of seven years. A
committee to review this constitution (with a New Zealander as Chair, an Indigenous
Fijian and Indo-Fijian making up the membership of this Committee) was formed in
1995. Its terms of reference called for recommendations on constitutional arrangements
which would meet the present and future needs of the people of Fiji, promote racial
harmony, national unity and the economic and social advancement of all communities
(Reeves, Vakatora & Lai, 1996). It is my view that seven years of national life after the
coups of 1987 saw a mellowing in nationalistic fervour and that many Indigenous Fijians
were ready to dialogue and communicate with other ethnic groups in Fiji, notably Indo-
Fijians.
Since 1996, a few issues dominated the political agenda: the expiry of
Agricultural Land Tenant Agreement leases (ALTA), finalising the reviewed constitution,
reviving a flagging economy and high unemployment. Arguably, it was debate on the
Constitution Report which formed the principal focus of national social and political
concern. In mid 1998, the constitution that had been reformulated after a two year review
was promulgated as the revised constitution that Fiji would follow. The Report of the
Fiji Constitution Review Commission, entitled The Fiji Islands: Towards a United
Future, specifically stressed that national unity was something to be commended. In the
words of the writers:
Progress in a multi-ethnic society is achieved when its citizens realise that what is
good for their neighbour must ultimately be good for them as well, when
difference and diversity are seen not as sources of division and distrust but of
strength and inspiration....National unity is a goal whose fulfilment will require an
abundance of patience, good will and understanding among all the citizens of the
Fiji Islands, It will require the nurturing of spiritual and human values which
sustain people in times of need and help them to adapt to situations of rapid
change. It will require building on the already considerable human and material
resources of these islands. And it will be the touchstone against which the people
will measure progress towards a strong and unified future for themselves and for
generations to come. (Reeves et al., 1996: xix)
In 1998, the emphasis seems to be on preparation for the 1999 General Elections
with the idea of radical coalitions becoming a reality. In an unprecedented development,
Indigenous Fijian parties are negotiating with the two Indo-Fijian parties to fight the
75
elections. Developments on the union front have witnessed mass demonstrations by the
workers against Government imposed wage limits. In mid-1998, Indigenous Fijian
landowners of the space on which the largest hydro-electric plant is built in Monasavu
staged roadblocks, These resulted in confrontations between the landowners and police.
One possible explanation for this development is that this is a reaction against the revised
constitution by nationalist Indigenous Fijians who resent what they perceive as the
disempowerment of Indigenous Fijians.
At this historical juncture, Fiji is a site of unfinished business. However, one
significant closure that has been achieved is the spirit of reconciliation, dialogue,
negotiation and compromise that has been forged between the two dominant ethnic
groups—Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijian politicians have crossed the racial divide and
are in the process of further dismantling it. In working toward finalising a constitution
that would be acceptable to all citizens, politicians found that they could work together
without invoking the category of 'race'. Nevertheless, there are many unresolved issues
at hand. Next to the constitution, the next national undertaking is working tlirough the
ALTA dilemma in such a way as to meet Indigenous Fijian, Indo-Fijian and national
interests. The social problems to do with unemployment, poverty, an increasing crime
rate and the like also need working on. Over and above all these, Fiji's flagging economy
needs revitalising in the face of such global matters as the Asian economic crisis.
I have here provided my interpretation of post-coup social, economic and political
development. While Fiji's constitutional crisis has been amicably resolved, there are as
yet many other social and economic crises to overcome. The uncertainty associated with
expiring land leases for Indo-Fijian tenant farmers will need to be settled. As well, the
problems that pertain to high unemployment (and unsettling social problems such as
increasing crime and poverty) demonstrate the trouble in Fiji's economy. In this context
of unfinished business, a major hurdle has been overcome - the finalisation of the
constitution. Events in Fiji have shown that racial barriers are in the process of being
dismantled. The important lesson perhaps to be learned from the aftermath of the coups
is the recognition that all the peoples of Fiji have to work together in a spirit of
cooperation, negotiation, tolerance and goodwill, This is necessary to forge the way for a
common future.
76
Colonial Fiji ]
i
Thus far, I have set the scene of this thesis, arguing that Fiji is a colonial construct I
and then describing current issues facing the nation. I now turn to an explication of Fiji's I
colonial history. First, I begin the analysis of Fiji's colonial history by a second act of |
il
resistance: I discuss acts of resistance against colonial rule before explicating in detail the
effects of colonial authority, knowledge and power as manifested in historical
representations, language and education. As well, I explicate its more tangible
applications as manifested in the policy of divide and rule, I also describe the colonial
curriculum to demonstrate that this has continued well into the postcolonial moment.
Colonial History: 1874-1970
World history has witnessed the quest of European nations to dominate and
exploit other nations (Sardar et al., 1993). The superiority complex that White
inhamtants have over people ditferent from them by virtue of their skin colour, religion,
language, and other cultural criteria have led them to believe that their cultural values are
far superior to those of Others. With the help of guns, alcohol, and under the guise of
Christianity, Europe carried out a violent conquering of 'uncivilised', 'savage1 and
'ignorant' societies. The environment and the social, political, religious and economic
structures of the colonised took a physical, material, ideological and psychological
bashing under the onslaught of colonialism. Whatever was in existence in a country that
was colonised, including natural and human resources, was believed to be provided by
providence for exploitation and utilisation by the colonisers. Additionally, the cultural
values of the colonisers were believed to be the only values worthy of keeping, so the
colonised were forced to assimilate these values or else be considered even more different
and alien, both to the coloniser as well as the colonised. All these apply to the colonial
situation in Fiji.
The history text books produced by Western writers have regarded three dates as
important in Fiji's historical development. The first date, 10th October 1874, marked
Fiji's introduction to colonial rule when the country was voluntarily ceded to Great
Britain. The second date, 14th May 1879, marked the arrival of indentured labourers
from India who were specifically brought in to work the sugarcane plantations. The third
date, recorded as 10th October 1970, marked the time that Fiji attained political
independence. This Western method of periodization is debatable because it wrongly
77
assumes that the entity that was named 'Fiji' by the colonising agent (i.e., Britain) had no
significant history before the advent of the white 'man' on its shores. It is problematic
because the colonising agent "unleashed a myriad of cultural and psychological forces,
many of them not yet fully manifest even after 500 years" (Sardar et al., 1993: 83). It is
problematic, too, because in taking on the belief that Fiji's history began only with the
arrival of the white man, the British colonisers were guilty, just like all colonisers, of
social engineering "to produce institutions and personalities that would be familiar to
Europe" in order "to render the colonized predictable and controllable" (Sardar et al.,
1993: 83-84). Periods/eras in history, therefore, provide emphasis on those times and
dates that are important from the perspective of the colonising agent, not from the
perspective of the colonised subject. This kind of periodization thus ensures legitimation
of historical domination by the West. The periodization and ordering of history is a kind
of inscribing control of history, and, ultimately, self-knowledge of the colonised.
Resistance to Colonial Rule
Considering that colonial rule occurred for close to a century in Fiji, resistance
was reported to be minimal, particularly from Indigenous Fijians. "Resistance to British
colonial rule and to the hegemony of the chiefs...was to be found mainly in inland and
Western Viti Levu" (Howard, 1991: 26). Colonial representations of resistance to
colonial rule portray these forms: armed revolt or millenarianism with serious opposition
occurring in the years immediately following cession. Colonial dealings with resistance
included the suppression of the Ra movement in 1878 and the Tuka Movement in 1892 in
the interior hills of Western Viti Levu. The Tuka Cult in Ra and Ba provinces were
perceived as a threat to the colonial administration such that Governor Thurston himself,
aided by an Indigenous Fijian chief, led the Armed Native Constabulary (the police force
made up entirely of Indigenous Fijian men) and crushed what was considered civil
rebellion. In 1894 the people of Seaqaqa in Vanua Levu physically resisted in protest
against a service imposed on them by colonial authorities by building a fort around their
village. Two constables were reportedly killed in the ensuing attempt to resolve the
matter. This prompted an attack by the Armed Native Constabulary which succeeded in
crushing the rebellion.
Howard (1991) reports that serious opposition to colonial rule had mainly come to
an end by the 1880s but had not disappeared completely, Another such example was
78
exhibited by a commoner named Apolosi Nawai who was compared to a prominent chief j
at the time in this manner:
If Ratu Sukuna was to become the statesman of Fiji, Apolosi R. Nawai was its '
underworld hero—the only man from the ranks of ordinary villagers who rivalled
the statesman for eloquence, personal mana, and a compelling vision of the Fijians
in their own country. (Macnaught, 1982: 75)
Nawai was portrayed as "a cultist and Degei worshipper; an anti-everybody-but-
Fijian militant who promised an end to taxation and the return of all land to the Fijians'1 I
(Gravelle, 1980 Bk Three: 9). He founded the 'Viti Kabani', an indigenous co-operative,
with the ultimate aim of monopolising all the commercial activity such that all stores i
would be completely owned by the indigenous people. 4000 people reportedly attended
the company's first general meeting in Tailevu in January, 1915. Ten indigenous
government-appointed officers were purported to have been sacked when they went
against government orders and attended the meeting. Nawai's success in gaining
widespread indigenous support angered not only the Colonial Government but also the
white settlers, the churches as well as the high indigenous chiefs. The latter were
reported to have been insulted by Nawai's usurpation of their power.
The Colonial Government arrested Nawai and 42 others. Nawai was gaoled for
18 months. However, his popularity and appeal were evident when 5000 people were
purported to attend the first meeting he called soon after his release from gaol which saw
his social standing elevated from chief to king (Gravelle, 1980 Bk Three: 12). Negative
reports at the expense of the Colonial Government and chiefs that filtered back to the
Government of what transpired at his meeting resulted in Nawai's arrest and exile to
Rotuma for seven years. He was exiled for a further ten years when, after his release, he
began preaching and making predictions that were viewed as harmful by the colonial
Government. This was the last reported serious attempt by Indigenous Fijians to resist
colonial rule and the power instilled in the chiefs by the Colonial Government.
In a book entitled Neither- Cargo nor Cult: Ritual Politics and the Colonial
Imagination in Fiji, anthropologist Martha Kaplan (1995: xii-xiii) notes that the concept
of cult, "the unbounded unnatural phenomenon, had its roots in colonial perceptions of
the unexpected or unwelcome response to a trajectory of Christianization, 'civilization',
or 'westernization' that the colonizers conceived as natural and inevitable". She argues
that cults exist as a category in Western culture and colonial practice. So what began as
neither cargo nor cult was created in the colonial imagination and became tied "not only
79
to the articulations of scholars and other observers, but also to the routinizing effects of
official powers making states" (Kaplan 1995: 18). Writing specifically about what the
official colonial records called the Tuka cult, Kaplan unpicks four different narratives of
Navosavakadua, the key person in the narrative, in an effort to write her own narrative of
"plural articulations, some defunct, some flourishing, some nascent, in a turbulent history
of power, ritual, and history-making" (Kaplan, 1995: 16). Kaplan makes the point that in
Tuka, the British believed they were encountering "events of an unusual character" which
"marred the natural and inevitable trajectory of their colonizing project, in which Fijians,
already Christian, were to become fully 'civilized'" (Kaplan, 1995: 69). What the British
perceived to be "unnatural" or "unusual" events were labelled "superstition",
"movement", "rebellion" or "cult". This was something they "labeled and reified as a
manifestation of Fijian disorder and irrationality" and they "tried to exorcise it from the
body politic through deportation" (Kaplan, 1995: 69).
Thus, the colonial response to what they perceived to be "Fijian disorder and
irrationality" was to control it. In the instances described above (i.e., the so called Tuka
cult and the Apolosi Nawai phenomenon), Indigenous Fijian resistance to colonial rule
was seen as rebellion and hence had to be crushed. Those seen to be leaders of these so
called cult or milleniarianism movements were exiled to a distant part of Fiji.
Resistance to colonial rule is reported to have come from the Indo-Fijian
community more so than from the indigenous populace. Brij Lai (1992: 106) points out
that Indo-Fijians "had no choice but to resist the European-dominated colonial order"
because of their resentment at being placed "at the bottom of the colonial hierarchy". The
Indigenous Fijians, on the other hand, were said to enjoy a cordial relationship with a
colonial government that was perceived to have their interests at heart. For example, the
reason indentured labourers from India were brought in to work the sugar plantations in
1879, five years after cession, was primarily because the first Governor of Fiji, Sir Arthur
Gordon, "refused to run the risk of a plantation system's effects on the Fijian way of life"
(Mayer, 1973). Gordon also institutionalised the administrative practices set in place by
his predecessor, the acting Governor Sir Hercules Robinson, by instituting a system of
'Indirect Rule' which saw the indigenous people with a separate system of administration
set apart from that of the rest of the colony. The Colonial Government utilised the chiefly
system already in place to administer the people and this effectively ensured compliance
from the people. Chiefs were given government positions to run the affairs of the
indigenous people. Perhaps this is one reason why resistance from the indigenous
80
population against colonial rule was minimal. Another reason perhaps can be attributed
to the fact that by a government policy of 'divide and rule', Indigenous Fijians and Indo-
Fijians were effectively kept from joining forces against the colonial 'masters'. In any
case resistance against colonial rule was reported to come principally from Indo-Fijians.
Gillion (1977: 18) reports that the "strikes and riots of 1920 were of great
importance in the history of Fiji: they had an important influence on later European,
Fijian and Indian attitudes in Fiji, and on opinion in India". With the end of the
indentured system in 1916, the Indo-Fijians who remained were free to either lease land
for sugarcane production or to work in the private and public sectors of the colony. In
1920 a strike occurred in response to Indo-Fijian labourers working in the Public Works
Department in Suva refusing to heed an order that they were to work 48 hours per week
instead of the usual 45. The strikers were joined by Indo-Fijian labourers in Suva, Rewa
and Navua. Those working for Europeans were called on to join the strike but not those
working for Indo-Fijians. A New Zealand armed troop of sixty arrived and the Governor
became confident of taking ^ome action against the strikers. In Samabula, on 12
February 1920, the police and military reacted to the crowd and opened fire. One Indo-
Fijian was reportedly killed in this incident. Armed retaliation by the colonial j
Government effectively brought to end this first show of resistance by the Indo-Fijian 'J
community. This resistance demonstrated to the Colonial Government that the Indo- j
Fijians were not going to be passive migrant workers and they began to be viewed as "the \
Indian Problem" (Tudor, 1962: 71) for the duration of colonial rule.
A lot of unrest arose out of disputes between Indo-Fijian canefarmers and the
Colonial Sugar Refining Company (CSR) which not only had monopoly over the sugar
industry since it began operations in Fiji, but the highest ranking CSR managers were
included in the top of the colonial hierarchy. This had implications for the involvement
of the Colonial Government in any disputes Indo-Fijians had with the CSR, After the
1920 strikes and riots, the Colonial Government kept a watchful eye on the Indo-Fijian
community, So in the words of Brij Lai (1992), the Indo-Fijian community had no
choice but to resist given their inferior place in the colonial social and political hierarchy.
Indigenous Fijians, on the other hand, had great admiration for Europeans and
European civilisation. Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna demonstrated this admiration by stating in
the Legislative Council in 1947 (quoted in Lai, 1992: 106-107);
Indians, like ourselves, have much to gain from European teaching on the
practical approach to life. This approach, based on the humanities, refined by
81
Christianity, steeled by economic and political encounters, tempered b y defeats i
and victories, this approach, I say, has proved itself, especially in the case o f t h e ',
British pattern, as the only effective approach to life. T h e attitude of mind created
by this experience, by meeting and overcoming of difficulties in the vicissitudes \
of life, has in the course of centuries produced t h e spirit of co-operation, o f
moderation and of tolerance.
If speculation on what could have been is useful, perhaps there would have been
stronger resistance from Indigenous Fijians if the first Governor of the colony, Sir Arthur ;j
Gordon, had not developed a different system of administration for the Indigenous Fijians j
that officially institutionalised the authority and power o f the chiefs over their people. '•
Perhaps there would have been more armed revolts led b y the chiefs themselves if the
Colonial Government had not stamped down hard on t h e selling of indigenous land.
Perhaps there would have been open rebellion if the Colonial Government had prioritised
the needs of the European settlers from Britain, N e w Zealand and Australia at the \
expense o f the indigenous way of life. Perhaps there w o u l d have been violence and \
killings if Fiji had been taken by armed force rather than t h e peaceful signing of the Deed
of Cession in 1874. A n d there would certainly have been greater armed resistance from \
Indigenous Fijians themselves if the course of history had b e e n different and Indo-Fijians
not been brought in to work in the sugar plantations but rather, the Indigenous Fijians
t
made to work in the appalling conditions that Indo-Fijians were forced to work under.
If Indigenous Fijians had been relegated to the bottom of the social and political
colonial hierarchy, there would probably have been greater nationalistic zeal from the |
i
indigenous population. Self-determination might have been wrested from colonial hands ,
(or not at all) in a violent revolution such as occurred throughout "Third World" ex- \
colonies like Cuba, Algeria and Indonesia. In any event, none of these occurred. The '
presence of an immigrant population and the utilisation of Indigenous chiefs in the Fijian ,
Administration system specifically set up to administer and control the indigenous \
population (although chiefly authority was limited by colonial rule), meant that a
complex, volatile situation existed in Fiji (Howard, 1991). Setting up specific institutions
for Indigenous Fijians, including the establishment of an armed police force solely made
up of indigenous men but under the authority of a white officer, effectively set the
indigenous population apart from the Indo-Fijians (as well as Indigenous Fijians from the
European population) in such a way that any combined efforts for rebellion against
colonial rule (assuming that the inclination was present in the first place) was very
difficult to arrange. Colonial policy in Fiji, therefore, not only exploited the indigenous
82
traditional political system that was already in place, but also was divisive and
discriminatory in its treatment of the people of the land. This discriminatory treatment
saw the white European population in the dominant position with the Indigenous Fijian
chosen elite next. The Indigenous commoner Fijians and the Indo-Fijians and other
minority groups were relegated to the bottom of the colonial social hierarchy.
Colonial Power and Control: Divide and Rule
The colonial policy of divide and rule was an effective mechanism to maintain
power and control. Two viewpoints can be said to apply to the way indigenous chiefs
were used by the Colonial Government immediately after cession. The traditional
viewpoint is that colonial rule in Fiji was benevolent and non-exploitative. The Deed of
Cession was viewed by the indigenous population "as a solemn charter for a British-
Fijian partnership premised on verbal assurances (the cession itself was unconditional)
that colonial rule would respect and maintain the interest of Fijian society as paramount"
(Macnaught, 1982: 1). Traditionalists view the chiefly system as the indigenous people's
main safeguard against the negative impact of the modern world. Colonial impact then,
according to traditionalists, would be minimal with this safeguard in place. For example,
Legge (1958: 202) argues that
In its modern interpretation administration through native rulers is but one part of
a system which is based upon growing knowledge of, and respect for, the closely
integrated structure of primitive societies, and of the difficulties likely to
accompany the changes which take place in these societies as they are brought
into sharp collision with Western civilization.
Likewise, Macnaught (1982: 49) observes that "Ultimately colonial rule itself
rested on the loyalty chosen chiefs could still command from their people, and day-to-day
village governance, it has been seen, totally depended on them". In a similar manner,
Roth (1973) and Scarr (1984) viewed the chiefs as central to the well-being of the
indigenous people.
On the other hand, the opposing perspective would view the use of the chiefly
system as an exploitative situation which maintained the supremacy and power of the
colonial 'masters' over the masses, Howard (1991: 25), for example, argues the first
Governor of the colony, Sir Arthur Gordon, "clearly saw that establishment of colonial
rule initially entailed working through collaborator chiefs" and Gordon "sought to create
83
a facade of responsibility among these chiefs, with European officials providing
supervision and ultimately being in control". Howard (1991) claims that:
Following the initial guidelines established by Robinson and Gordon, during the
remainder of the nineteenth century, the system of administering to native Fijians
was developed to serve the needs of an evolving colonial political and economic
order. At the upper level, hereditary chiefs slowly were turned into colonial
bureaucrats. During the initial period of colonial rule, chiefly power had been
consolidated and reformed and the rights of commoners diluted, (pp 31-32)
I am somewhat caught in a bind in this debate. Mine is an ambivalent self-
positioning. On the one hand, I am an indigenous female Fijian 'commoner' with strong
traditional allegiance to the chiefs of my village and island. On the other hand, I must
also profess the perspective of the postcolonial critic who uses the Western form of
academic theoretical analysis to lay open the oppressive effects of colonial rule. I view
the distinctive Indigenous Fijian Administrative system that consolidated the power and
authority of the chiefs as a clever attempt by the Colonial Government to maintain
control over the indigenous population. The formation of an armed police force
specifically made up of Indigenous Fijians was a masterpiece in tactical strategy because,
not only were indigenous people used to control the vagrancies of the indigenous people
themselves, but this method of control kept the white settlers out of the picture for there
would have been severe backlash against white settlers and Government officials if white
people had made up the police force. This was also a form of control over the Indo-Fijian
populace and was an effective way of keeping the two major ethnic groups apart with
very little opportunity for combined resistance,
So while I think that the Colonial Government was oppressive and had the self-
interests of the white settlers always at the forefront, yet on the other hand, I cannot help
but think that the indigenous people in Fiji would have gone the sad path that other
indigenous people have followed such as the Maoris in New Zealand, the indigenous
people in America as well as the aboriginal population in Australia if the Colonial
Government in Fiji had totally dominated indigenous society, allowed the settlers to buy
out indigenous land and caused the rapid disintegration of indigenous culture by insisting
on the assimilation policies it did in its other colonies which asserted white supremacy.
While I recognise that colonial rule is exploitative, oppressive and in many cases
inhuman because of the inherent assumption that what is Western is good and what
existed prior to contact with the white man is unimportant and therefore insignificant, I
84
am also grateful to the first Governors of Fiji in recognising the impact Western contact
may have on indigenous culture. On the other hand, I resent the very process of
colonisation which assumes domination, superior values and power display. I
particularly resent the self identity that I have been inflicted with which is by association
with colonialism, created and constructed by that very process. The identity crisis
therefore that I am undergoing (which will be evident in parts of my writing) is one that is
dislocated. It is a manifestation of a dual incomprehensibility: on the one hand, dealing
with the difference between the West and my actual self; and on the other, coming to
grips with the difference between my actual self and the invented self given 'Others' like
me by Europe (Sardar et al., 1993), particularly Britain and its other white-settler colonies
such as New Zealand and Australia.
Colonial Power and Control: Knowledge, History, Language and Education
I have described the domination and oppression of the colonial process that tried
to suppress any signs of resistance from the colonised. As well, I have outlined the
colonial policy of divide and rule that effectively set in place racialised practices that
continue at this historical juncture, I now turn to an explication of colonial control,
authority and power as manifested in historical knowledge and its representation,
language and education.
Historical knowledge is problematic in Fiji. This is not surprising given that the
only history Fiji knows is the one drawn up for them by the British colonial system. The
knowledge that is endemic to the people of Fiji is layered under Western interpretation
and represented that way in the guise of history, The history one gets, therefore, is not
the history of a particular people but how one or another 'orientalist' perceived it.
Western assumptions, knowledge and outlook formed the basis for the interpretation and
representation of the history of 'Others'.
The issue of representation is crucial in any discussion of the colonial condition.
European texts (anthropologies, histories and fiction) have "captured the non-European
subject within European frameworks which read his or her alterity as terror or lack"
(Ashcroft et al., 1995: 85). Through schooling and general colonialist cultural relations,
these representations were then projected back to the colonised as authoritative pictures
of themselves. The history of Fiji, as we know it, has been represented and written by
colonialists and after political independence, by Western expatriates. Our first glimpses
of what life in Fiji might have been like come from the logs of sea captains (e.g., William
85
Bligh) and memoirs, diaries and correspondence of British subjects such as those serving
in the colonial office (e.g., governors) as well as Christian missionaries. For example,
descriptions of Indigenous Fijian society have been provided by such titles as Fiji and the
Fijians (Williams and Calvert, 1858), Fijian Society (Deane, 1921), The Hill Tribes of
Fiji (Brewster, 1922), Fijian Frontier (Thompson, 1940), Deuba. A Study of a Fijian
Village (Geddes, 1945) and Fijian Way of Life (Roth, 1973), Works on the Indo-Fijian
society by Westerners include Mayer's Peasants in the Pacific. A Study of Fiji Indian
Rural Society (1973), Gillion's The Fiji Indians: Challenges to European Domination
1920-1946 (1977) and Coulter's Fiji: Little India of the Pacific (1942) and The Drama of
Fiji: A Contemporary History (1967).
Only since the early 1980s have Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians begun
seriously writing about the situation in Fiji in order to negate the Eurocentrism of colonial
writings, as a means of protest or resistance or even to confirm Western interpretations or
representations (e.g., Ravuvu, 1974, 1983, 1987, 1991; AH, 1980, 1986; Lasaqa, 1984;
Narayan, 1984; Durutalo, 1985a, 1985b; Lai, 1986, 1988, 1992). Even today, there is
still a proliferation of writings on conditions in Fiji by people who are not indigenous or
non Indo-Fijian (e.g., Howard, 1991; Lawson, 1991). I am not arguing that this is bad.
However, the point needs to be made that more ethnic people residing in Fiji need to
research and write about the prevailing and past conditions in this country in order to
write themselves into the history books, provide their own voice(s) about themselves, and
make prominent their place in the history books. This thesis, inter alia, is an attempt to
provide Indigenous Fijians with a voice that negates representations of Indigenous Fijians
as school failures. It is a tool that writes back/talks back to colonial representations.
Robert Young (1990) points out that myths about the Western world abound in
the colonies regarding power, knowledge and therefore history. He questions the myth
that white history is the History of the world and he articulates the need to deconstruct
"the concept, the authority, and assumed primacy of the category of 'the west'" (R.
Young, 1990: 19). He maintains that the long-term strategy of critiqueing the structures
of colonialism is "to effect a radical restructuring of European thought and, particularly,
historiography" (p. 119). This involves "repositioning European systems of knowledge
to demonstrate the long history of their operation as the effect of their colonial other".
This viewpoint is highly pertinent to Fiji. It is important that the history of the
country as written by Westerners, is deconstructed so as to place more emphasis on the
history of the country before and after contact with the West from the perspective of the
86
people in that country, not from an outsider's perspective. Indigenous Fijians, Indo-
Fijians and other ethnic groups living in Fiji need to be made aware of the long-term
effects of colonialism and attempt to find a constructive and practical way to "deconstruct
the concept, the authority, and assumed primacy of the West" as Robert Young (1990)
has put it. :
The primary instruments of control of colonised subjects were (and still are) ;
written history (texts), education and language. All these are evident in Fiji. The history i
of the country has been written by British colonialists, often governors or people in j
authority at the time, as well as missionaries. Even at this historical juncture, there is still j
much hesitation by Indigenous Fijians to write their own history. Perhaps this is because j
Fijian history has an oral rather than written tradition. Or perhaps it is because they have j
not been made to feel empowered or confident about writing about themselves. Their j
psyche has been so affected by the experience of colonialism that they would j
subconsciously feel that they are 'inferior'. After all Fijian history was written by the ;
British. \
How then can Fijians better that history? Frantz Fanon so aptly described this }
mentality in his book Black Skins, White Masks (1967a), Indigenous Fijians, after been
made to feel inferior (through the ideological, political, economic and social structures \
put in place by the British—96 years of this), may have internalised this attitude.
Consequently they may believe that anything Western is good for them and would strive
as much as possible to emulate Western behaviour and internalise Western values and
attitudes.
Language is a powerful control mechanism in a colonial situation. The English
language became the legitimate official language during colonial times in Fiji. The
Indigenous Fijian alphabet was constructed by Western Christian missionaries as a first
step in making the 'natives' more understandable to Western society. Next, the English
language became the language of the school with instruction carried out in this medium.
English texts were the source of knowledge about the world presented to the indigenous
people and other ethnic groups in Fiji. Fanon (1967a) argues that the best way of
controlling a people is through the institutionalisation of the colonial language. This is
certainly true for Fiji. Today, after almost three decades of independence, the colonial \
situation is still evident in the official use of the English language in schooling, f
communication, law, commerce and administration. This dependence on the colonial |
87
language is an insidious legacy for a nation that has purportedly attained political self-
determination. 1
As explained earlier, Western history books represented Indigenous Fijians as
primitive and ignorant. Missionaries were intent on transforming the 'natives' and
'heathens' who were regarded as the "very dregs of Mankind, or Human Nature (sic),
dead and buried under the primeval curse, and nothing of them alive but the Brutal
part...." (cited in France, 1969: 29). It was envisaged that a Western-type education
would make the Fijian less primitive. The British curriculum was institutionalised during
colonial times. Missionaries, who were the initial teachers, did their best to inculcate
Western values and attitudes in their students. This was continued after political
independence by expatriate teachers from New Zealand and Australia (also British
colonies) who were recruited to teach in Fiji before local teachers were trained. At this
historical juncture, despite the fact that local teachers provide instruction, the curriculum j
is still pro-Western in its orientation, pedagogies and content. I
i
I
Colonial Curriculum ;
The education of Indigenous Fijians owes its beginnings to the Christian •
missions. The main purpose of Methodist mission schools was to evangelise the 'natives' !
and for this purpose, the missionaries evolved an orthography for the Fijian language and
translated parts of the Bible into this newly written language, The early curriculum for
Fijians in the nineteenth century was therefore one which saw an emphasis on Christian
doctrine and learning to read and write in the vernacular but arithmetic and some
vocational education was also provided (Mangubhai, 1984).
The missions thus solely controlled educational activity in Fiji for eight decades.
This changed, however, when the Education Ordinances of 1916 and 1918 enabled the
Colonial Government to take direct control by providing grants-in-aid in exchange for
control over the curriculum, the language of instruction (it was stipulated that instruction
had to be in English after Class 4) and school registration. Thus began the process of
control that would ensure that the curriculum, school pedagogies and the way that
learning was evaluated would become hegemonic and normative. In this postcolonial
moment, the purposes of education, the curriculum, the educational administrative system f
and pedagogies remain of Western origin (Mangubhai, 1984; Thomas and Postlethwaite, j
1984). In the course of this thesis, I will return repeatedly to this historical legacy. |
The fact that English became the language of instruction is significant since one of
the main features of colonial oppression is control over language (Ashcroft et al., 1989),
The transmission of knowledge and culture is carried out through language. Language,
then, becomes the medium through which a hierarchical structure of power is
perpetuated, and the medium through which conceptions of 'truth', 'order', and 'reality'
become established (Ashcroft et al., 1989: 7).
Through the English language, English culture formed the heart of the curriculum
in colonial Fiji. For instance, a whole generation of primary school students in the 1940s
and 1950s grew up on the New Method Readers, a series used in most tropical British
colonies where they learned about such things as England's four seasons, King Arthur,
Rip Van Winkle and the desert crossing in Egypt (Lai, 1992). The secondary school
curriculum, set by Cambridge University, was heavily academic and exam-oriented. The
literature component consisted of Shakespeare's plays and the works of Charles Dickens,
Thomas Hardy, Jane Austen and Robert Louis Stevenson (Lai, 1992). History students in
1951 were required to be laminar with topics ranging from the history of Fiji and the
organisation of the colonial government to British imperial history and the history of the
Renaissance and the Reformation (Lai, 1992). Local language, history and culture were
totally ignored in the curriculum.
Using the leverage of grants-in-aid, then, the Colonial Government was able to
impose the curriculum and the language in which it should be taught. Note here the
undermining of Indigenous Fijian cultural knowledge and wisdom in the school
curriculum. Note also the emphasis on English as the medium of instruction after class 4.
The secondary school curriculum was dictated by external examinations set in foreign
lands. New Zealand continued to set the exams and, consequently, the curriculum until
1988, eighteen years after decolonisation occurred. So it was during colonial rule that the
curriculum for primary and secondary schools was decided and this has continued in
neocolonial hegemonic forms after the point of decolonisation.
Postcolonial Fiji
So far in this chapter I have explicated the impact of British colonisation on Fiji's
physical, social, cultural, economic and political landscape. I have tried to show that no
matter how benign British colonialism may have seemed, the colonisation process was
oppressive, dominating and exploitative. Colonial assertions of control, authority and
power form the central pivot of colonialism, The process and practice of colonialism is,
89
therefore, one of epistemic violence (Spivak, 1995). In this section I reiterate the point
that what is at this historical juncture are neocolonial configurations of what was. Hence,
Fiji's colonial history has shaped in significant ways the ideological, epistemological and
material basis of Fiji society. In particular, I describe the neocolonial shaping of the
educational system after political self-rule became a reality and then focus on a
discussion of educational inequalities. This manifests itself in a fuller description of "the
educational gap" or underachievement of Indigenous Fijians. I then provide an analysis
of the development and implementation of AA policies which forms the last section of
the chapter.
After Fiji became a British colony in 1874 the people endured 96 years of British
values, attitudes and institutional structures. A century is long enough for the inculcation
of Western values into the fabric of every facet of life in the colony, The ideology of the
colony was British in flavour. Fiji's political, economic and educational structures were
(and still are) almost twin copies of Britain's, in essence if not in quality. Schools, for
example, were established along similar lines to those in the home ccunUy. Uniforms, a
formal curriculum based on Western knowledge and values, timetables, teachers,
buildings and other physical infrastructures, school fees, text books, a central
administrative system, school grants and the like became inherent features of Fiji's
educational system. The democratic form of political governance was set in place during
colonial times and continues today. The legal and judicial system was adopted from the
home country as well. Economic structures with an emphasis on capitalism set in place
prior to independence are firmly entrenched today. The assumption that seemed to be
held by the British colonialists was that their way of life was superior to that of the
'natives' therefore, if structures from the home country were set in place, life would be
much easier for them because of this familiarity. There was little consideration of how
these structures would affect the indigenous way of life. It was assumed that what was
good for the home country would definitely be good in the colony.
Colonial institutional and discursive structures, whatever form they may take, do
not necessarily end when a nation attains political independence. In a colony where the
coloniser was more than willing to hand over total responsibility to the people of the
colony, it would be extremely difficult for a new nation to dream up new ways of doing
things. In any case, 96 years of colonisation had firmly entrenched in the psyche of the
colonised the notion that what was British was good for them. The smooth transition
from one phase to another was facilitated by the existence of a local elite who had been
90
trained by the colonisers in the ins and outs of that value system. These were represented
by those in government positions, including persons of chiefly rank, who had been
cultivated by the colonisers. It is not altogether surprising that the old colonial structures
continued to play a prominent part in the workings of a newly independent nation. Today,
a quarter of a decade down the path of Fiji's postcolonial history, this still applies, albeit
in different forms,
Neocolonial Curriculum
Neocolonialism is the highest stage of colonialism where a politically
independent nation that was once under colonial rule, continues to be bound, whether
voluntarily or through necessity, to a European or American society, or to a Western
derivative society such as New Zealand or Australia (Altbach and Kelly, 1978).
Neocolonial educational practices continued in Fiji as manifested in the distribution of
foreign textbooks, the subtle use of foreign technical advisers on matters of policy, as
well as the continuation of foreign administrative models and curricular patterns for
schools, with very little alterations to the curriculum that was in place before
independence (Altbach, 1971).
The most insidious element of neocolonialism is that relatively little change to the
education system occurs after ex-colonised nations attain political independence. As
Ashcroft et al., (1995: 424) have put it, "Education is perhaps the most insidious and in
some ways the most cryptic of colonialist survivals, older systems now passing,
sometimes imperceptibly, into neo-colonial configurations", In this sense, educational
apparatuses can be described as hegemonic because once structures such as the
curriculum, assessment and school organisation become entrenched and institutionalised,
they have a totalising effect on the society. Education deeply saturates "the
consciousness of a society", as Raymond Williams (1976: 204) emphasises, and becomes
unquestionably what parents want for their children.
New Zealand, another British colony, has played an influential role in the
development of education in Fiji (Whitehead, 1981). This is evident particularly in the
nature of the curriculum and the presence of teachers, educational administrators and
head teachers from New Zealand prior to, and in the decade after, political independence.
The curricula offered in schools after independence were a continuation of those firmly
entrenched in colonial times. Up to almost two decades after independence, Fiji still
depended on New Zealand to prescribe the content of, and set the higher exams for,
91
Forms 5 and 6. The New Zealand University Exam, taken at Form 6, was phased out in
1988 with the New Zealand School Certificate following the year after.
The length of time taken for Fiji to move from an 'imported' curricula and
examinations to a more local one demonstrates the institutionalisation of colonial
structures. Fiji may have become independent politically but, in terms of education, it
has been very heavily dependent on content, pedagogies, school organisation and
assessment derived from European culture, notably of Britain and New Zealand. For
instance, the study of English literature at the senior level continues to emphasise
Western works such as Shakespeare (Julius Caesar, Hamlet, Twelfth Night, The
Tempest), Somerset Maughan's The Razor's Edge, Graham Greene's The Heart of the
Matter, Katherine Mansfield's Selected Stories, Ernest Hemingway's The Old Man and
the Sea, G,B. Shaw's Androcles and the Lion and Tom Stoppard's Night and Day.
The themes for senior History include economic development (Fiji, 1930-present;
Japan, 1918-1970), social welfare (Fiji since 1945; New Zealand, 1891-1970), conflict
(Palestine/Israel, 1945-1967; China, 1921-1949), nationalism (Italy, 1848-1871;
Germany, 1848-1879), imperialism (India, 1875-1947; Europe and Southern Africa,
1870-1919), international relations (World War I; World War II) and government (United
Kingdom, 1832-1868; Russia, 1927-1957). The theme of cultural interaction includes a
study of Fiji and South Africa. Specifically, the topic Fiji Since 1874 has four foci: Fiji
after cession, 1874-1920, Adjustments, 1920-1970, The Integration Process and Post-
Colonial Period, 1970+. Two of the three recommended books for this topic are written
by Westerners - Fiji in the Pacific by Donnelly and Kerr, revised in 1994, and J.D.
Legge's Britain in Fiji, 1855-1880, published in 1958. The point I would like to make
here is that if the teacher does not adopt a critical pedagogical approach, s/he will present
to the students colonial representations of Fiji and students would internalise these
representations as an authentic interpretation of Fiji's history.
The other valid point to make is that the Form Six History curriculum that was
developed in 1987 was still in use in 1996 and may still be in use today. The same can be
said for the Form Seven History curriculum. This was a reprint of a version that was
developed in 1979 and was subsequently reprinted in 1982 and again in 1991. The
implication of this is that no changes have been made to the Forms Six History
curriculum for over 10 years and close to 20 years for the Form Seven History
curriculum.
92
I recall from my own experiences at a multiracial school, Suva Grammar, in the
late 1970s being taught by expatriate teachers from New Zealand and Australia. The
principal of the school was also 'European'. I studied for and passed the New Zealand
School Certificate (Form 5) and University Entrance (Form 6) Examinations. Sereana
Tagivakatini, Fellow in Science Education at the Institute of Education, USP, recalls
when she did her senior years in the mid 1970s at Lelean Memorial School, a
predominantly Indigenous Fijian school, that the principal was European and her teachers
were mainly New Zealanders, Australians and some Peace Corps from the United States
of America. Tagivakitini notes:
The language in and of schools was English. Students were actively discouraged
from talking in the vernacular. Culture was given a one-two period session once a
week and were largely used for meke practices, Never was culture integrated into
mainstream studies. Other coverage of history and culture was academic as and
when they cropped up in History or Geography lessons. (Tagivakatini, personal
email correspondence, 20/11/98)
Tt is interesting that the only other places where British-based educational
practices were adopted are Hong Kong, Singapore and even after decolonisation,
Malaysia. Only in recent times has Fiji become confident enough to specify its own
curricula and national examinations at the upper secondary level. Even so, Western
knowledge and values still play a dominant influence in these changes as the above
examples show. Many informants argue that the curriculum, pedagogical and assessment
systems are still Western-oriented (See Chapter Five). And this state of play is
maintained by the continued dependence on foreign educational aid and the utilisation of
so called foreign 'experts' or 'consultants' that such aid produces. This is one reason
why a neocolonial curriculum has continued after independence from imperial
colonialism. Other explanations for the continuation of hegemonic, neocolonial
educational structures will be explored a little later in this section.
The formal education structures that were put in place during colonial rule in Fiji
became the norm, with the society not really critically questioning whose knowledge it is
and whether it is relevant and appropriate. In any case, it was more a case of the local
people aspiring for the kind of education that the 'white masters had' and the mentality
seems to have been 'what was good for them must be good for us'. The aspirations of the
people in Fiji for a Western type education is put in this manner by Thomas and
Postlethwaite (1984: 299):
93
If advertising can be defined as 'making people dissatisfied with their present
condition, and proposing ways to surmount this dissatisfaction,' then the
Westerners' arrival can be viewed as a kind of advertising. The material culture
and learning they introduced served in many cases to cause islanders'
dissatisfaction with aspects of their own traditional modes of living, thereby
creating in them new appetites and goals to be fulfilled by embracing elements of
the colonisers' culture.
Despite attaining political independence in 1970, Fiji is in a neocolonial condition
because of its continued dependence on the hegemonic social, political, economic and
educational structures that had been instituted during the period of colonial rule. These
structures were maintained and perpetuated by the local elites who had power after
political independence was attained. In any case, what other alternative education
systems had Fiji known? Fiji was colonised for almost a century, That is long enough for
the people to internalise the British way of doing things. After all, Britain had not done
anything overtly destructive in Fiji to cause the people to rise up in nationalistic
resistance as had occurred in India. There is also the interrelated explanation where the
local elites were trained as clerks and public servants before independence to maintain the
colonial administration (Baba, 1991). Not only were these elites trained under colonial
bureaucrats, but those who received an overseas education did so in British-based
universities. These processes ensured the maintenance and perpetuation of Western
cultural values, knowledge and attitudes.
As discussed earlier, an added explanation for the continuation of neocolonial
hegemonic structures was the continued dependence Fiji had on Britain and New
Zealand. Fiji has a limited physical resource base and therefore a small industrial base,
hardly enough for economic sustenance. Fiji depends heavily on Western countries for
foreign economic and educational aid. Hegemonic neocolonial educational structures,
therefore, continue to be perpetuated by this economic dependence.
Fiji has maintained a neocolonial curriculum despite decolonisation. There has
been more focus on local content, including the inclusion of Fijian as a language of study,
but it is my view that this change is superficial and does not fundamentally change the
Western focus and orientation of the curriculum. In his comparison of education in Fiji
in 1925 and 1983, Mangubhai (1984), notes that in 1983, more than a decade after
decolonisation, the content, language and structure of education were still predominantly
derived from European culture. Just like the colonial curriculum, the neocolonial
curriculum devalued (and continues to devalue) Fijian knowledge and cultural values.
94
In sum, the educational system in place in this postcolonial moment is a
continuation of that set in place during the period of colonial rule, Not only is the
curriculum and examination system Western-based, but the pedagogies of schooling,
school organisation, administration and organisation are still foreign. As well, English is
used as the medium of instruction and this is a tangible manifestation of the continued {
effect of colonialism.
Racial Inequalities in Schooling
Thus far, I have set the context by analysing Fiji's pre-colonial, colonial and
postcolonial conditions. I particularly make the point that the educational system has
continued in neocoionial hegemonic configurations in the postcolonial moment and
continues to do so at this historical juncture, At this stage, I would like to describe the
framework that led to the development of AA as a strategic intervention and a counter
response to the effects of educational and social inequalities created by a colonial past.
This framework is underpinned by the notion of an educational gap between Indigenous
Fijians and children of 'other' ethnic groups in Fiji, notably Indo-Fijians.
This educational gap has been specifically defined as "any kind of disparity that
currently exists between Indigenous Fijians and Others in relation to access to education,
the nature of teaching and learning resources available in schools and the performance of
students in external examinations" (Cabinet Memorandum prepared by the Minister for
Education, August 1988). At the point of decolonisation, Indigenous Fijian
underachievement in schooling (Fiji Government, 1970) and their consequent under-
representation in "top and middle level positions in the public and private sectors of the
economy" (Fiji Government, 1975: 184) were problematised as national issues.
What were the reasons for, and the nature of, the educational gap that formed the
basis for the development of AA in Fiji? One of the main aims of this thesis is to answer
this question (See Chapter Five). Nevertheless, I would like to discuss the findings of the
1969 Fiji Education Commission Report. In this report, the views portrayed are basically
colonial representations of Indigenous Fijian underachievement which have been
perpetuated and reproduced in postcolonial official and academic discourses. This report
is also interesting because Fiji's educational development in the decades after
decolonisation has been shaped by the implementation of some of its recommendations.
It is pertinent to say that the blueprint of educational development in the postcolonial
period, including the development of AA policies, has found its basis in this report. As
95
well, official postcolonial government (Ministry of Education Annual Reports,
Parliamentary Debates, National Development Plans) and academic discourses have
reproduced these colonial representations of Indigenous Fijian underachievement.
In the years preceding decolonisation, the Colonial Government prepared local
leaders for political self-rule. An informal local Indigenous Fijian government structure
was in place that recognised the sovereignty of Indigenous Fijians while processes were
being finalised to see to official decolonisation (occurred in 1970) and the first general
elections (held in 1972).
In 1968, a Commission was formed to examine the state of Fiji's educational
system. One of the Commission's seven terms of reference dealt specifically with the
problems of Indigenous Fijian education. This term of reference specifically called for
recommendations to be made on
the special problems of the education of Fijians and the extent to which special
measures, including scholarship provision and the improved preparation for higher
education, may be necessary to solve them. (Fiji Education Commission, 1969: 67)
The composition of this Commission is interesting in that none of the six
members4 were local. The Commission noted that one problem which had concerned the
Colonial Government, the Education Department and Indigenous Fijian leaders was the
"disparity in educational performance between children of the two major racial groups -
the Indigenous Fijians on the one hand and those of Indian extraction on the other" (Fiji
Education Commission, 1969: vi). The Commission, therefore, defined the Indigenous
Fijian educational problem as the wide disparity in educational opportunity and
achievement between the two major racial groups. The Commission noted that the low
quality of Indigenous Fijian primary education was reflected in poor Indigenous Fijian
school performance at the secondary, and consequently, tertiary levels. The Commission
also noted the poor performance of Indigenous Fijians at overseas universities.
4 The chair of the Fiji Education Commission was Sir Philip Sherlock, Secretary General of the Association of
Carribean Universities and Research Institutes, The other five members were Mr G, Bessey, Director of
Education, Cumberland; Mr P. Chang MinPhang, Chief Inspector of Schools, West Malaysia; Miss Margaret
Miles, Headmistress of Mayfied School, Putney, London; Professor A J . Lewis, Chairman of the Department
of Educational Administration, Teachers' College, Columbia University, New York; and Professor O.H.K.
Spate, Director of the Research School of Pacific Studies, Australian National University.
96
The following factors were identified by the 1969 Education Commission as
impediments to the education of Indigenous Fijians:
1. The scatter of Indigenous Fijian schools; consequently, these schools were identified
as too small for effective staffing and teaching;
2. Difficulty of supervision by Education Department officials because of (1) above;
3. Isolation of Indigenous Fijian rural teachers contributing to lack of intellectual
stimulus to help their own professional development;
4. Many Indigenous Fijian students were forced to be boarders because of the distance of
schools from their homes, usually in the rural areas which added to the burden of
costs;
5. Severe shortage of appropriately qualified Indigenous Fijian primary teachers;
6. Rural poverty made it very difficult for school committees to maintain adequate
standards and for parents to pay school fees;
7. Physical conditions in the village were not conducive to study: inadequate lighting,
liitle privacy, children often walked long distances to and from school, and many
social distractions.
H
Further, the Commission identified various intangible contributing factors to the
problem of Indigenous Fijian education. Once such cause was the social background of
Indigenous Fijians which manifested itself in their lack of perseverance and patience.
These attitudinal weaknesses coupled with difficulties in money management were
viewed as problematic. The Commission also viewed boarding schools as a hindrance to
performance at tertiary institutions because of their contribution to the slow maturation of
Indigenous Fijian students which could result in the students having difficulty in adapting
to the permissive atmosphere of the university. In addition, the lack of competition in
totally Indigenous Fijian schools was seen as a handicap to Indigenous Fijian educational
advancement, Moreover, the Commission identified the structural difference from the
English language to the Fijian language as a further handicap.
Having determined Indigenous Fijians educational problems, the Fiji Education
Commission made a number of general and specific recommendations to particularly
assist Indigenous Fijian students. Many of the general recommendations concerned rural
needs. The Commission, for instance, recommended that the Postcolonial Government
build six junior secondary schools of high standard in carefully selected areas. It also
recommended the improvement of teacher training and conditions of service, and the
localisation of the curriculum. Further, it recommended that pre-school and adult
97
education campaigns be conducted in rural areas to improve the attitude to, and
conditions of, children's study in the village.
The specific measures recommended by the Commission to help Indigenous
Fijians bridge the educational gap included scholarship awards. More specifically, the
Commission recommended that 50% of government tertiary scholarships be reserved on a
"parallel block basis" for Indigenous Fijians. What this meant was that Indigenous
Fijians were to compete for 50% of the scholarships while the non-Indigenous Fijian
component would compete for the other half. The Commission also recommended that in
the event of Indigenous Fijians not filling their quota, the un-allocated balance of funds
should be devoted to other specifically Indigenous Fijian educational needs such as
university students repeating courses. I will discuss AA policies in more detail in the
next section. What I would like to do now is to examine the statistical and other data on
Indigenous Fijian underachievement to see what the state and nature of the educational
gap is that has been the basis for AA.
Table 1: A Comparison of Indigenous Fijian and Inuo-Fijian Performance in the
NZSC Examination: 1966-69
Number of Candidates and Passes
Indigenous Fijians
Indo-Fijians
Year
Sat
Passed
%
Sat
Passed
%
1966
110
64
58.2
157
196
61.1
1967
158
77
48.7
504
186
36.9
1968
272
133
48.9
757
378
49.9
1969
487
223
45.8
1414
545
38.5
(Source: Education Department, Report for the Year 1969: 17)
The two national examinations prior to decolonisation were the Cambridge School
Certificate and the more popular New Zealand School Certificate (NZSC) Examinations
taken at the end of Form Five (Year 11) and New Zealand University Entrance (NZUE)
Examination taken at the end of Form Six (Year 12), Table 1 above provides a
comparison of Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian performance in the NZSC Examination
for the four-year period just prior to decolonisation in 1970. From Table I, we can see
that the concerns of the Colonial Government and Indigenous Fijian leaders may have
been correct. The concerns were mainly with regard to the actual number of Indigenous
Fijians accessing the final year of schooling. In 1969, the actual numbers of Indigenous
98
Fijians sitting the NZSC examination was almost a third of Indo-Fijians. In terms of the
numbers qualifying to enter Form Six in 1969, again, there were three times more Indo-
Fijians qualifying than Indigenous Fijians. For the four year period 1966-1969, only 497
Indigenous Fijians passed as against 1205 Indo-Fijians, a clear difference of almost two
and a half times more Indo-Fijians qualifying for Form 6.
Table 2 below illustrates that the problem of Indigenous Fijian attainment was
more serious at the University Entrance level. Not only was the number sitting this
examination disproportionably smaller but the number of Indigenous Fijians passing was
abysmally low. For instance, in 1969 only 44 Indigenous Fijians qualified for university
against 132 Indo-Fijians, giving it a ratio of 1 Indigenous Fijian pass for every 3 Indo-
Fijians. The small number of Indigenous Fijians qualifying for entrance to tertiary
institutions was a matter of great concern to the incumbent Postcolonial Government on
the eve of political self-determination. The number passing or graduating at university
level would be even smaller given the poor performance of Indigenous Fijians in overseas
universities. Hence, the concern of both the Colonial and Postcolonial Governments for
the education of Indigenous Fijians was justified since this meant that only a small
number of Indigenous Fijians were qualifying for decision-making positions in national
life. This was indeed a national problem confronting the newly independent Fiji
Government at the point of decolonisation.
Table 2: A Comparison of Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian Performance in the
NZUE Examination, 1966-69
Number of Candidates and Passes
Indigenous Fijians
Indo-Fijians
Year
Sat
Passed
%
Sat
Passed
%
1966
45
16
35.5
106
64
60,4
1967
88
22
25,0
200
78
39.0
1968
80
23
28.7
281
87
30.9
1969
131
44
33.6
404
132
32.7
(Source: Education Department, Report for the Year 1969: 17)
What is the nature of this educational gap, say 10, 20 and 30 years after Fiji
became independent? Has it remained the same or has it narrowed in the way that the
Postcolonial Governments have intended? Table 3 below provides comparative data of
Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian pass rates in the NZUE examination over a nineteen-
• M L .
H .
if
•A
year period from 1970-1988. The pass ratio for this period shows that the difference
between Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians has remained the same as in colonial times,
that is 1 Indigenous Fijian pass to every 3 Indo-Fijians. Between the period 1980-1988, a
yearly average of 598 more Indo-Fijians qualified for entrance to university compared to
Table 3: A Comparison of Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian Pass Rates in the
NZUE Examination, 1970-88
Indigenous Fijians
Indo-Fijians
Year
Sat
Passed
%
Sat
Passed
%
Difference
in Number of
Passes
1970
202
45
22
501
167
33
122
1971
224
55
24
585
146
25
91
1972
252
63
25
684
225
33
162
1973
202
58
29
709
232
33
174
1974
240
67
28
807
246
30
179
1975
293
76
26
912
299
33
223
1976
318
96
30
1107
322
29
226
1977
478
107
22
1405
411
29
304
1978
576
170
29
1710
647
38
477
1979
804
183
23
2037
681
33
498
1980
922
184
20
2305
771
33
587
1981
1000
219
22
2278
825
36
606
1982
1117
258
23
2512
837
33
579
1983
1300
334
26
2581
950
37
616
1984
1259
333
26
2597
947
36
614
1985
1433
391
27
2478
874
35
483
1986
1483
345
23
2447
933
38
588
1987
1622
368
23
2493
1077
43
709
1988
1951
441
23
2651
1047
39
606
NB. Percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number.
(Source: Ministry of Education Annual Reports)
Indigenous Fijians. This had implications for differential entry points to USP, for
instance, where Indigenous Fijians entered USP with lower marks as a result of the quota
placed on government scholarships. This will be discussed further in the next section on
AA.
100
Has there been a significant improvement in the educational gap in the period
1987-1996? We have seen that since decolonisation, the ratio of passes at the NZUE
examination has been 1 Indigenous Fijian to 3 Indo-Fijians, This has not changed from
the four-year period prior to political self-rule where the ratio was also 1:3. Tables 4 and
5 provide statistical data on pass rates for the Fiji School Leaving Certificate (FSLC) and
the Fiji Form Seven examinations. The FSLC programme, a two year programme,
replaced the NZSC and NZUE in 1988 with the first examination taken in 1989. It was
only in 1992, when the Government decided to stop sponsoring students into the
Foundation course at USP, that predominantly Indigenous Fijians schools expanded up to
Form Seven (Jitoko, 1995). Many Indo-Fijian schools had been offering Form Seven
courses for many years prior to that. The introduction of the Fiji Form Seven national
examination has increased schooling to 13 years for those who make it through the
system.
Table 4: A Comparison of Indigenous Fijian and Non-Indigenous Pass Rates in the
FSLC Examination, 1989-95
Number of Candidates and Passes
Indigenous Fijians
Non-Indigenous
Year
Sat
Passed
%
Sat
Passed
%
1989
2987
1247
41.7
4010
2179
54.3
1990
3366
1420
42.2
4006
2263
56.5
1991
3844
1595
41.5
4603
2618
56.9
1992
4317
1516
35.1
4894
3006
61.4
1993
4750
1806
38.0
5280
3217
60.9
1994
5012
1899
37.9
5340
3287
61.5
1995
5274
2062
39.1
5720
3458
60.4
(Source: Ministry of Education Annual Reports)
Table 4 shows a comparison in the pass rates of Indigenous Fijians compared to
all the other ethnic groups combined in the FSLC examination from 1989-1995. In terms
of the numbers accessing Form 6, Indigenous Fijian figures are becoming increasingly
comparable. In 1995, for instance, the ratio was 1:1.3 in favour of the non-indigenous
category. However, in terms of numbers passing and qualifying for Form Seven, a bigger
proportion of Indigenous Fijians are failing, The highest percentage of passes for
Indigenous Fijians has been 42% compared to 60.4% for the non-indigenous category. In
101
1995, only 39% of Indigenous Fijians passed compared to 60.4% of the non-indigenous
category. What conclusions can we glean from these figures? An interesting trend that
has occurred in the detailing of the results is the inclusiveness of the Indo-Fijian category
in the 'Other' category compared to the clear distinction made prior to the coups of 1987
between Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijians. The gap between students studying at the
Form Six level seems to be narrowing if ratios are anything to go by. The ratio between
Indigenous Fijians and the non-indigenous category has reduced from 1:3 in the decade
of the 1970s and 1980s to approximately 1:1.7 in the first half of the 1990s.
While the results at the end of Form Six may look encouraging, Form Seven
results illustrate a disproportionately large educational gap between Indigenous Fijians
and other ethnic groups. Table 5, which shows a comparison in the Fiji Seventh Form
national examination in 1995, emphasises the point that the educational gap between
Indigenous Fijians and other ethnic groups is still large, particularly where it counts
most—at university entrance level. The Ministry of Education (MOE) in a non-dated
paper entitled "Factors Affecting the Performance of Fijian Schools" highlights two
points: first, that a comparatively small number of Indigenous Fijians are accessing Form
Seven; and second, that the pass rate for Indigenous Fijian students is low compared to
other ethnic groups. Table 5 reveals that in 1995, for every Indigenous Fijian accessing
Form Seven, there were two Indo-Fijians. In terms of passes, the ratio was 1:3.5, that is,
1 Indigenous Fijian passing for every 3.5 Indo-Fijians. When one adds the 'Other'
category to the non-Indian category, the ratio is 1:3.8,
Table 5: A Comparison of Pass Rates in the Fiji Seventh Form Examination, 1995
Indigenous
Indo-Fijians
Others
Total
Fijians
Total Sat
871
1822
209
2903
Total Passed
387
1358
131
1876
% Pass
44,4
74.5
62.7
64.6
(Source: Ministry of Education paper titled "Factors Affecting the Performance of Fijian
Schools", n.d.)
These statistics indicate that the educational gap identified as a serious national problem
at the point of decolonisation is still serious almost four decades later.
102
The MOE, in a non-dated paper that is post-1995, identifies the following as
factors affecting achievement in Indigenous Fijian schools:
(a) Teacher Shortage
(b) Isolation
(c) Management problems
(d) Leadership problems
(e) Teacher attitudes
(f) Lack of parental and community involvement
(g) Lack of prudent time management
In 1995, the MOE strengthened its Fijian Education Unit to specifically look at
the education of Indigenous Fijians. This unit, consisting of a Principal Education
Officer and a Senior Education Officer, began close liaison with Indigenous Fijian
schools and began a multi-pronged approach to tackle the shortcomings identified above.5
Since it was formed in 1995, this Fijian Education Unit has been proactive in conducting
workshops for Indigenous Fijian primary school headteachers and secondary school
principals as well as Indigenous Fijian school managers and education officers (Ministry
of Education, 1995). It has also been involved in school visits to advise teachers and
parents on their role in the education of Indigenous Fijian students.6
I have examined the Ministry of Education reports and statistical data to ascertain
the nature of the educational gap that the first Postcolonial Government had identified as
a national problem at the point of decolonisation, From the evidence of the data, the
educational gap that existed in 1970 is still evident in the mid-1990s. If its main purpose
was to narrow the educational gap so that Indigenous Fijians could be better represented
in "senior positions in the public and private sectors" (Fiji Government, 1966: 96) of the
economy, why has AA not made an impact on the underachievement of Indigenous
Fijians?
5 This information was provided by the two officers at the Fijian Education Unit of the Ministry of Education
during interviews I conduced in late 1996,
6 See Appendix A for a mission statement developed by the MOE detailing what it hopes to achieve in terms
of the education of Indigenous Fijians by the Year 2001.
103
AA Policies in Fiji
The impact of recommendations made by the 1969 Fiji Education Commission on
the education of Indigenous Fijians was far reaching. The first Postcolonial Government
advocated twelve special measures to reduce the educational gap between the two major
racial groups. These measures were aimed at improving facilities (i.e., boarding, books,
equipment), encouraging more Indigenous Fijians through scholarship provision,
providing incentives for teachers to teach in rural areas (i.e., better quarters), improving
teacher education (i.e., better qualified teachers), establishing more junior secondary
schools, launching a 'public relations' campaign, easing the problem of travel, and the
acquisition of more vessels for field staff (Fiji Government, 1970), One of the long-term
aims of the Postcolonial Government, which it hoped to achieve by the mid-1980s, was
defined as "a marked improvement in the education of Fijians" in order to redress the
educational imbalance between the Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians (Fiji Government,
1970: 67). Five years later in 1975, the Government emphasised the need for special
measures if the nation was to "produce enough qualified Fijians to occupy a due share of
top and middle level positions in the public and private sectors of the economy" (Fiji
Government, 1975: 184).
AA policies, then, have been in place since the early 1970s to counter this
government defined problem of Fijian underachievement. At least six AA policies were
implemented by the first Postcolonial Government, especially at the tertiary level, in the
hope that the imbalance in educational attainment of the Indigenous Fijians and non-
indigenous students would be reduced. This, it was envisaged by the Government, would
somehow reduce, if not close, the occupational gap between the ethnic groups.
Specifically, these AA policies were:
(i) The establishment of junior secondary schools since the early 1970s to
specifically increase the number of Fijians at the secondary level and to
improve the education of Indigenous Fijians in general;
(ii) The reservation of 50% of Fiji Government university scholarships for
Indigenous Fijians since the mid 1970s;
(iii) The inauguration in 1971 of a 'public relations' campaign designed to
encourage in Indigenous Fijian parents, especially in rural areas, a greater
appreciation of the educational needs of their children.
(iv) The award of scholarships to all deserving Indigenous Fijian applicants
since 1975;
104
(v) The establishment in 1984 of special funds for more scholarship awards
and institutional improvements of Indigenous Fijian schools. This was an
annual fund of $3.5 million; and
(vi) The conversion of a teachers' college into a residential college for
foundation students at the University of the South Pacific (USP) in 1984.
(Puamau, 1991:115-116)
From the above list, one can see that three AA strategies (ii, iv and v) were
devoted to providing Indigenous Fijians with scholarship awards to enable them to access
a university education, It is important to note at this juncture that AA strategies in Fiji
were not specifically aimed at addressing educational inequalities at the lower levels of
the educational system, Instead, the emphasis was on providing Indigenous Fijians with
the opportunity to access a tertiary education to enable them to be better represented in
middle and top level jobs in the private and public sectors of the economy. That is where
the perceived priority lay soon after decolonisation occurred in 1970, This point is
further discussed in the Interpretation section of Chapter Six.
I now turn to an examination of AA policies in education. What have been their
assumptions and rationale? How have they been implemented? What have been some of
the outcomes of these policies? I specifically focus on a statistical analysis of two AA
policies in play at this historical juncture: the allocation of half of all government tertiary
scholarships for Indigenous Fijians and the annual $3,5 million (increased to $4.7 since
1994) Indigenous Fijian Education Fund.
AA Policy: Government Scholarships for Indigenous Fijians
The AA policy of reserving 50% of government scholarships for Indigenous
Fijians was first proposed by the 1969 Fiji Education Commission. It was incorporated
into Fiji's Sixth and Seventh Development Plans for the period 1971-1980. In theory,
this policy was supposed to ensure that more Indigenous Fijian graduates would be in a
position to hold the middle and top level positions envisaged for them by the first
Postcolonial Government in the public and private sectors of the economy. A tertiary
education, particularly university training, was viewed as the means by which a
proportional number of Indigenous Fijians would participate actively in the economic and
social well-being of the nation. But more importantly, as Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, the
Prime Minister from 1970-1987, argues AA was perceived as necessary to ensure that
105
can only speculate on the reasons why Indigenous Fijians have not been able to meet their
50% allocation of government scholarships. One reason could very well be the lack of
applicants with the appropriate entry marks. Another reason could be attributed to the
"bloody-mindedness" of bureaucrats determined to subvert the full implementation of
this policy as Dr Ahmed Ali7 puts it.
I have just discussed problems associated with the implementation of the 50:50
scholarship quota policy that was supposed to provide access to more Indigenous Fijians
at the tertiary level. I now turn to an examination of the second AA policy, the Special
Indigenous Fijian Education Fund, instituted by Fiji's first Postcolonial Government to
counter their lack of access to and representation in those processes that assure a more
representational participation in social and economic life. First I provide a brief
background to the conceptualisation behind the policy before detailing the two specific
foci of the fund which are the capital development of Indigenous Fijian schools and
scholarship awards for Indigenous Fijian students to access tertiary education.
AA Policy: The Special Indigenous Fijian Education Fund
The special annual fund of $3.5 million was established by Cabinet in late 1983 to
assist the education of Indigenous Fijians (Ministry of Fijian Affairs, Annual Report for
the Year 1988), It was first implemented for five years from 1984-88. Cabinet approved
the second phase from 1989-93. Since 1994, this fund has increased to $4,77 million. At
this historical juncture, AA for Indigenous Fijians in the form of this special annual fund
is a hegemonic feature of Fiji's social and political landscape.
The then Prime Minister, Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara summed up the need for the
Special AA Fund in this manner:
I think the basic criterion that decided Government to allocate this fund and to put
it under the Ministry of Fijian Affairs is the fact that it is the Fijian people, as a
whole, who have been lagging behind in education. Many endeavours have been
made and the problem seems to have not been reduced. We hope that with this
injection of funds and activity that will arise from it, we will be able to hope to
alleviate the problem that is building up - the resentment of one section of the
«> community about their lagging behind in achievements in the professions and
educational attainments. (Parliamentary Debates, Oct/Nov/Dec, 1983: 1756)
7 Dr Ahmed Ali is a former Minister for Education (1982-1986) and is currently Director of the
Policy Analysis Unit in the Prime Minister's Office at the time of the interview, dated 4/10/96.
108
Similarly, it was noted by a member of Parliament, Ratu Timoci Vesikula, in the
Parliamentary Debates of Nov/Dec. 1984 that the Special Education Fund was essential
...not merely for the benefit the Fijian people will receive, but also for the well-
being of this country and in this sense, for the welfare of all the people domiciled
in Fiji. By ensuring the Fijian people a fair share of the fruits produced in their
land, this country will continue to have the stability for which it has been noted
for everywhere. (Ratu Timoci Vesikula, Parliamentary Debates Nov/Dec 1984:
74)
The assumption of Cabinet, when setting aside this sum, was that special financial
resources were a prerequisite for any intended improvement in the education of
Indigenous Fijians (Fijian Education Committee, 1988). Better provision of adequate
school facilities, good teaching and suitable advisory services was considered to be the
means of improving Indigenous Fijian performance. Thus, one of the targets of the fund
was school development (e.g., upgrading buildings and facilities - classrooms, libraries
and science laboratories), resources (e.g., library books), and materials (e.g., science
laboratory chemicals and equipment) - particularly in rural Indigenous Fijian schools.
The second focus of the fund was provision of scholarships for tertiary studies in areas
such as Commercial, Scientific and Technological fields where Indigenous Fijians were
lagging behind.
The creation of this special fund as an AA policy to improve the education of
Indigenous Fijians arose as a consequence of the relative failure of special measures spelt
out in the first two postcolonial Development Plans (Fiji Government, 1970, 1975) to
significantly improve the educational performance of Indigenous Fijians. This fund is
administered by the Ministry of Fijian Affairs (MFA) which is synonymously referred to
as the Fijian Affairs Board (FAB). The implementing arm of this special fund is the
Fijian Education Unit at the MFA which is responsible for compiling information on
Indigenous Fijian education, making proposals for the use of the fund and monitoring its
usage (Ministry of Fijian Affairs, Annual Report for the Year 1987). It is the Fijian
Education Committee (FEC) that makes decisions on the disbursement of the fund. This
Committee, chaired by the Permanent Secretary of the MFA, comprises Indigenous
Fijians in key positions in the public and private sectors with relevant experience in
education.
109
because the coups had a large impact. "Due to the state of affairs of the nation, $700,000
was returned to government and $786,575 vired to the Ministry of Fijian Affairs'
administration" (Ministry of Fijian Affairs, 1987: 32). In 1993 there was a significant
decrease in spending on school development. Only 4.45% of the total Fijian Education
Fund was utilised and I have been informed by senior officers at the MFA that the capital
development component of the Special Education Fund ceased in 1993. The emphasis in
the years since has been on manpower development. The emphasis, then, has shifted
from assisting Indigenous Fijian schools to an almost total focus on scholarship
provision. According to information provided by the Ministry of Fijian Affairs, $4.7
million is used for the further education of Indigenous Fijians and only $100,000 for
school text and library books.
Many of the Indigenous Fijian principals, as well as other educationists that I
interviewed, expressed concern at the abolition of this AA programme (See Chapter Six).
They thought this may be a premature move given that many Indigenous Fijian schools
still need a lot of capital work in addition to maintaining what the fund had contributed to
building in its first ten years of operation. However, a senior MOE bureaucrat pointed
out that the two main reasons for the shift in emphasis of the MFA administered Fijian
Education Fund has been the increase in university fees and the increased allocation in
the MOE budget for capital development of schools.
Scholarship Provision
As pointed out above, one of the programmes of the $3.5 million Special
Education Fund, which increased to $4,77 million from 1994, has focussed on the
physical development of Indigenous Fijian schools and the provision of resources and
equipment. I now shift to an examination of the second focus of the programme which is
to do with scholarship awards. An interesting feature of the awards of scholarships is the
inclusion of Rotumans in the category of potential beneficiaries.
Table 9 provides data on the number of Indigenous Fijians and Rotumans who
have won scholarship awards, both locally and overseas. Since the inception of the Fijian
Education Fund AA policy, a total of 4830 Indigenous Fijians and Rotumans have been
awarded scholarships to study both locally and overseas to get Certificate, Diploma,
undergraduate and postgraduate qualifications (See Appendix B for a listing of
programmes and awards that students on FAB scholarships have pursued). Table 9
i l l
have caused much concern, particularly for the provinces that are underrepresented. This
will be discussed in Chapter Six.
The criteria used for the selection of awardees of FAB scholarships has been
another area that has caused much concern because they have not been made transparent
to the public. The only information received is in the form of (a) an advertisement calling
for applications from Indigenous Fijians and Rotumans in particular fields of study and
(b) a list of applicants called to attend interviews at the MFA. Appendix H provides
information on the criteria used for the selection of awardees of FAB scholarships. The
four most important criteria rests on academic performance, choice of programme of
study, recommendation from Employers for working applicants and special consideration
of those from disadvantaged provinces.
An area that has been neglected in discussions on AA in Fiji is that of gender
equity in access to scholarships. This is primarily because of the following reasons: (i)
the secrecy surrounding policies which are race-based; (ii) the consequent lack of public
information; (iii) the emphasis on giving awards to Indigenous Fijians, irrespective of
gendei and (iv) the male biased nature of courses for which applicants can apply. Tables
12 and 13 provide data on the allocation of FAB scholarships over a 13 year period from
1984-1996 for local and overseas institutions based on gender. We can see from these
tables that, with the exception of several years, a significant number of both local and
overseas FAB scholarships have been awarded to males. In terms of local scholarships,
the highest percentage awarded to female Indigenous Fijians was 74.7% in 1990 and the
next highest in 1989 with females winning 52.4% of local scholarships. The average
percentage of local scholarships awarded to female students, however, has been 40.9%.
As Table 13 shows, the same holds true for the award of overseas FAB tertiary
scholarships. Females are significantly underrepresented in overseas training on FAB
scholarships. The highest percentage of overseas scholarships awarded to female
Indigenous Fijian students was 53,3% in 1992. However, the next highest was in 1985
when females scored only 25% of all overseas scholarships. The average percentage of
overseas scholarships awarded to females has been less than this at 23.9%, which is less
than a quarter of alt overseas FAB scholarships.
114
doubtful whether these many Indigenous Fijian students would have accessed a tertiary
education in the absence of such a scholarship fund.
The quantitative data provided in the preceding sections indicate that the
educational gap that existed between Indigenous Fijians and other ethnic groups prior to
decolonisation is still present at this historical juncture, especially in terms of access to
and performance at national examinations at the Form Seven level. We have seen from
the analysis above that AA policies have taken shape in the form of scholarship provision
and school capital development. The important question to ask is: What impact have
these policies had on racial inequalities in schooling? Considering that very little AA
was provided to assist Indigenous Fijians directly in schooling, was it a misconception on
the part of the first Postcolonial Government to assume that there was a direct
relationship between the educational gap and the availability of state funds? The
Government's concern has been with regard to enabling Indigenous Fijians to attain
positions of authority and power in the public and private sectors of the economy. There
is no doubt that the scholarship provisions by PSC and FAB have made a significant
difference as the data on scholarship awards and graduates demonstrate. Precisely how
this has translated into employment prospects for Indigenous Fijians is yet to be
ascertained by further research. Precisely how to translate spending on school facilities,
resources and equipment into examination performance of Indigenous Fijians is again
difficult to ascertain.
My main concerns here are to find out why Indigenous Fijians are underachieving
in schooling, why AA policies have been ineffective in reducing or closing the
educational gap, what the nature is of the relationship between underachievement and
AA, and what impact neocolonial educational structures have on Indigenous Fijian
underachievement.
Summary
In order to understand AA, we need to see how these policies interact in specific
historical contexts. I have attempted to provide the shifting economic, political and
cultural context under which AA operates in Fiji. It is through this context that we
should view AA in Fiji.
I have examined Fiji's history in order to place in context the conceptualisation
and implementation of AA policies in education that followed immediately after the first
Postcolonial Government took up the reins of government from the colonial 'masters' in
117
one of its first bids at self-determination. It is pertinent to point out that although this
government was a multiracial one, the perception by the people was that it was a
predominantly indigenous party because the majority of the ministers were Indigenous
Fijians. I view AA, therefore, as a deliberate move by the government to assert Fiji's
postcoloniality and, in so doing, to counter the effects of a Western education that had
disadvantaged indigenous students in schooling.
Some important issues raised in this chapter pertain to Fiji's colonial history.
These issues include the problematics associated with the following: the use of categories
and Western periodization; historic forms of knowledge particularly in view of the
following: (a) the absence of a written tradition before pre-contact times; (b) dependence
on the historical representation by the colonialists/colonisers/western writers; (c) the
insidious effect of Western representation of Fiji's history on the people themselves; and
(d) the continuation of colonial educational structures and reproduction after the nation
had attained political self-determination.
I also provided a detailed account of the thinking that led to the development of
AA in postcolonial Fiji in the form of racial inequalities in schooling followed by an
examination of two specific AA polices: ihe 50% quota of scholarships for Indigenous
Fijians and the Special Annual Education Fund for the education of Indigenous Fijians
and Rotumans. I have provided quantitative data to show the nature of the educational
gap that the Postcolonial Governments said existed, as well as a statistical analysis of the
outcomes of the two aforementioned AA policies.
118
CHAPTER FOUR
METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS
This research project is a qualitative case study of policy in the Fiji context and
draws on interviews as its main source of data. In this chapter, I explicate the
methodological considerations I had in mind prior to, during and after data collection.
First, I review the literature on previous studies and procedures on research methodology
pertinent to this study. Specifically, I review the literature on qualitative research, the case
study approach, the interview and policy analysis. The second and third sections of the
chapter offer a description of the fieldwork, The final part of this chapter is a description of
the processes of analysing and interpreting the interview data.
Literature Review on Methodology
Qualitative Research Methodology
Qualitative research (henceforth referred to as QR) has been described as research
that studies talk, texts and interaction with the four major methods of QR identified as
observation, analysing texts and documents, interviews and recording and transcription
(Silverman, 1993). Put another way, qualitative methods are of three kinds: direct
observation, in-depth, open-ended interviews and written documents (Krathwohl 1993;
Patton, 1990). While there is "no standard approach among qualitative researchers", what
is common is that they "all share a commitment to naturally-occurring data" (Silverman,
1993:23).
Drawing on the work of sociologist John Lofland (1971), Patton (1990: 32)
interprets what Lofland suggests as four people-oriented mandates in the collection of
qualitative data as: (1) the researcher "must get close enough to the people and situation
being studied to personally understand in depth the details of what goes on"; (2) the
researcher "must aim at capturing what actually takes place and what people actually say:
the perceived facts"; (3) "qualitative data must include a great deal of pure description of
people, activities, interactions, and settings"; and finally, (4) "qualitative data must include
direct quotations from people, both what they speak and what they write down". The
qualitative researcher must be directly involved in the natural setting and must be actually
present to faithfully and accurately record what people say and do (this would exclude data
collection using written documents). This inherently means that the views and perceptions
of the participants are valued highly. Broadly speaking then, QR is that which "produces
descriptive data: people's own written or spoken words and observable behaviour" (Taylor
119
and Bogdan, 1984: 5). Or as Krathwohl (1993: 311) points out "Qualitative research
methods permit the description of phenomena and events in an attempt to understand and
explain them". He (Krathwohl, 1993: 311) adds:
Such descriptions may be used to seek principles and explanations that generalize.
Qualitative methods are inductive: they let the problem emerge from the data or
remain open to interpretations of the problem different from those held initially.
The data are accounts of careful observations, including detailed descriptions of
context and nearly verbatim records of conversation.
Another characteristic of qualitative data is that it contributes to hypotheses
generation and theory building. In QR, unlike the quantitative approach where data is
collected to test preconceived hypotheses, models or theories, there are no specific
hypotheses at the outset but the hypotheses are produced by the field research itself. The
strength of QR therefore lies in the flexibility this gives to design which is partially
emergent as the study occurs (Krathwohl 1993; Patton, 1990) and alternative analyses after
the data collection phase (Silverman, 1993; Krathwohl 1993).
While qualitative data contributes to the generation of hypotheses and theory
building, not theory testing, it is important to note that the selection of a methodology
depends upon the researcher's theoretical perspective. This does not mean that the research
study undertaken has initial theories that need to be tested in the field. Far from it. Rather,
what is referred to here is that the research method or tool that is selected for use will be
determined by the researcher's theoretical standpoint about the place of knowledge and how
this is translated from theory into practice. Thus, what research questions one is asking,
how one answers these and how they are interpreted depend on one's theoretical
perspective.
Quantitative research places an emphasis on numbers. On the other hand, QR
focuses on words, actions and records (Maykut and Morehouse, 1994). But this does not
mean that one method has to be used exclusively. In fact, one might want to combine both
approaches. As Silverman (1993: 22) points out: "[Tjhere are no principled grounds to be
either qualitative or quantitative in approach. It all depends upon what you are trying to
do". Similarly, C.W. Mills (1959: 245-246) urged researchers:
Be a good craftsman: avoid any rigid set of procedures. Above all, seek to develop and
to use the sociological imagination, Avoid the fetishism of method and technique,
Urge the rehabilitation of the unpretentious intellectual craftsman, and try to become
such a craftsman yourself. Let every man be his own methodologist; let every man be
his own theorist; let theory and method again become part of the practice of a craft.
120
According to Silverman (1993: 21), most QR is concerned with describing and
illuminating "the meaningful social world as prescribed by the interpretivist paradigm".
"Achieving understanding" is how Maykut and Morehouse (1994: 34) define the goal of
qualitative inquiry. Or as Taylor and Bogdan (1984: 8) put it: "The phenomenologist views
human behavior, what people say and do, as a product of how people define their world".
They add that the task for the qualitative researcher "is to capture this process of
interpretation" because the "phenomenologist attempts to see things from other people's
point of view" (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984: 9). What these writers all have in common is
that they view qualitative methodology as a way of approaching and interpreting the
empirical world from the perspective of the participants in the study.
This far I have discussed the general characteristics of qualitative research. Four
points have been made: First, qualitative research is concerned with naturally occurring
data; second, these data contribute to the generation of hypotheses and theory building
which facilitate alternative analyses after data collection; third, one's choice of
methodology is influenced by one's theoretical perspective which can either fit into the
quantitative or qualitative theoretical framework or can be a combination of both; finally,
the ultimate aim of qualitative research is to gain an understanding of how people view
their world: the main role of the researcher is to interpret how people define their world.
QR draws on participant perspectives in order to gain a deeper insight and
understanding of social phenomenon unlike the positivist research tradition of generalising
results. Another specific feature of QR is that the research design evolves over time and the
emphasis is placed on the researcher as the main research instrument. Additionally, the
research sample is selected purposively and the researcher goes out into the natural setting
to collect the data. Moreover, data collection involves capturing people's words and
actions. As well, data analysis is ongoing and primarily inductive. Finally, research
outcomes are reported using a case study approach (Maykut and Morehouse, 1994).
The Case Study Approach
The qualitative case study is "an intensive, holistic description and analysis of a
bounded phenomenon such as a program, an institution, a person, a process, or a social
unit" (Merriam, 1988; xiv). According to Stake (1994), a case study is not a
methodological choice but is instead a choice of object to be studied because the researcher
chooses to study the case. A case study has also been technically defined as an empirical
inquiry that "investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context; when the
121
boundaries between phenomenon and context are not clearly evident; and in which multiple
sources of evidence are used" (Yin, 1989: 23). The latter definition has been used to
differentiate the case study strategy from an experiment, a history and survey methods.
Stake (1994) emphasises that the case study is a specific, unique, bounded system.
He suggests that many researchers will gather data on all of these: the nature of the case, its
historical background, the physical setting, other contexts (including economic, political,
legal and aesthetic), other cases through which this case is recognised and those informants
through whom the case can be known (Stake, 1994: 238). Stake (1994) goes on to identify
three kinds of case studies: the intrinsic case study where the aim is better understanding of
a particular case; the instrumental case study where a particular case is examined to provide
insight into an issue or refinement of theory; and the collective case study where a number
of cases are jointly studied in order to inquire into the phenomenon, population or general
condition. For Stake, the purpose of case study is to represent the case, not the world.
Providing us with more information on the case study, Yin (1989: 13) makes the
point that the case study strategy is generally appropriate "when 'how' or 'why' questions
I
are being posed, when the investigator has little control over events, and when the focus is f
on a contemporary phenomenon within some real-life context". He categorises case studies I
into three types: explanatory, exploratory and descriptive, although he cautions that there
are large areas of overlap among them. It is pertinent to point out at this point that my own
research case study is a combination of all of these three categories. This study is
principally explanatory, attempting to explain the causes of Indigenous Fijian
underachievement and the reasons why AA policies have not had a significant impact on
reducing educational inequalities. But it is also descriptive since I have made the
methodological decision that informant perspectives are valuable and incipiently
meaningful. This is borne out by the heavy emphasis I have placed in Chapters Five
through to Seven on what informants say. It is the tentative nature of QR that also makes
this thesis an exploratory one as well, So as Yin has described it, there are large overlaps in
case study types.
Merriam (1988: 17-20) stresses several characteristics of QR which feature
prominently in case study research. First, she makes the point that the primary focus of
qualitative researchers is process rather than outcomes or products. The second point she
emphasises is that meaning is what qualitative researchers are interested in - "How people
make sense of their lives, what they experience, how they interpret these experiences, how
they structure their social lives". The third point Merriam makes is that the researcher "is
122
the primary instrument for data collection and analysis" and that the data are "mediated
through this human instrument" in the form of the researcher. The fourth obvious
characteristic of QR that Merriam discusses is that QR usually involves fieldwork, where
one physically goes "to the people, setting, site institution ("the field"), in order to observe
behavior in its natural setting". Two additional features that Merriam attributes to QR are
qualitative description and induction. In the former, because QR is concerned wiih process,
meaning and understanding, words or pictures are used to describe the phenomenon under
study. In the latter, QR is inductive because it "builds abstractions, concepts, hypotheses,
or theories, rather than testing existing theory" as is the norm with quantitative research.
Another feature of QR is that qualitative work is generally written up as a case study
(Maykut and Morehouse, 1994; Krathwohl, 1993; Yin 1989).
Yin (1989: 146-151) outlines five general characteristics of what he calls "an
exemplary case study". The first point he makes is that the case study must be significant.
For example, the case study is significant in terms of the individual case or cases being
unusual and of public interest. Another example he gives is that the underlying issues are
nationally important either in theoretical, policy or practical terms or as he puts it "both of
the preceding". A second characteristic of an exemplary case study, Yin claims, is that it
must be "complete" and this can be carried out in three ways: (a) the boundaries of the case,
defined as "the distinction between the phenomenon being studied and its context", are
given "explicit attention". This can occur throughout the analytic and reporting phases of
doing case studies and can be achieved by showing "through either logical argument or the
presentation of evidence, that as the analytic periphery is reached, the information is of
decreasing relevance to the case study"; (b) in the collection of evidence, the researcher
should demonstrate convincingly that (s)he was exhaustive in collecting the relevant
evidence; and (c) the absence of a severe time or resource constraint because this a
reflection that the research design was planned around such constraints and should not then
arise in the middle of the case study. A third characteristic of an exemplary case study
identified by Yin (1989) is that the case study must consider alternative perspectives that
most seriously challenge the design of the case study. This can occur for instance in
alternative cultural views, different theories or variations among the people who are part of
the case study. As Yin (1989: 149) puts it: "In fact, the exemplary case study anticipates
these 'obvious' alternatives, even advocates their positions as forcefully as possible, and
shows - empirically - the basis upon which such alternatives can be rejected".
123
The last two characteristics of an exemplary case study, according to Yin (1989),
are that the case study must display sufficient evidence and that it must be composed in an
engaging manner. For the former, the "exemplary case study is one that judiciously and
effectively presents the most compelling evidence, so that a reader can reach an
independent judgment regarding the merits of the analysis" (Yin, 1989: 149). The latter,
that is writing of the final case study report in an engaging manner, should engage, entice
and seduce "the eye" of the reader. This would necessitate enthusiasm on the part of the
researcher who would impart the impression that the case study "contains earth-shattering
conclusions" (Yin, 1989: 151).
For Patton (1990: 461), credibility issues for qualitative inquiry, which are equally
applicable to case study research, are as follows. First, rigorous techniques and methods for
gathering high-quality data need to be made and the data carefully analysed with particular
attention placed on issues of validity, reliability and triangulation. Secondly, there is the
issue of the credibility of the researcher, which is dependent on training, experience, track
record, status, and presentation of self. Third, the researcher needs to have a philosophical
belief in the phenomenological paradigm in the sense that s(he) has a fundamental
appreciation of naturalistic inquiry qualitative methods, inductive analysis, and holistic
thinking. Patton (1990: 461) sums this up by maintaining that credible qualitative study
will thus need to address the following issues: (1) What techniques and methods were used
to ensure the integrity, validity, and accuracy of the findings? (2) What does the research
bring to the study in terms of qualifications, experience and perspective? and (3) What
paradigm orientation and assumptions undergird the study?
What criticisms have been made about case study research? Yin (1989: 21-23)
identifies three problems: lack of rigour, very little basis for generalisation and the tendency
towards massive, unreadable documents. In answer to the first criticism, Yin points out
that bias can enter into conduct of experiments or in the design of questionnaires for
surveys and that it is possible to minimise bias. Yin's response to the second criticism is
that "case studies, like experiments, are generalizable to theoretical propositions and not to
populations or universes" (Yin, 1989: 21). In answer to the third criticism, Yin points out
that case studies need not necessarily be massive, unreadable documents and spends a
whole chapter outlining how this can be done. He also notes that case studies need not take
a long time and says that confusion may have arisen between the case study strategy with
ethnography or participant-observation, which is a specific method of data collection that
does take a long time to carry out.
124
It is clear, therefore, from the preceding discussion that the case study approach is
appropriate to use when one wants to study bounded phenomenon occurring in its
naturalistic setting, in the field. The boundary of the case being studied is local and
therefore non-generalisable because case studies deal with situated knowledges. This
concept of situated knowledges is critical in postcolonial contexts, as I have explained in
Chapter One, in this chapter and in Chapter Eight. The final outcome, that is the case study
report (like this thesis), would yield a textured and detailed description of local
phenomenon that is specific to that situation under study, The case study approach is also
useful to use when one wants to generate hypothesis and for theory building.
This particular research study is a qualitative case study of policy in Fiji using the
interview as the main source of data. The phenomenon under study, that is, AA policies, is
a bounded phenomenon because it is specifically in the context of Fiji that it is examined.
Not only is this study bounded in terms of place, it is also bounded in that the 74 interviews
conducted provide 74 different 'cases' to the overall case study and offer a rich and
complex description of phenomenon that is specific and local to Fiji. What is critical here
is the potential each viewpoint has for developing critical theoretical insights into the case
under study,
In this section, I reviewed the literature on qualitative case study. The next section
examines the interview as a qualitative research method because, as mentioned earlier, this
study is a case study of public policy in the Fiji context and specifically uses interviews as
its main source of data.
The Qualitative Interview
This particular section reviews the literature on the interview with special emphasis
on what it says about the qualities or characteristics of the qualitative interview, what its
strengths and limitations are, and the issues pertaining to data analysis and interpretation.
An interview is not only a conversation but a conversation with a purpose (Maykut
and Morehouse 1994; Lincoln and Guba 1985) or as Holstein and Gubrium (1997: 113)
describe it "interviews are special forms of conversation". The qualitative interview has
also been defined as "interaction" (Fontana and Frey, 1994: 361), and "talk" (Silverman,
1993), Alternatively, qualitative interviewing has been defined by Mishler (1986: vii), who
proposes a reformulation of the process after finding standard views and practices of
interviewing limited, as a "discourse shaped and organized by asking and answering
questions". As he has described it, "An interview is a joint product of what interviewees
125
and interviewers talk about together and how they talk with each other. The record of an
interview that we researchers make and then use in our work of analysis and interpretation
is a representation of that talk" (Mishler, 1986; vii).
The main purpose of an interview "is to obtain a special kind of information"
(Merriam, 1988: 72); it is a method of trying to understand our fellow human beings
(Fontana and Frey, 1994; "it provides us with a means for exploring the points of view of
our research subjects, while granting these points of view the culturally honoured status of
reality" (Miller and Glassner, 1997: 100), McCracken (1988:9) puts it this way: "The long
interview gives us the opportunity to step into the mind of another person, to see and
experience the world as they do it themselves", Perhaps the best description of the purpose
of an interview is given by Patton (1990: 278), who makes the assumption that "the
perspective of others is meaningful, knowable, and able to be made explicit".
In terms of types of interviews, Patton (1990) distinguishes between the informal,
conversational interview, the general interview guide approach - what Lofland (1971: 76)
has called "intensive interviewing with an interview guide11 - and the standardised open-
ended interview. This corresponds with Merriam's (1988) classification of unstructured,
semi-structured and highly structured interviews. Similarly, Maykut and Morehouse (1994)
refer to interview types as the unstructured, the interview guide (semi-structured) and the
interview schedule (structured). What is common in all these types of interviews is that
one, the questions are open-ended, and two, they are conducted in some depth, hence the
phrase "depth interview" or "in-depth interviewing" (Maykut and Morehouse, 1994; Jones,
1985; Taylor and Bogdan, 1984) or the "long interview" (McCracken, 1988). The third
commonality in these types of interviews is "that the persons being interviewed respond in
their own words to express their own personal perspectives" (Patton, 1990:287).
In terms of interview content, Patton (1990: 290) points out that many decisions will
have to be made such as what type of interview to carry out, what questions to ask, how to
sequence questions, how much detail to ask for, the length of the interview and how to
word the questions. As well, Patton addresses the issues of asking clear questions, being
careful about asking 'why' questions as well as the issues of rapport and neutrality.
Merriam (1988) emphasises that to ask good questions is essential to getting good data.
Issues surrounding asking the interview questions, before and during the actual interview,
are therefore critical to getting the data sought in the quality that is required. As well, it is
recommended that interviewers record the interview on a good quality tape recorder and
126
that transcriptions are made of the interview because that is the data that will be utilised in
the analysis and the interpretation (Merriam, 1988; Patton, 1990; Silverman, 1993).
Many social scientists regard the interviewer as the research tool or instrument in
the collection and analysis of data (McCracken, 1988; Taylor and Bogdan, 1984; Patton,
1990). As such, the interviewer plays a critical role in the interviewing process. After all,
the interviewer determines what questions to ask, when to ask them, and is in control of the
structure of the interview and the way the data are analysed and interpreted. In addition,
Miller and Glassner (1997: 101) point out: "The issue of how interviewees respond to us ;
based on who we are - in their lives, as well as the social categories to which we belong, }
such as age, gender, class and race - is a practical concern as well as an epistemological or f
theoretical one". j
Power relations are supposed to be equal in the interview situation, that is, where no j
one is dominant and in a context where both are participating in what is supposed to be a f
I
social interaction. However, dynamic power relations are at work in this relationship. |
What is important is to ask who has power at which point and what does that power consist I
of For me, the interviewer, in using himself or herself as the tool or instrument for data |I
collection, has control over the questions that are asked in the interview, directs the | j
interview in the direction s(he) considers appropriate to the kinds of data sought, and has ? !
the final say on what to do with the data in terms of their analysis and interpretation. On |
the other hand, the interviewee (I use the term informant in subsequent chapters) also has I1
power because s(he) determines what s(he) says to the extent that what s(he) says will |I
influence the quality of the data. If one takes this a step further, the interviewee has a great
deal of control in the sense that s(he) determines how much to reveal and what to hide from
the interviewer. The interviewer, therefore, has to ensure that nothing in manner or dress or
demeanour or overall presentation, including the kinds of questions asked, will offend or
hurt the interviewee, This has implications for the preparation that the interviewer makes
prior to and during the data collection. Furthermore, issues of power in the interview
situation can be taken further to ask questions about what position does the interviewee
hold in relation to the interviewer (e.g., is s(he) superior or a subordinate) and how does the
ethnicity, class, age and gender of the interviewee impact on the data collection. I will take
this up in relation to my interviews.
Interview data analysis has been described as "hard, sometimes, tedious, slog" (sic)
(Jones, 1985: 56) or as Merriam (1988) put it "tedious and time-consuming work", On the
other hand, it has been described as "a dynamic and creative process" (Taylor and Bogdan,
127
1984: 130). Data analysis "is the process of making sense out of one's data" (Merriam,
1988: 127). One point that is made about data analysis is that data collection and data
analysis should occur simultaneously (Miles and Huberman, 1994; Merriam, 1988; Maykut
and Morehouse, 1994; Taylor and Bogdan, 1984) although it is usual for the researcher to
concentrate most on analysis and interpretation after all the data is collected. Taylor and
Bogdan (1984: 129) recommend that intensive analysis begins soon after the data has been
collected. However, they make the point that the researcher may be forced to postpone
analysis for the simple reason, for example, that the transcription of interviews took much
more time than initially anticipated.
Much has been said about how to go about analysing the data. For example, Taylor
and Bogdan (1984: 130) point out that combining insight and intuition with an intimate
familiarity with the data is how researchers gradually make sense out of what they are
studying. They argue that the researcher must learn to look for themes by examining the
data in as many ways as possible. In a similar vein, Maykut and Morehouse (1994) outline
some of the processes involved in preparing the data for analysis in terms of coding data
pages to their sources and unitizing the data. They then discuss the "constant comparative
method" of analysing qualitative data which draws heavily on the work of Lincoln and
Guba (1985), utilising such sequential strategies as inductive category coding, refinement
of categories, exploration of relationships and patterns across categories and the integration
of data and writing up the research. With regard to the latter strategy, they point out that
"writing up one's research is part of the analytic process" and that "[p]ondering the
substance and sequence of the report requires a rethinking of the data, often yielding new
insights and understanding" (Maykut and Morehouse, 1994: 145).
Taylor and Bogdan (1984: 81-82) point out three drawbacks of interviewing that
they note arise from the verbal statements or talk that interview data consists of. The first
drawback they highlight is that "as a form of conversation, interviews are subject to the
same fabrications, deceptions, exaggerations, and distortions that characterize talk between
any persons". What this means is that the interview may provide insights into how people
perceive their world and how they behave, but one thing that needs to be remembered is
that what people say and what they actually do may be different. That is, the interviewer
must not accept the interviewee's description of events as if they were facts. The second
limitation that Taylor and Bogdan point out is that "people say and do different things in
different situations". Thirdly, they (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984: 82) say that interviewers
make assumptions about things that could have been observed because they "do not directly
128
1984: 130). Data analysis "is the process of making sense out of one's data" (Merriam,
1988: 127). One point that is made about data analysis is that data collection and data
analysis should occur simultaneously (Miles and Huberrnan, 1994; Merriam, 1988; Maykut
and Morehouse, 1994; Taylor and Bogdan, 1984) although it is usual for the researcher to
concentrate most on analysis and interpretation after all the data is collected, Taylor and
Bogdan (1984: 129) recommend that intensive analysis begins soon after the data has been
collected. However, they make the point that the researcher may be forced to postpone
analysis for the simple reason, for example, that the transcription of interviews took much
more time than initially anticipated.
Much has been said about how to go about analysing the data. For example, Taylor
and Bogdan (1984: 130) point out that combining insight and intuition with an intimate
familiarity with the data is how researchers gradually make sense out of what they are
studying. They argue that the researcher must learn to look for themes by examining the
data in as many ways as possible. In a similar vein, Maykut and Morehouse (1994) outline
some of the processes involved in preparing the data for analysis in terms of coding data
pages to their sources and unitizing the data, They then discuss the "constant comparative
method" of analysing qualitative data which draws heavily on the work of Lincoln and
Guba (1985), utilising such sequential strategies as inductive category coding, refinement
of categories, exploration of relationships and patterns across categories and the integration
of data and writing up the research. With regard to the latter strategy, they point out that
"writing up one's research is part of the analytic process" and that "[pjondering the
substance and sequence of the report requires a rethinking of the data, often yielding new
insights and understanding" (Maykut and Morehouse, 1994: 145).
Taylor and Bogdan (1984: 81-82) point out three drawbacks of interviewing that
they note arise from the verbal statements or talk that interview data consists of. The first
drawback they highlight is that "as a form of conversation, interviews are subject to the
same fabrications, deceptions, exaggerations, and distortions that characterize talk between
any persons". What this means is that the interview may provide insights into how people
perceive their world and how they behave, but one thing that needs to be remembered is
that what people say and what they actually do may be different. That is, the interviewer
must not accept the interviewee's description of events as if they were facts. The second
limitation that Taylor and Bogdan point out is that "people say and do different things in
different situations". Thirdly, they (Taylor and Bogdan, 1984: 82) say that interviewers
make assumptions about things that could have been observed because they "do not directly
128
observe people in their everyday lives" therefore they are "deprived of the context
necessary to understand many of the perspectives in which they are interested".
But in order to examine the interview data on AA in Fiji, it is important to have a
good idea about what we mean when we talk of policy and policy analysis. In what follows
I review the literature on policy and policy analysis.
Policy Analysis
What is policy? Many writers agree that defining policy is not an easy task (Ham and I
Hill, 1984; Cunningham, 1963). Taylor, Rizvi, Lingard and Henry (1997: 24) make the j
point that policy is very difficult to define because of its ongoing and dynamic nature,
because we are trying "to capture and pin down something which is continually in process", :;
By contrast, according to Considine (1994: 3), the standard view of public policy is "an I
action which employs governmental authority to commit resources in support of a preferred ;
value". Alternatively, he suggests another definition of policy as "the continuing work done |
by groups of policy actors who use available public institutions to articulate and express the I
things they value" (Considine, 1994: 4). Hogwood and Gunn (1984: 13-19), operating
within a traditional framework, categorise ten different uses of the word policy as "policy as
a label for a field of activity", "policy as an expression of general purpose or desired state of
affairs", "policy as specific proposals", "policy as decisions of government", "policy as
formal authorization", "policy as a programme", "policy as output", "policy as outcome", |
"policy as a theory or model" and "policy as process". Policy has also been defined as \
"what governments choose to do, or not to do" (Dye, 1987: 2). Thus, public policy, as j
distinct from the activities of private enterprise which has self-interest as the main ^
motivation, forms the focus of this thesis.
Policy is both process and product; it is certainly much more than just a specific
J
policy document or text (Taylor et al., 1997). In this conceptualisation of policy, policy ,
involves not only the production of the text and the text itself, but also ongoing
modifications to the text as well as processes of implementation into practice. Policy
processes are, hence, viewed as complex, interactive and multi-layered. Bowe, Ball and '
Gold (1992: 19-20), in their discussion of the policy cycle, envisage three primary policy
contexts of policy making: the context of influence, the context of policy text production and r
the context of practice. Ball (1994: 26) adds two more contexts to the policy cycle
formulation: the context of outcomes and the context of political strategy. \
129
What is policy analysis? What are the purposes of policy analysis? And how does
one go about analysing policy? These are three key questions that writers about policy
analysis attempt to answer (for example, see Dunn, 1994; Ham and Hill, 1984; Hogwood
and Gunn, 1984; Wildavsky, 1987). The study of policy is a highly contested field because
the ideological or philosophical positions that one holds are reflected in the way one thinks
not only about policy but also the nature of civil society (Taylor et al.t 1997).
Taylor et al. (1997: 35) define policy analysis very simply as "the study of what
governments do, why and with what effects". By contrast, Wildavsky (1987: 15-19, 385-
406) uses the metaphor of policy analysis as both art and craft rather than providing a
definitive definition. He argues that policy analysis is an art whose "subjects are public
problems that must be solved at least tentatively to be understood" (Wildavsky, 1987: 15)
and that analysis is imagination. He (1987: 389) reiterates the point that "Without art,
analysis is doomed to repetition; without craft, analysis is unpersuasive". He notes:
Policy analysis is creating and crafting problems worth solving. What is the clay of
which recalcitrant experience is shaped into problems and how is the form of the
problem determined? By understanding the material with which analysts work, we
can better understand the limits and potentials of the craft. (Wildavsky, 1987: 389)
Taylor et al. (1997) have identified two models of policy development and analysis:
the traditional or rational model and the more recent model of critical policy analysis. In the
traditional or rational model, the main focus was on determining the technically best course
of action to adopt in order to implement a decision or achieve a goal. The policy scientist,
therefore, was supposed to clarify the possible outcomes of certain courses of action as well
as choose the most efficient course of action in terms of available factual data for the
government of the day. A criticism of this model, Taylor et al. point out, is that issues of
power and the ways in which the state might exercise this power were mostly ignored. As
well, these researchers point out that the traditional view of policy analysis was based on a
particular view of knowledge which assumed that any knowledge, to be of any use, "must be
scrupulously value-neutral, grounded in the essential facts provided by the most systematic
observation possible" (p 18). This process of policy making, therefore, adopts a measure of
rationality, this view claims, which would "counteract the special pleading and special
sectional interests which might otherwise dominate the political processes" (p 18). Policy
analysts, according to this view, advise policy makers on the most efficient course of action
to take to achieve a particular goal, but are not deemed to be qualified to assess the morality
or the legitimacy of the goal itself.
130
On the other hand, the critical policy analysis model contradicts this traditional view
of policy analysis. First it contends that social scientific knowledge cannot be value-neutral.
Taylor et al. (1997: 18) put it this way:
In our view, observations are inevitably informed by our theories and values in ways
which make any absolute distinction between policy analysis and policy advocacy
hard to sustain. What we 'see' when we examine the processes involved in the
development and implementation of any particular policy is framed by larger
questions, which are themselves linked to the normative positions we might adopt
about education and its role in creating conditions for social reproduction or
transformation.
Second, it views critical analysis as overtly political and sees "a major task of critical
policy analysis as investigating the ways in which key terms are used, and the extent to
which particular policies are consistent with our moral vision for education" (Taylor et al,,
1997: 19). Third, critical policy analysis should pay attention to both the content of the
policy as well as to the processes of policy development and implementation. The fourth
claim made by the critical analysis model is that an examination of the manner in which
power is exercised in the making of political choices is central to critical policy analysis.
Fifth, an understanding of the context in which a policy emerges is important in this model
of policy analysis.
It should be noted that this study aims to utilise the critical policy analysis approach
rather than the traditional approach to policy analysis. Following Taylor et al. (1997), it
recognises that policy is complex in the following ways: it is more than the text, it is multi-
dimensional, it is value-laden, it exists in a particular context, it is a state activity, it interacts
with policies in other fields, policy implementation is never straightforward and that policies
result in unintended as well as intended consequences. Policy processes therefore are
complex, interactive and multi-layered. Some of the salient points of the critical policy |
analysis approach worth reiterating are that social scientific knowledge is value-laden, and |
that in examining the processes involved in the development and implementation of any |
educational policy for instance, one's thinking about the role of education in perpetuating f
social reproduction or transformation will influence the analysis. Additionally, critical II
analysis is overtly political. As well, the content and the processes of policy development
and implementation should be given attention. Furthermore, the exercise of power in the
making of political choices is a central focus of critical policy analysis. As well, an
understanding of the context in which a policy arises is also important.
131
I have just provided an explanation of what policy is and how policies are analysed.
As mentioned earlier, this study is a qualitative case study of policy using interviews as the
principal source of data. The context surrounding AA policies in their local, bounded
context will be discussed in detail in Chapter Six. The questions which guided the policy
analysis are discussed in the summary section of Chapter Six.
Preparing for the Fieldwork/Data Collection
Thus far, I have examined the literature on the interview as a qualitative research
method of data collection. 1 discussed what the literature says about what a qualitative
interview is, the purpose of the interview, the features of the interview, what is involved in
analysing and interpreting the interview data, some of the limitations of the interview
method as well as what policy analysis entails. The next section is concerned with a self-
reflexive description of the decisions I made regarding the method of data collection and
the reasons I made certain decisions prior to the data collection phase of the study.
Reflexivity: Assumptions of the Current Research Design
Three ways have been identified where researchers display setf-reflexivity; (a)
describing decisions that went into selecting methods, (b) laying out limits of knowledge
(or threats to validity) in a particular study and (c) laying out the researcher's personal
biases that might influence the conclusions (Potter, 1996: 294). The first definition of self-
reflexivity will be described in the following sections, The second approach to self-
reflexivity will become apparent in the course of the whole thesis where I will lay out the
limitations of the study at appropriate junctures. The final approach to self-reflexivity was
discussed in some detail in Chapter One where I laid out my personal biases in terms of the
assumptions I made before, during and after data collection that are intricately woven into
the research design. My personal biases and perspectives will also be explicated in the next
sections in decisions I made regarding the interview categories and sample, in the kinds of
interview questions I decided on, the actual processes of the fieldwork and the analysis and
interpretation of the data.
My theoretical perspective of research design hinges around the qualitative research
method that assumes that data collected in its natural state, in the field with real people
whose experiences, values and knowledge of the world is valuable, will provide worthwhile
data that play a pivotal role in the outcome(s) of the study. My decision to use case studies
of interviews with 74 participants to provide illumination on the research aims and
132
questions arose out of the critical role I felt that the case study approach and the interview
method had in providing the understanding that I sought.
The next three sections will be a self-reflexive examination of the decisions I made
and why I made these decisions in relation to the research design before, during and after
the data collection phase, culminating in a discussion of how I went about analysing and
interpreting the research data.
The Preliminary Stage
I began preparing for the fieldwork in January of 1996. During my first year of
studies the previous year, I had decided that this project would be qualitative and that the
specific tool I would use would be interviews with people whose experience and knowledge
about AA policies and education in Fiji would form the main part of my research data. I
had decided that I would use this "flexible strategy of discovery", what Lofland (1971: 76)
calls "intensive interviewing with an interview guide". According to Lofland, the purpose
of this method of inquiry is "to carry on a guided conversation and to elicit rich, detailed
materials that can be used in qualitative analysis" (p. 76). It is the search for these "rich,
detailed materials" that I sought through the interview method of data collection.
In summary, prior to the data collection phase, I made decisions regarding the
interview categories, the ethnic and gender composition of my interview sample, obtained
ethical clearance to proceed with the fieldwork, corresponded with potential informants
(See Appendix K for a sample of the initial letter of contact), finalised interview questions
and conducted several trial interviews (See Appendix L for a fuller account of the
administrative activities I conducted prior to the fieldwork). I also made the decision that
the language of the interview would be English since the discourse of communication is
English in both official and every-day circles. An important reason for this decision to
conduct all interviews in English was that strategically, it would enable less work after data
collection, that is, I would not have to spend hours transcribing the interviews verbatim and
then translating them into English, I thought it was better, under the circumstances, to get
the informants' exact words, rather than my interpretive translation. In other words, it was
a strategic decision to conduct the interviews in English - since the thesis is written in
English, it would be easier all around if the interviews were conducted in English.
Ethical considerations were also important aspects of the research, Participation was
voluntary and informants were assured that they could withdraw from the study at any time.
As well, their anonymity was protected unless they wished specifically to be named in the
133
thesis. They also had a choice about having their interviews audio-recorded. Furthermore,
each informant was given the opportunity to make amendments to the interview transcripts
prior to my utilising them. Finally informants were informed of where they could access
the thesis in its final form.
Selection of Questions for the Interview
As a guide to the interview I selected six general questions (See Appendix M). I
sent these questions with my first letter to potential participants to make them aware of the
kinds of questions I would be asking them. Questions 1 and 2 were intended to put the
participants at ease and let them talk about their understanding of what in their view AA
meant, as well as their knowledge of AA policies in Fiji's educational system. Questions 3-
5 were concerned with participants' views on AA policies and the final question on the
general guide was concerned with the reasons for continuing Indigenous Fijian
underachievement. However, after three trial interviews conducted before the fieldwork,
this list was translated into 17 points in the actual interview (See Appendix N for the
detailed interview guide).
It was important that I thank each participant for agreeing to be interviewed and
emphasise how important their contribution was to my research project. This became the
first point in the Detailed Interview Guide. I followed this with a brief introduction of what
I was doing and the purpose of the interview. The principal reason for questions 2-3 was to
get the participants to feel at ease by talking about themselves and their contribution to
education in Fiji,
The reason for questions 4-8 on the Detailed Interview Guide, which corresponded
with questions 1-5 on the General Interview Guide which was sent with my first
correspondence to potential participants, was to get the interviewees1 views and perceptions
on what their understandings were on the concept of AA, what they knew about AA
policies in education to specifically assist Indigenous Fijians, how these policies were
implemented, what the outcomes of these policies were and what importance they placed
on AA. These questions were critical as they are central to the research topic and the main
research question which I reiterate here: After over two decades of AA to assist Indigenous
Fijians in education, why are these students still underachieving compared to the non-
indigenous population? Questions 9-11 were specifically on participants' views on why
they thought Indigenous Fijian students were generally not doing as well as other ethnic
134
groups in Fiji. The bullet point items in questions 9 and 11 are reminders to me to ask their
views on these aspects if they do not mention them in their answer.
It is pertinent to note here that I stopped asking questions 4 and 12 altogether when I
realised that this posed problems for some participants. Question 4 called for the
participant's definition of AA and question 13 was too difficult a question for many of the
participants to answer as reflected in some of the answers that I received. At some point in
the interviews, I realised that it might be important to ask Indigenous Fijians why they
succeeded in school. This question replaced question 12 but was only asked of Indigenous
Fijians.
The two elements in Question 14 were important to gauge the participants' views on
other agencies that can be involved in Fijian education. The main purpose of questions 15
and 16 was to determine how, in the participants' views, AA policies can be made to work,
The final question was a hypothetical one, and the most difficult. Its purposes were not
only to seek participants' views about how the whole issue of Fijian education could be
improved, but it also acted as a summing up to the whole interview.
Selection of Interview Sample: Interview Categories
After initial discussions with supervisor Professor Rizvi, I decided on six categories
of people to interview: Politician, Bureaucrat, Community Representative, Academic,
Secondary School Principal and Teacher. The sample was also to include expatriates who
have worked in education in Fiji under any of the categories. The main reason I selected
these six categories was that I wanted to get as wide and comprehensive data as I could in
order to take account of the different perspectives that people might have. I thought that
these categories would add complexity to the data that might not be evident if, say, only
two categories were selected. I had decided that I would interview five in each category
and the total number of participants would be 30. However the reality was that I ended up
interviewing more than double this number of people for the following reasons: more
names were suggested to me by participants and other professionals and I felt I had to
interview all the key people at the Ministry of Education (a total of 11 comprising almost
16% of the sample).8 (See the beginning of the thesis for a complete list of Informants)
11 did this because not only did I consider their viewpoints important, but I did not want to risk offending
anybody in the ministry by excluding them from the interviews.
135
Initially, I had wanted to interview people out in the rural areas who might fit under
the categories of principal, teacher or community representative but because of time,
logistical and financial constraints, I had to drop this idea altogether. However, in
determining the people to be interviewed, I built in a tacit requirement to interview people
who had had experience teaching in the rural areas. Why the rural area? When one speaks
of Indigenous Fijian education in Fiji, one is basically referring to the rural area because the
bulk of the Indigenous Fijian population is rural by nature. I had also wanted to interview
students themselves for their perceptions about why students fail in school but, again
unfortunately, the problematics associated with this made it an inappropriate category,
In terms of ethnic and gender composition, I decided that the range for the former
would be 60% Indigenous Fijian and 40% non-indigenous and that the gender make-up of
my sample could range from 70% males to 30% females. I needed to consider the inclusion
of expatriates in the non-Indigenous Fijian category as well. Why did I decide on these
details? Since the study mainly was concerned with the educational achievement of
Indigenous Fijians, I thought it was appropriate to interview more Indigenous Fijians hence
the decision to have a ratio of 60-40.
As it developed, I interviewed Indigenous Fijians and Rotumans who comprised
69% of the sample, while non-Indigenous Fijians made up 3 1 % (see Table 14). From Table
14, one can see that 64% of the sample was male and 36% was female. I interviewed close
to 7% in the expatriate sub-category of the non-indigenous category. Table 15 gives a
summary of the number of participants in each category.
I would have preferred to have interviewed some more politicians and fewer
bureaucrats but this proved difficult. In the first instance, it was difficult accessing
politicians since the Parliament was in session for most of the time I was in Fiji for the field
Table 14 Participants in the Interview by Ethnicity and Gender
Ethnic Category
Gender
Total
Male Female
Indigenous Fijians and Rotumans
27
24
51(69%)
Non-Indigenous Fijians
20
3
23(31%)
Total
47 (64%)
27 (36%)
74(100%)
136
perspectives of the two Prime Ministers since independence, Unfortunately I was not able
to interview either of them due to difficulty of access. I also thought that it would be
important to obtain the viewpoints of the politicians who were part of the Opposition
Political Party, Again it was unfortunate that I could not interview certain key politicians
because of difficulty of access since the Parliament of Fiji was in session for most of the
time that I was in Fiji for the fieldwork, Additionally, Fiji was in the process of deciding
prominent political and social issues such as the Review of the Constitution (a special
parliamentary sub-committee was formed to examine the Report of Fiji Constitutional
Review Commission) and the expiry of land leases (ALTA)9, two issues which preoccupied
the whole country as I have described in Chapter Three.
In terms of deciding on people in the bureaucrat category, I felt I had to interview
people in the Ministry of Education (MOE), the Ministry of Fijian Affairs (MFA) and the
Public Service Commission (PSC) as these were the three agencies involved in developing
and implementing AA in education. It was not possible to interview a few key people at
the MFA due to access problems (interviewing of students for overseas scholarships was
taking place). However, a few key people were facilitative in answering a set of written
questions regarding the implementation of the $3.5 million annual fund (see Appendix O
for the questions). For this I thank the Permanent Secretary of Fijian Affairs, Ratu Jone
Radrodro, the Acting Permanent Secretary for Fijian Affairs Mr Isoa Tikoca and the staff at
the Fijian Education Unit (FEU) once again for providing invaluable data that are
unavailable elsewhere,
Academics, all of whom were teaching at the University of the South Pacific (USP)
based in Suva, Fiji, were selected in terms of who I thought might be able to contribute to
the debate on AA. Most of the expatriate informants came from the academic category.
Community representatives were those people who I thought were not only involved as
parents and sat on some committees, but were also key people in the community in terms of
the positions they held. For this, I included church leaders, leaders at the University
Extension who worked in distance education, the University librarian, business leaders and
key people in the two teachers' unions—the Fijian Teachers Association (FTA) which
caters for Indigenous Fijians and Rotuman teachers and the Fiji Teachers Union (FTU)
which is primarily for Indo-Fijian teachers.
» ALTA stands for the Agricultural Land and Tenant Agreement. This agreement is managed by the
Native Lands Trust Board (NLTB). Indigenous Fijians are landlords while the Indo-Fijians form the bulk
of the tenants.
138
1
Those in the principal category were selected either as current or past principals and
included are two principals at tertiary institutions, namely a teachers' college and the only
medical school in Fiji, The participants in the teacher category were selected if they had
held heads of department positions in a secondary school or had taught for a number of
years in secondary schools. Eight participants who come under this category were
interviewed in three group sessions because of time pressures on both their and my part.
Some of those interviewed were either lecturers at a teachers' college or at a TAFE college
or were professionals at the Curriculum Development Unit (CDU), but the reason they were
selected under this category was because they had all taught at a secondary school before
taking up these positions.
The Actual Fieldwork
The Processes Involved
Data collection was carried out in Fiji over a period of 15 weeks from 24 August to
6 December 1997, In total, I interviewed 74 people: 66 individually and the remaining 8
were interviewed in three separate group sessions, This included the two pilot and trial
interviews carried out in Brisbane prior to the commencement of the field study. The group
interviews were carried out because of time constraints both on the interviewees' and my
part. The participants in the group interviews belonged to the same peer and friendship
group and were comfortable about being interviewed together.
Each interview was an average of one to one and a half hours long. Four interviews
with key female participants took up to three hours. There were only two interviews that
lasted less than an hour. The majority of the interviews took place at the working place of
the interviewees during the working week, some extending well into the evening. Seven
interviews were carried out at the interviewees' home, two of which took place over the
weekend. The bulk of the interviews were completed by the end of the eleventh week. The
largest number of interviews occurred in week seven where 14 interviews were scheduled,
of which 10 were completed and four postponed.
My first two weeks in Suva, where all the data was collected, were spent sorting out
financial matters, making arrangements for the telephone to be installed at home and an
office space to work from at my former workplace (the Fiji College of Advanced Education
- FCAE - in Nasinu), making arrangements for phone messages, meeting relatives and
friends and getting in contact with people who had already agreed to be interviewed prior to
my arrival in Fiji. The latter was a critical component of my early weeks in Fiji because not
139
only did I need to confirm interviews and thereby get started with the interviews, the
telephone calls were my way of re-establishing links that had begun with the initial letter
that each one of them had received.
The number of interviews I carried out varied from week to week. I conducted my
first interview on Thursday of the second week. I found that I was very uncomfortable and
stilted; the data from this interview probably reflects this limitation. However, I found that
by the fourth interview, I was not referring to my notes and could ask questions without
much difficulty. I knew most of my interviewees and could go straight into the interview
without having to build up a sense of trust and rapport that is a normal part of the
preliminaries when interviewing relative strangers. I did not need to spend as much time at
the beginning to persuade the participants that I was not a threat, and that whatever
contributions they could make to the research project were valuable and, unless they
otherwise stated, confidential. This is not to say that I did not have to build up rapport with
some participants I knew but the point I hope to make here is that it seems relatively easier
to talk with familiar rather than unfamiliar people and that one does not spend as much time
getting introductions and explanations done before the interview proper.
Telephone calls were an integral part of the interview process. From the first week,
right up to my last day in Fiji, I was liaising, arranging, organising, postponing and calling
for information I was missing.
I used an excellent quality walkman Sony tape recorder which had an unobtrusive
microphone. Tape recording was not a hindering factor in data collection. This was
partially because I had specifically requested that the interview be tape-recorded when I
first wrote to the participants so all the participants were aware, before the interview, that I
needed to tape-record our sessions. This was also due to the fact that the quality of
recording was so good that it was not distracting in any way. In all the cases, the
participants did not seem intimidated by its presence. There was one case where a
participant had written in his consent form prior to the fieldwork that he was cautious about
being tape recorded because of the sensitivity associated with the research topic. I noted
this but took along the tape recorder just in case. In the preliminaries before the actual
interview, I mentioned that everything he said would be strictly confidential and that if I
tape recorded the interview, I would send him a copy of the transcript before I utilised
anything in the interview. I also mentioned that I would not mention him by name, 1 took
notes for the first 10 minutes of the interview and was pleased when he suggested I tape
record the interview given that it would be so difficult to record the interview with paper
140
and pen. I found that in all cases, the participants quickly forgot about the recorder once
they became engrossed in what they were saying.
Language of the Interview
All the interviews were conducted in English. As mentioned earlier, I had decided
to conduct the interviews in this medium because all the participants could speak English
relatively fluently. English is the language of the discourses of schooling, public
administration, formal communication, bureaucracy, politics, law and so forth. All the
informants were sufficiently conversant with the English language to enable us to have
meaningful conversations.
I also mentioned earlier that the use of English as the medium for interviewing was
a strategic decision. It was strategic because the interview language would be compatible
with the language of the thesis, I did not think it was a worthwhile exercise to conduct the
interviews in Fijian only to spend double the transcribing time on translation work. I also
did not want to colour the translation with my own interpretation of what the interviewees
actually said and meant.
It was also for the sake of consistency that I conducted the interviews in English.
Not all the informants were Indigenous Fijians. As 31% of informants were non-
indigenous, it was strategically and practically convenient to conduct interviews in English.
If I had interviewed Indigenous Fijian parents who had little knowledge of English, then I
would have had to conduct the interviews with them in Fijian, As it was, I did not come
across any informants who were not fluent in English,
Some informants, particularly Indigenous Fijians, switched codes from English to
Fijian when they wanted to emphasise a point. This seemed to occur naturally in the course
of the conversation. Other instances where code switching occurred were in cases where
the discussion centred around the content of the Fijian curriculum and on the role of the
church and parents in the education of Indigenous Fijians, It is interesting that those Indo-
Fijians who could speak some Fijian also used Fijian words and phrases to make a point. I
did not discourage the informants from code switching. Where Fijian was used, they were
transcribed verbatim but were translated into English in the thesis so that non-Fijian
speakers can understand what was said,
It should not come as a surprise that I opted for English as the language of the
interview. This demonstrates the extent to which the process of colonialism has colonised
my thinking space. Even if I had made the decision to conduct interviews with Indigenous
141
Fijian informants in Fijian, it is uncertain whether this would have increased the speaking
voice that I claim to be giving them in this thesis. The reality is that this text has to be
written in English. Hence, it was strategic to conduct the interviews in the language of the
thesis.
Problems in the Field
Most of the interviews were carried out satisfactorily, There were three, however,
where I felt that the participants had not given the questions adequate thought and were
therefore not as prepared as I would have liked them to be. This was understandable, given
the busy schedules that they had.
All researchers who conduct fieldwork must have their repertoire of blunders they
committed. In my case, I fouled up on two occasions with the tape recording machine.
They were not due to any lack of preparation on my part. In each instance, I had checked
that the batteries were not flat, carried an extension cord and an adaptor just in case they
were needed, had the appropriate blank tape in the machine and had switched on the
machine at the right time.
My first blunder occurred with a very lengthy interview with the Minister for
Education, Women and Culture, the Right Honourable Ms Taufa Vakatale. The Minister
had postponed our interview several times until Thursday 3rd October so that she could
give me two and a half hours of her time. On my arrival she put me at ease and we
proceeded with the interview, I left her office at 12.50 p.m. and made a hasty dash in a
taxi to the bus stand to catch the 1.00 p.m bus out to Sawani, a journey of some 45 minutes
for another interview scheduled to begin at 2.00 p.m. As soon as I arrived I sat down
outside the office to put the Minister's tapes away and prepare for the next interview. I had
not completed this when my interviewee came out of her office and saw me. In the ensuing
confusion, I inadvertently put the Minister's first tape back into the machine thinking that it
was a blank tape as it was not yet labelled. You can guess the rest. I taped my next
interview over the Minister's tape. On the third day after this interview, I managed to
reconstruct part of the interview with the help of the notes that I had made during the
interview. It took me a long while to gain enough courage to call the Minister's office to
request another interview. Unfortunately, I left it rather too late because I was informed by
her secretary that she was very busy with parliamentary sittings, attending prize, opening
and closing ceremonies and the like. The Minister's secretary assured me that she would
inform the minister about my request and would get in touch with me. I had actually
142
sought advice from an elder about how to make the approach. I had obtained a tabua10 for
the purpose of seeking her forgiveness and asking for a reinterview. It was not until three
days before I was to return to Brisbane that I received a call from the Minister's office
informing me that the Minister could squeeze me in for 45 minutes. At the second
interview, I was very apologetic but Ms Vakatale laughed my mistake away and I asked
those questions that I felt were the more important ones and had been absent in the
reconstructed text.
The second blunder occurred when I was interviewing a school principal. It was not
until close to the end of the interview that I realised that the machine was still in the pause
mode and that I had not activated the machine at the beginning of the interview.
Fortunately, the interviewee was very pleasant about it and agreed to be reinterviewed. I re-
asked the questions and she gave a summary of her answers which I managed to record
without any further mishaps. She also gave me the notes that she had prepared for the
interview.
I also faced several other problems in the course of the fieldwork. For the first five
weeks, making contact and confirming interviews were quite problematic. The telephone
was not installed at home until the sixth week and I had to rely on the telephone at the
FCAE for messages from the interviewees, On several occasions, I found that because I
had missed messages left for me I arrived at the scheduled interview venue only to find out
that the interview had been postponed. As far as possible I called ahead to reconfirm a day
or two before the scheduled interview, but in some cases this was difficult, particularly
when I had two or three interviews to attend each day over several days and the interviews
were in different locations. Another problem was with postponements of interviews and
then rescheduling times suitable for me and the participants. In my fifth week, for example,
five out of eight interviews were postponed. In four cases, because of the nature of the
participants' jobs, I had to reschedule other times to complete the interviews, two of which
were eventually not completed. As well, five key people were not interviewed because of
the constant rescheduling and the mismatch in their times and mine: two Indo-Fijian
politicians from the Opposition political party, two senior bureaucrats and one Indigenous
Fijian school principal. I was rather sad that I could not interview two opposition
1(1 A tabua is a whale's tooth, an article of special value amongst Indigenous Fijians. It is used as a
presentation on all special occasions, such as the installation of a chief, a means of acquiring property, to
assuage the temper of a person of rank, weddings, funerals, welcoming important dignitaries, etc. (CapeH,
1941). I would have used the tabua to seek the Minister's forgiveness for messing up her interview. On
the advice of the Minister's Personal Secretary, I did not present the tabua.
143
parliamentarians, Mr Mahendra Chaudry and Mr Shiu Charan, because of scheduling
difficulties.
It was also unfortunate that I could not interview some other key players because of
their very busy schedules: the President, His Excellency Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara who was
the First Prime Minister of Fiji under whom the AA policies in education were established;
the Prime Minister, The Right Honourable Brigadier General Sitiveni Rabuka, who is also
known as the leader of the two coups instituted in 1987; the Minister for Foreign Affairs,
The Right Honourable Mr Filipe Bole, who was also a previous Minister for Education, and
Leader of the Opposition, The Right Honourable Mr Jai Ram Reddy. The timing of my
data collection, perhaps, was not very good given that the Parliament was in session most of
the time I was in Fiji.
The Personal and Socio-cultural Contexts
Discussion on the personal or social context under which the field study is carried
out is generally absent from the literature on research methods. Some western researchers
do indeed acknowledge the personal aspects of research but in the main, the general
absence or neglect by writers of research method literature is a serious limitation because
there should be recognition that the personal/social context can impinge on the data
collection. In my case I took my youngest child, a boy of five called Manoa, with me while
my husband and three older children remained behind in Australia with my mother. I feel
that extra stress is placed on a researcher who goes overseas for data collection for an
extended period of time, especially when the nuclear family is absent, and particularly
when one has the extra care and responsibility of a child during the data collection exercise,
Additionally, extra financial stress was placed on me because Manoa and I stayed with my
sister (who a few weeks before our arrival had become unemployed), her two children, a
sister-in-law and her son Daniel who is the same age as Manoa. Yet Manoa accompanied
me to Fiji and I consider him a valuable and important part of the data collection stage.
What impact did my personal circumstance and the social and cultural contexts have
on the data collection? Would this negatively reflect on the quality of the interviews and
would the data then be contaminated in some way because of this? Would knowing the
interviewees affect the quality of the data as compared to interviewing people I had not met
i
144 I
before? Would my missing out on interviewing some key people affect the richness and
complexity of the overall data? These are some crucial questions that need addressing.
In. terms of answering the first question regarding the personal and socio-cultural
context under which the field study was carried out, more elaboration is needed in order to
gain a better understanding of the answer I am going to give. I had been away from Fiji for
two and a half years and it was a wonderful experience returning for three months and re-
immersing myself in the culture and the language. Just as importantly, Manoa and I were
re-acquainted with the extended family, friends, soil, land and sea. I cannot describe how I
felt as we neared Nadi Airport and I got my first glimpse of the land. Actually walking on
Fiji soil and knowing that I was home again was a wonderful feeling. For a student
studying in a foreign land, the fieldwork gave me an opportunity for re-immersion, re-
acquaintance and replenishment to prepare me for the last phase of the PhD. For me, the
fieldwork phase was not simply for data collection purposes. Just as importantly, it
rejuvenated me physically, culturally, and spiritually. And since Manoa was part of this
journey back home, he is bound up intrinsically with the peace of mind I had whilst
carrying out the fieldwork. In this way, Manoa facilitated rather than hindered the data
collection.
The social context where I was carrying out my fieldwork, amidst the extended
family and close friends, could have affected the productive time I might have been
spending intensively listening to the day's interviews and preparing more thoroughly for
the next day's interview(s). It is critical therefore, in my view, that consideration is given
to the social and cultural context under which the field study took place as this may have
implications on the analysis and interpretation of the data undertaken later.
Despite the shortcomings that might be associated with going into the field where
one 'fits' comfortably but where the personal and social context might be inhibiting to the
Western way of conducting research, I feel even richer for going home because of the
contributions I made. I presented two papers at the University of the South Pacific, where I
did both my first and second degrees: one was as guest speaker in a postgraduate course
and the second was to staff and students at a lunch time seminar.
As well, I attended many functions including the graduation ceremony at the FCAE,
the funeral gathering of an uncle, three birthday parties and many luncheon/dinner parties
with friends and relatives. These all contributed to my well-being since I was considered an
integral part of the community. Furthermore, the interactions with people enabled me to
freely discuss what I was doing and I received constructive feedback and advice which
145
contributed, I feel, to the relative success of the interviews. Drawing on the strengths of the
informal and formal networks that I had contributed greatly to the relative success of the
fieldwork. In fact 40% (28) of interviewees were interviewed as a result of suggestions
from people I knew. Forty-two out of 63 people who I had written to agreed to be
interviewed and the remaining 28 interviewees were a result of the snowball effect created
by those I knew and those I interviewed,
Does it affect the data when a researcher interviews many people she knows? On
the contrary, I think interviewing people we know dispenses with that period of building up
trust and is more enabling in situations where the interviewee has nothing to fear from the
interviewer. In many of the interviews I carried out, the participants were senior in terms of
position and age, and I would like to think that I had prepared them relatively well for the
interview in the initial letter I had written to them and when I telephoned to first arrange
and then confirm the interview, I hope that any ambiguity that may have arisen from lack
of knowledge about my research study, the purpose of the study, what the general questions
were and so forth would have been reduced before the interview even started. In fact, quite
a few people thanked me for selecting them and seemed pleased to be providing me with
valuable knowledge derived from their particular values and years of experience.
Thirty-four percent of the participants were unknown to me before the interview. I
found that I had to work really hard at gaining their confidence and trust before they
became more open in their answers. Despite this, I do not think that either knowing or not
knowing participants before the interview has a powerful effect on the actual interview.
What is more important is that the interviewer builds up a rapport and gains the trust and
confidence of the participant. What is also important is that there is no ambiguity in the
questions that may keep the participant guessing at the reason for a question. In the first \
instance, the researcher has to be up front about what the study is about, why the need for
the study, why the need for the interview, what the questions are, and issues of
confidentiality which need to be sorted out and so forth.
Despite the advantages that accrue from knowing informants, there were some
instances where the informants seemed to exert their authority. For example, one
participant who obviously had not thought about the questions before the interview gave me
the equivalent of a 'telling off when she was unprepared for one of the earlier questions. I
found in general that those who had not given the general questions I had sent out with the
first letter much thought were the ones who were annoyed at some of the questions. But
these were isolated cases. In a few other cases, the participants had other prior
146
commitments immediately after the interview and I had to hurry through the final questions
in order to bring the interview to a quick close.
What is the impact on the study when key players are excluded due to time
constraints or for other reasons? I believe that while the study could have been richer by
their inclusion, the amount of data that I have accrued from the 74 interviews is extremely
rich and offer some very useful insights into the questions I was asking. The complexities
that appear in the data come from the different perspectives participants take to the
questions put to them. So I do have a significant proportion of data that demonstrate the
complexities and tensions that exist in the different perspectives and positions that the
participants have taken in the interviews,
After the Fieldwork
I found my experience in the few months after my return from data collection
debilitating and unproductive. It was a time that I found myself in limbo and it was a slow
process to adjust back into the culture of the reading and writing associated with academic
work. In the 15 weeks away in the field, I had not done any serious reading despite one of
my supervisor's advice of the need to flex the mental muscles - as explained in the previous
section, this was difficult for me because of the socio-cultural context I was operating
under. So adjusting back to academic life after the fieldwork was a slow and painful
process, particularly when part-time tutoring work impinged on my thesis-working time.
In the following sections, I will discuss the process of transcribing the interviews
and how I proceeded with the analysis and interpretation of the data.
Transcribing the Interviews
My immediate concern on returning from my fieldwork was to convert my
interview data into a retrievable, written text for these were to be my main research data. I
returned to Brisbane from Fiji in December 1996. I did not begin any transcription work
until late February 1997. There were several reasons for this. The first was that there was
no transcribing machine available for my use and the first one became available only in mid
February of 1997. Secondly, I had five relatives staying with my family over the Christmas
holidays and the last did not leave until the middle of February. Third, I had not realised
that I would be so tired after the field study and I needed to recover from the intensive data
collection that I had just come through. However, the most important reason for me was
spending time getting reacquainted with my immediate family after the longest separation
147
period we have ever had. After all, three months away from husband and children is a
considerable amount of time by any standards.
I found the transcription work an extremely painful affair, both in terms of my time
and pocket. The tedious, painstaking and time-consuming transcription work took longer
than the six months I had anticipated for this purpose. By the end of April I had personally
transcribed 17 interviews. In total, I transcribed 43 interviews in their entirety, On
average, one hour of interview took six hours to transcribe. As many of my interviews
were about one and a half hours long, the hours that went into transcribing the 50
interviews totalled 450 intensive hours. Additionally, I had to spend more time listening to
and correcting those transcripts that had been prepared by the three people who I had hired
to carry out some of the transcription work for me, As two of the transcribers were not
familiar with the Fiji context, I spent hours making the necessary corrections to these
transcripts before sending the draft off to the interviewee to check.
Since I had run out of transcription funds, I made the decision that for the remaining
31 interviews, I would only transcribe those portions which had potential for usage.
Because I had the moral conviction that I would let each informant 'speak' in some way in
the thesis, I felt I could not leave out any of the interviews. After all, each informant had
given me the privilege of hearing their 'speech', Thus, I spent a considerable amount of
time listening to the remaining 31 interviews, selecting the sections that resonated with
what I thought was important, and transcribing them.
For all the transcripts, as soon as one was completed, I would make two copies,
keep one and send the other off to the interviewee with a covering letter (See Appendix P)
and a consent form. In the letter, I had asked the interviewee to send back the amended
version of the interview, if they had made any amendments, as well as the consent form
which was a statement of whether they agreed to be quoted by name or whether they
wished to remain anonymous in the thesis. As soon as I received a reply, I would make the
necessary amendments and print out three copies of the final interview transcript. I opened
up three files—one file for permanent copies of the interviews, one file for analysis
purposes (for writing on, highlighting, etc.,) and one for cutting up purposes.
Analysing and Interpreting the Data
In addition to one year of transcription work, many hours were spent in data
analysis and interpretation. It is important to stress that the two processes are not separate
but can occur simultaneously. In fact, the process of making sense of the data had begun
148
during the interview proper. I found that on reflecting on the interviews, I had a fair idea of
the kinds of themes that were occurring. This process was continued during transcription
work. I found that as I listened to the interview tapes, I began to get a clearer picture of the
issues that were emerging.
I would take out each transcript from the analysis folder and pore over it, reread it,
make notes in the margin down the left, and put a one word or several-phrase summary of
what the theme was for different quotations down the right margin. Prior to this I had
formulated on paper what I thought some of the themes would be. These were added to as I
came across new themes that did not fit into the prior list, I opened up many files with its
theme written on the front.
As soon as I had 'completed' analysing a transcript, I would take out a 'clean'
version from the cut up file and transfer the theme to the appropriate place on the right
margin. I would classify or code each quotation with the following information on the left
hand margin: name, interview category, gender and race and the page number. When this
was done, I then cut up the appropriate quotations and sections and placed them in the
folder that contained all the quotations that had the same or similar themes. I opened up
many new files as new or different themes emerged, What I did not think was relevant I
placed in a trash file thinking that I might have some use for them later on.
I found that once I became familiar with my data, I could make connections
between what interviewees said that was similar and that which differed, etc. I wrote down
my observations in an analysis folder and continued with this running commentary for all
the interviews. This folder was to play a most critical role when I had to put the data
together and try to interpret what they meant to both the interviewees and to me, As I was
building up my folders of data using a thematic approach, I would prioritise the quotations
according to the value I placed on them with the most important at the top of the pile. In
other words, I was categorising the data when I was analysing them.
Does it make a difference to the quality of analysis and interpretation if there is a
big gap in terms of time of data collection and intensive analysis work? The literature
suggest that it is best to simultaneously carry out analysis while collecting the data (e.g.,
Miles and Huberman, 1994). The quality of data analysis may also be affected by the gap
between completion of data collection and intensive analysis. I did not really begin
intensive analysis work until six months had elapsed after my return from data collection.
As I explained earlier, this was due to the fact that transcription of interviews took far
longer than I had anticipated and I also experienced personal problems during this time
149
coupled with my tutoring commitments in three different courses at the university. Despite
these shortcomings, I do not think the analysis is affected too negatively because once I
began poring over the transcripts and reacquainted myself with field notes I had made, this
lack was accounted for.
In terms of interview data description and interpretation, it is pertinent to note that I
have made a distinction in the way I have presented these in Chapters Five, Six and Seven.
In other words, I let the informants speak and built up a narrative based on their 'speeches'
without trying too much to analyse and interpret what they meant. It is in the latter part of
each of the data chapters that I provide an in-depth analysis and interpretation of the data.
While this distinction may be theoretically problematic, it is nonetheless analytically useful.
In Chapter Eight, I explicate the reason why I have chosen this format. Basically, my
purpose in separating the data description from its analysis and interpretation is due to the
strategy of privileging Indigenous Fijian voice(s) that I consider methodologically
important. This is in keeping with one of the aims of the thesis where I wish to provide the
space for Indigenous Fijians to speak, to have a voice from which to articulate their place in
the world. I, therefore, have privileged the narratives provided by the informants of the
study by separating what they say from my interpretations of their narratives. However, I
acknowledge that the 'freedom' of my informants to speak is mediated by my selection and
ordering of interview data as well as the accompanying commentary.
Summary
This chapter has described and explicated the methodological framework and
considerations that underpinned this research project. In particular, I discussed QR,
narrowing down to the case study approach and then, focussed specifically on the
interview.
The important point that I make in this chapter is that the case study approach that I
have adopted in this thesis is non-generalisable because the case under study is local and
case studies deal with situated knowledges. This is particularly critical in postcolonial
contexts. The final outcome should yield a detailed and textured description and analysis of
locally specific phenomenon (i.e., AA policy and racial inequalities in education in Fiji).
Moreover, another important point that I make in this chapter is that by utilising the case
study and interview methods. I have sought to "enter into the other person's perspective"
with the assumption that "the perspective of others is meaningful, knowable and able to be
made explicit" as Patton (1990: 278) has put it. This approach is in keeping with the
150
emphasis that I have placed on the perspectives of the informants, particularly with the
view that providing a voice for 'locals' is important. However, I have made the important
point that the informants' ability to speak 'freely' has been mediated by my choice of
interview extracts.
In the following three chapters, I present, analyse and interpret the interview data.
First I discuss explanations for racial inequalities in education (Chapter Five) followed by
viewpoints on the conceptualisation, implementation and outcomes of AA (Chapter Six). I
then discuss the portrayals of the informants regarding reform in terms of people, practice
and policy (Chapter Seven).
151
CHAPTER FIVE
EXPLANATIONS FOR RACIAL INEQUALITIES IN SCHOOLING
The following three chapters provide a summation, analysis and interpretation of the
interview data. In this chapter I examine what the interview data reveal about explanations
for the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians under three broad themes: socio-cultural
deficit, psychological and historical structural models. The first two categories give
deterministic, essentialistic explanations for failure in school and basically hold the victim's
physical, social and cultural environment responsible for his or her underachievement in
schooling. The third category shifts from an emphasis on the underachiever's social and
cultural environment to a focus on educational structures in place, such as the curriculum,
assessment and pedagogical systems, as a possible explanation for underachievement.
Socio-Cultural Deficit Models
Many informants attribute the academic underachievement of Indigenous Fijians to
deficit in, variously, their physical, social or cultural environment. Rurality, or the problems
associated with distance from urban spaces, is identified as a serious impediment to the
performance of Indigenous Fijians in schooling. The home background of these students,
their socio-economic status, the cultural orientations of their parents and school variables,
such as teacher quality and resource availability, have also been identified as important
factors contributing to their performance in formal schooling.
Rurality: Spatial Disadvantage
The issue of the disadvantages associated with distance from urban spaces has been
consistently raised by the informants. For instance, Sefanaia Koroi, Chief Education Officer
in charge of Primary Education, draws our attention to spatial disadvantage in this manner:
In Fiji, what has been...foremost in policy..,is the rural concept because there is a
tendency to look at the two sectors of the economy, rural and urban and look at the
disadvantaged area - the rural. Most of the schools are in rural areas, most of the
Fijians live in rural areas and the disparities in performance tend to point to the fact
that rural education seems to be the starting take-off point of modern education for
our Fijian children. (T9: 2)
Koroi makes several points here. First, the rural area is disadvantaged relative to
urban centres. Second, a significant proportion of Indigenous Fijians live in rural areas and
third, because of this, many Indigenous Fijian children begin their schooling in this
economically and educationally disadvantaged environment.
152
Another informant who is concerned about the problems of spatial disadvantage is
Sakeasi Butadroka, the Leader of the Fijian Nationalist Party. Butadroka highlights the
problems associated with rurality by asking, "How can you expect high passes from Fijian
youth when most of the Fijian parents are still in the rural area without any provision for
electricity, for medical services, for roading and for good housing?" (T36: 5).
Focussing specifically on the rural Indigenous Fijian school, Veniana Lovodua,
Principal of ACS who worked as a curriculum officer and has had vast experience visiting
rural and urban schools, reiterates the point about the lack of adequate educational
equipment, materials and resources. As she has put it, "There is a lot of struggle in the rural
areas, struggle for the children because their facilities are non-existent". She notes that
"There would be one book among six or seven if they're lucky". As well, according to
Lovodua, "there is no electricity hence no duplicating machine or photocopier" (T44: 1).
Filimoni Jitoko, Principal Education Officer in charge of the Fijian Education Unit at
the MOE, particularly highlights the issue of rural poverty and how that impacts on the
school. He argues that "the lack of funds in the community" would be a "hidden factor" that
would explain the "difference in the resources available for Fijian schools...when we
compare this with the resources available in the Indian secondary schools". Emphasising the
struggle that Indigenous Fijians face, he points out that "Parents face a lot of difficulties" so
that "fees for students in Fijian schools are paid very late if they are paid at all". This creates
problems for the school management who "can't do a lot in terms of school development
because funds are not readily available". The "scarce cash available" then affects
"resourcing the teachers in their teaching work" as well as general school development (T13:
2).
What is the underlying cause of the poverty of Indigenous Fijians in the rural areas?
The subsistence economy of the rural areas is raised by Joeli Nabuka, currently Manager of
Academic Services at the Fiji Institute of Technology. Nabuka was principal of several rural
Indigenous Fijian schools for a period of twelve years and spent three years as Principal of
the Lautoka Teachers College. Nabuka's emphasis is on the reasons for the poor economic
base of the rural area which affects the quality of resources, teachers and so forth. As he
explains it, "The only sources of employment...in the rural areas are actually for those who
have come out from the urban areas, for example teachers. It is "economically inactive...in
the sense that there is no source of basic employment there" (T10: 2).
153
A senior educator at USP also emphasises the issue of poverty and survival in the
rural area, particularly as faced by women, which in turn impacts on the children's education.
She notes:
Another issue is hardship at home, affordability....For...women in rural areas, a lot of
time is spent trying to survive. What is education when you're spending hours getting
food...getting firewood...getting the daily sustenance which most urban people are
spared from....I think in many Third World countries, most of us haven't sorted out
our basic needs and this is a hindrance to schooling or to taking advantage of
opportunities offered in the schools and the formal educational system. (Tl 1: 7)
The key theme here is the portrayal of spatial disadvantage associated with distance
from urban centres. Because the rural economy is mainly subsistence-oriented, there is not
much scope for the kind of economic development that would bring a reasonable level of
financial prosperity and security for the inhabitants. As the informants above have
consistently pointed out, poverty and the struggle to survive are a way of life in the rural
area. Consequently, teaching and learning resources are scarce. This, together with lack of
formal education on the part of adults, perpetuates the cycle of ignorance and poverty which
is not conducive to school success for Indigenous Fijians in niral areas. The issue of
uneducated Indigenous Fijian parents will be discussed in more detail in Chapter Seven. For
now, I would point out that educational deprivation in rural Indigenous Fijian schools is a
key focus of my informants. Many Indigenous Fijians start their formal education in rural
primary and junior secondary schools, and the poor economic and educational base that they
encounter is purported to have serious implications for their education, particularly when
they move to the urban centres for a high school education.
Many informants have pointed out that rural schools face another disadvantage: that
of poorly trained, underqualified teachers. For example, Taufa Vakatale, the Minister for
Education, argues that poor living conditions in the rural area are a deterrent to attracting f
qualified teachers. Because teachers are not considered a priority, their "houses, for example,
are sub-standard compared to the housing that other government officers who go out to serve
in the rural area". As the Minister for Education puts it, "Unfortunately, most of the rural
schools are committee-run schools and the responsibility for providing houses for teachers
would rest on the rural community". There is then "a serious problem with the kind of
quarters that teachers are provided with" (T14: 2).
The point that is worth reiterating here is that almost all rural Indigenous Fijian
schools are owned and managed by local communities. In fact, about 96% of all educational
institutions are community or privately owned. By and large, community owned Indigenous
154
Fijian schools are economically poor, What this means is that many local Indigenous Fijian
communities in the rural area are not in a financial position to build adequate houses for their
teachers, let alone build schools that are equipped with adequate teaching and learning
facilities and resources. This is further exacerbated by the problem of remoteness. The
further the school is from the closest urban centre, the more problems there are with the
transport of people and goods. The Minister for Education states:
Another problem faced in rural education is that some schools are remote and very
difficult to reach. It is very difficult to get materials, furniture, etc out to these
schools and they, as well as other schools in the islands, have problems with
equipment and transportation. How to transport materials out to these schools, given
the transportation difficulty, is a serious problem, especially in interior areas which
can only be accessed by horse transport. Teachers may want to improve their living
standards out in the rural areas but may be constrained by remoteness and
transportation problems. (T14: 2)
She also raises the problem of young, inexperienced teachers having to teach multiple
classes. This problem is further exacerbated by the lack of professional networking between
these teachers and their colleagues in the urban ce...res because of the problem of
remoteness. As the Minister notes, "They...lack professional networking with their
colleagues because of the problem of remoteness from the centres and many of them are
forgotten once they go out the rural areas to teach" (T14: 2).
Vakatale's views about substandard facilities and lack of professional support are
reiterated by Divendra Nath. Nath is currently Assistant Principal at Mahatma Gandhi
Memorial School. An Indo-Fijian teacher, who in his first year out of training taught in a
remote rural Indigenous Fijian school, Nath recollects:
When I went out in my first year, I did not receive any professional support. The
Ministry posted us and left us to sink or swim, The housing was substandard. I was
told that there was electricity but this was provided by a generator. I was told there
was water supply but this consisted of only one tap outside for washing and
everything. (T52: 2)
What Vakatale and Nath have said about the problems faced by new, inexperienced
teachers is supported by Veniana Lovodua, Principal of Adi Cakobau School. She goes a bit
further to argue that many teachers in rural schools are "not graduates, not teacher-trained"
and some are "fresh school leavers". The very young untrained and inexperienced teachers
had the problem of "their students...treating them as colleagues...And they don't have control
and they teach the way they were taught" (T44: I).
155
The challenges associated with the disadvantage of location have been addressed in
various ways by the Ministry of Education, Hari Ram, former Permanent Secretary for
Education, served in the education sector for many decades as teacher, secondary school
inspector, and a senior bureaucrat. Currently the Director of the Institute Social and
Administrative Studies at USP, he points out that when he was Deputy Secretary for
Education, "one of the major aims of the Ministry of Education was...to reduce the
educational gap between Indigenous Fijians and others". This included improving "teaching
facilities in rural areas - the buildings, the libraries and..,to increase the supply of educational
materials to rural schools" including "better laboratories...more equipment for practical work
in science subjects" as well the improvement of the "staffing to those schools" (T5: 2).
The emphasis, since independence, on rural education policy seems to have been the
improvement of schools facilities, the provision of adequately trained teachers and
educational resources. Amraiya Naidu, the current Permanent Secretary for Education,
points out that for the three years between 1996-8, a total of $3,45 million was earmarked for
science education in the rural area. He notes that this fund will be used "in the teaching and
learning of science in rural schools for rural children" and would include the building of new
laboratories or the upgrading of old ones. As well, chemicals and science textbooks would
be provided to rural schools. Refresher courses are also planned for science teachers and in
areas where there is no electricity, generators would be provided, particularly for the teaching
of Physics. Naidu also points out that the MOE has been concerned about teachers'
conditions in the rural area and were assisting in building teachers' quarters. Moreover, the
Ministry was providing a rural allowance to attract teachers and an incentive allowance to
retain graduate teachers in the rural area.
The Minister for Education identifies inequities in the allocation of the per capita
grant of $30 per primary child emphasising that remote and small schools in the rural areas
were greatly disadvantaged because of their small enrolment numbers, She notes that the
MOE is in the process of trying to bring about financial equity through a provision of an
additional grant over and above the per capita grant. This, she maintains, will need to be
worked out in such a way that the more remote schools with small enrolment numbers are not
further disadvantaged by their isolation from the urban centres.
The issue of the disadvantage associated with location, therefore, is one that has been
identified by the informants as a major deterrent to Indigenous Fijian school performance.
The poor economic conditions associated with the rural subsistence economy and the
isolation of rural school communities from urban centres seem to be the two major factors
156
that provide negative conditions for the Indigenous Fijians to perform well in schooling. The
conditions are not conducive to attracting well-qualified, adequately trained teachers to teach
in rural schools. As well, local communities are generally too poor to provide the necessary
teaching and learning resources and facilities that are found in the relatively more affluent
urban settings, According to government officials, the MOE has recognised the
disadvantages associated with rurality and have attempted to address them through school
capital development and the provision of teaching and learning resources such as books and
chemicals. For a little over a decade, the MOE's efforts were supplemented by special funds
provided through the AA policy implemented by the FAB. This took the same form of
assistance as the MOE but the target specifically was rural Indigenous Fijian schools. So the
disadvantages associated with living far away from urban spaces has been identified as a key
factor in the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians in schooling.
Home Background
Many informants have identified some deficiencies in the home background of
Indigenous Fijians to account for their poor performance in school. For example, a senior
academic at USP highlights the cycle of disadvantage associated with low socio-economic
status. He points out:
We have a vicious circle situation....On average, unfortunately, Fijian students come
from lower socio-economic background or homes with much less money for books,
for study space that perpetuate itself in their lack of achievement. (T50: 2)
Similarly, Sir Len Usher, former mayor and editor of the 'Fiji Times' who has had
many years experience as principal of Indigenous Fijian schools during the colonial period,
agrees that the problem facing Indigenous Fijians in education is associated with home
background factors, what he terms 'environmental'. He points out that "It's not made easy
for Fijian children to study at home because of the environment at home and also...the
disposable income of Fijians is probably lower than Indians...Chinese and Europeans and so
they haven't the same access to books" (T26: 4).
Many informants have argued that Indigenous Fijian parents may have educational
and career aspirations for their children but may not know how to facilitate school success.
Adi Litia Qionibaravi, Chief Accountant at the Ministry of Fijian Affairs, points out:
The way our home is structured, we don't provide for facilities to enable our children
to study and parents also do not know or do not understand that they have an
important role to play in our children's education like assisting the children, making
sure that they do their homework...be there to answer their questions...make sure
157
that.,.they attend school interviews, attend fundraising for the school and things like
that. (Tl:8)
Mere Tora, Acting Principal Education Officer responsible for Secondary Education,
also argues that Indigenous Fijian parents value education but lack the knowledge about how
to meet the educational needs of their children. She maintains that Indigenous Fijian parents
definitely value education. Their problem is that "they are ignorant" and "need to be
guided...to have the attitude to be able to give that support". (T19: 15).
To counter the problem of ignorance and poverty, a senior Indigenous Fijian educator
at the USP points to education as the answer because "education is self-supporting, self-
sustaining". As she puts it, "If you're educated, you make sure your kids get educated". She
maintains that "as more Fijians get educated at whatever level they leave school, they will
ensure that their children go to school. They will have adopted a new set of values, a new
system altogether and they'll go for education" (Til: 5).
Moreover, a senior Indigenous Fijian bureaucrat suggests that if Indigenous Fijian
parents provided a supportive environment for their children, they may do well at school. In
her view, this would be possible if Fijians looked "at themselves as individuals" in the sense
that if the parents were concerned about "their own children, their survival, their future,
parents will begin to wonder about where they're going, where their children are going".
This self-reflexivity would enable Indigenous Fijian parents to think "I must not drink grog
too much. I must go and work and get income to be able to support my children, to pay bus
fares, fees, lunches. I must set space aside for them to study at night because I want my
family to succeed, I want my children to succeed" (T56: 1),
A low social class, then, has been identified by the informants as impeding the
educational development of Indigenous Fijians. A low level of education on the part of
parents and the concomitant low socio-economic status associated with lack of formal
education are two factors perceived to be militating against Indigenous Fijian academic
achievement. This applies in both the rural and urban areas. Parents who are poorly
educated and are economically.poor are not taken to be in a position to understand what is
required of them to assist their children to achieve their maximum potential in schooling.
According to these informants, because of this lack of knowledge, many low-income, little-
educated Indigenous Fijians do not understand the conditions that are essential at home to
assist their children such as providing time and privacy to study, making the educational
15S
needs of their children first priority by paying fees on time, buying school books, attending
teacher-parent evenings and so forth.
Excessive drinking of yaqona" by Indigenous Fijian adults has been identified by
some informants as a major social problem that impedes the social and educational
development of the Indigenous Fijian community, For instance, Adi Kuini Speed identifies
the yaqona as "the curse of the Fijian society" when it is used excessively in both the village
and urban areas. Adi Kuini is an executive member of the Fijian Association Party, Chief of
the Naikoro District in Navosa and is a member of the Great Council of Chiefs. She
maintains that
yaqona drinking cripples the energy of our people to such a serious extent, especially
the men-folk, that the whole traditional social system is becoming a burden to a few,
especially the women who have had to carry a lot of the burden...and that's why
things are slowing up. (T32: 11)
Several other informants have referred to grog drinking by the adults taking
precedence over the educational interests of the child. In both the rural and urban areas, for
instance, if people come to visit, the adults will drink grog and there will not be a place for
the students to study, particularly since many low socio-economic status Indigenous Fijians
live in one- or two-room houses. In this instance, the main living area will be taken up by
adults drinking grog. And in the rural area, the only good light would most likely be used for
the grog session, thus depriving the student from the best light for study purposes.
Sir Len Usher endorses this viewpoint:
I think one of the problems...is the general way of life. It's very difficult for children
to study in the evenings because in most village houses, the light is not very good and
also there is very little privacy....[W]ith grog sessions going on, it's very difficult for
children to study or do homework. The general way of life doesn't make it easy for
children to spend a lot of time in study except when they're actually in school. (T26:
2)
Another home background factor identified by a few informants is in terms of a
conflict of values between the Indigenous Fijian student meeting the needs required for
success at school, on the one hand, and the demands placed on the child in the rural area to
carry out daily chores, on the other. For instance, Dr Nii-Plange, an expatriate from Ghana
who is the Head of Sociology at USP, observes that "the young kid in school becomes a
11 The yagona plant (Piper methysticum) is a tall, leafy plant that grows to about Five feet in height. Its
roots are dried, pounded or pulverized, then mixed with water to form a drink. It eventually produces a
soporific effect. Yagona is found, not only in sacred settings, but at almost every social gathering (Katz,
1993). The yaqona is referred to as 'grog' in English.
victim of this conflict because more time is allocated for him to do other things than to do
what he really needs to do to get through in the school system" (T20: 7).
The issues I have discussed so far seem to apply mainly to Indigenous Fijians in rural
areas, although they are equally applicable to urban areas. In what follows, I would like to
examine some of the data on urban poverty, Susana Tuisawau is a teacher-educator at FIT
and President of the FT A. In her case-study research into the Indigenous Fijian urban poor
and the reasons for low retention at school, she explains that the urban poor with a low socio-
economic status cite the effects of poverty as the main reason why they dropped out of
school. One such example is that students could not do their homework because they could
not afford the textbook. They could then be in trouble with the teacher at school and this
would be a vicious circle resulting in the students becoming too embarrassed about attending
school. Eventually, the students would drop out of school altogether.
Another effect of poverty is said to be lack of privacy in the home. The students
might not have anywhere to do their homework because they lived in a one-room apartment
or in a squatter settlement. Yet another effect of poverty is the problem of bus fares. If there
is no money available for bus fares to school, the student would miss a lot of school and
would eventually be too far behind to catch up. As Tuisawau explains, "The economic status
would determine the quality of the home environment because [this], in as far as provisions
for study are concerned, would determine whether the students can do the back-up at home or
will determine whether the students can have access to education where it has been offered".
For Indigenous Fijians in the urban area who are poor, their inability to attend school is seen
to lead to a lot of absenteeism which "progressively becomes worse to the point where the
students just drop out of school altogether" (T30: 9).
By contrast, some informants have raised the point that the urban-rural divide is not a
simplistic and unproblematic division. For instance, Dr Vijay Naidu, Head of School of
Social and Economic Development at USP and Pro Vice Chancellor, maintains that there are
some categories of Indo-Fijians such as "cane cutters, workers and the like" who "don't
really care too much about what their children know" (T6; 10). Similarly, Krishna Datt,
member of Parliament, trade unionist and former school principal, argues that there are
categories of Indigenous Fijians in the urban centres, very much like those described in the
study by Susana Tuisawau above, who are "more underprivileged" and disadvantaged than
some Indigenous Fijians in the rural areas. Both Naidu and Datt are highlighting the
important point that social class would be a more appropriate category to explain the
disadvantages that students face, irrespective of which ethnic group one belongs to and
\60
irrespective of whether one is located in the rural or urban area, This point repeatedly occurs
in the data and is something that I will discuss later. 'I
In sum, then, home background factors considered to be impediments to the
educational progress of Indigenous Fijian students are; low socio-economic status, little or no
formal education on parents' part, and the kinds of priorities that parents have for their
children. The ignorance of poorly educated Indigenous Fijian parents about what is needed
to facilitate the educational needs of their children has been particularly emphasised by some
informants, The excessive drinking of yaqona as well has been identified as another
impediment. Another important point emerging from the data is that the distinctions between
rural-urban and Fijian-Indian ethnic divisions are not as clear-cut as people think. In other
words, the demarcation between rural and urban is not as strong as some informants have
made them out to be. This is borne out in the sense that rural Indigenous Fijians are a
heterogenous group as are those in urban centres, Similarly, the homogeneity that is
accorded to Indo-Fijians by some informants in terms of the disadvantages they face is not
borne out in the data. As the informants have poin^d out, socio-economic class and level of
education reached are far better indicators of how children will do at school than whether one
lives in the urban or rural area or whether, indeed, one is Indigenous Fijian or Indo-Fijian.
Cultural Factors
In addition to the disadvantage associated with location and home background
factors, many informants have identified some cultural factors as impediments to the success
of Indigenous Fijians at school. A poor attitude towards education is one such impediment.
Evidence of this is provided by Adi Kuini Speed who argues that Indigenous Fijians are
underachieving because of the low priority they place on education. She argues that the
traditional way of life requires that social functions, such as deaths and weddings, take
precedence in their lives, even for the more educated ones. She puts it this way;
They're doing badly in school because of our traditional way of life...because Fijians
are never taught the importance of education. We never really appreciate, never
connect why education is important and vital so we don't apply it. Even for
reasonably educated Fijian parents, there's still a question mark there. We don't
devote enough time for our children,.,,Our social calendar is more important - the
ogan, solevn" so education comes as a low priority. (T32: 9)
12 Oga is an Indigenous Fijian word for social obligations such as a wedding, a funeral, a birthday or any
other customary obligation.
13 Solevu refers to a large gathering of people for the ceremonial exchange of food, etc., with feasting
(Capell, 1941) to celebrate a wedding or to mourn a death, for example.
161
1
In addition to Indigenous Fijians spending more time and effort on the "social
calendar" with families demonstrating a lack of emphasis on education, Adi Kuini maintains
that school committees, particularly in rural schools, also "don't function as effectively as
they should". The low priority placed on education by the parents and the community
therefore does not make conditions conducive for good teaching and learning.
This viewpoint is supported by Ted Young, General Secretary for the FTA, who
agrees that the cultural obligations of Indigenous Fijians take precedence over education. In
his view, "education is the last priority" because "the first priority is the vanua14, second '
priority the church and if there is anything left, it's for our children". Young argues that this
attitude is prevalent in the rural area while some of the more educated Indigenous Fijians in
urban centres have more flexibility. Unfortunately for "the common Fijian in the village, in
the rural set-up, they can't do that" because the "way the culture is set-up, they'll be
ostracised" (T29: 6),
Like Young, Professor Tupeni Baba emphasises that Indigenous Fijians, particularly
in the rural areas, cannot opt out of cultural obligations because of the social sanctions in
place. This contributes to education coming "out a poor third". Professor Baba argues:
I think [for] a lot of the rural people, given the small setting, the small community
they're in, it's very difficult to get away from this kind of obligation because
everybody knows if they opt out, if they don't contribute to ceremonies, if they don't
pull their weight with the church or the vanua or the community, they will stand out.
All sorts of social sanctions are there in the village for them to observe this so
education comes out as a poor third, (T8: 9)
On the other hand, Sahu Khan, an educator at the FIT, elaborates on the difference
between Indo-Fijians and Indigenous Fijians regarding their orientations towards the value of
education. Khan maintains that "Indians,..are more conscious of education and Indian
parents will not spare anything to ensure that their children are educated. They'll make all
the sacrifices because that's one of those things that they consider of the greatest wealth -
education" (T58: 1). Similarly, Dr Jimione Samisoni, Dean of the Fiji School of Medicine,
admits that the Indo-Fijian students "have a different mentality" and "they're brought up in
that way", in other words to succeed in school (T 55: 1-2).
By contrast, a senior Indigenous Fijian educator at USP maintains that it is the child-
rearing practices of Indigenous Fijians which disadvantage them in the school system. She
14 Vanua literally means land, region or place. Politically, it is a confederation, a land oxyavusa (the
largest kinship and social division of Fijian society) under a strong chief, in its turn combinable with
other vanua under a matanitu (kingdom) (Capell, 1941).
162
argues that because children are not valued as a human being in their own right, the way they
are treated could affect their self-esteem which would be disadvantageous in school. As she
has put it, "Children are not supposed to articulate in the Fijian society. [They] are told what
to do all the time. They don't discover for themselves " (Tl 1: 7).
This point is taken further by Dr Vijay Naidu. Naidu maintains that Indigenous
Fijians are not encouraged to question, to experiment, to be innovative which affects the self-
confidence and sense of independence of the child. He notes:
Children brought up in many ethnic Fijian communities, also amongst Indo-Fijians
but more so ethnic Fijians - these children are not encouraged to really find out why
things are happening. They're supposed to know almost sort of implicitly that these
are the conventions.,,the taboos,...The systematic learning and questioning and the
development of self-confidence is not something that is widely encouraged. (T6: 8)
A further explanation provided for Indigenous Fijian underachievement in formal
schooling is the view that Fijian culture discourages individual success. Josevata
Kamikamica, is the Leader of the Fijian Association Party and the director of Fijian
Holdings, a business arm for Indigenous Fijians. Also a former Minister of Finance and
General Manager of the Native Lands Trust Board, Kamikamica argues that Indigenous
Fijians are "easily satisfied". He argues that "they probably approach the school with the
attitude that as long as they pass they move on to the next stage, that's fine", and that "there
is not the urge to get to the top of their class", He attributes this lack of ambition in school to
the fact that "right in the homes and maybe in our society, individual success is not
encouraged". Instead, "the norm is that everyone remains about the same" (T16: 6),
Similarly, Dr Michael Davis, Lecturer in Sociology at USP, observes that "there was
a culture of ordinariness, a culture of mediocrity, a culture where they were not supposed to
excel compared with their mates" among unemployed Indigenous Fijian males (T66; 1),
Like Susana Tuisawau's study on the urban poor already described earlier, Davis provides
another insight into the low self-esteem of young male Indigenous Fijian males "on the
streets". As he has pointed out, "these boys are competing to go to jail...not because they
wanted to go to jail but they wanted the experience behind them" in order to "get gain a
higher reputation amongst the group" (T66: 2),
By contrast, the group orientation of Indigenous Fijians is raised by the Minister for
Education, who argues that "our communal way of life is at odds with school success" (T14:
3). She notes that Indigenous Fijians "do well in sports because it's team work, we do well
in fund raising because it's team work". However, when "it comes to individual
performance.,.then we don't do as well" (T14: 9). On the other hand, Sefanaia Koroi argues
163
that Indigenous Fijians do not do so well because they "do not have a tradition of academic
background unlike the Indians who have had a long tradition carried over from India". As he
explains it; "Traditionally [Indigenous Fijians] have not aspired as hard as we can to achieve
something better, something like education" (T9: 9).
Some informants have indicated that Indigenous Fijian culture should not be made
the scapegoat for poor performance in schooling. For instance, Unaisi Nabobo, Lecturer in
Education at the FCAE, points out that "Culture is used as an excuse to be lazy because that
is how the missionaries and the colonial master defined us and that is how people are using
that as an excuse to be lazy" (T45: 2). She argues that "real Fijian culture is excellence in
thinking of tomorrow, in seeing there is ample provision for tomorrow and the future". Her
main argument is that the perception that Indigenous Fijians are lazy has come out of the way
missionary and the 'colonial master' had represented them.
Similarly, a senior academic at USP argues that "there is not enough sensitivity to
different cultural contexts and the Fijian cultural context is so different in many ways
although there are some interesting similarities but the Fijian context is so different from the
so-cailed Indian context" (T50: 1). His main point here is that criticisms about Indigenous
Fijian culture should take account of the different cultural contexts that abound in Fiji. What
he means by this is what he perceives to be the enormous social and cultural differences
between Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians that disadvantage Indigenous Fijians more than
others.
The cultural orientations of Indigenous Fijians, then, have been identified as other
factors that disadvantage them in schooling. For example, the low priority they place on
education, their adult-centred practices which creates dependence and lack of confidence and
the discouragement of individual success have been identified. As well, their lack of an
academic tradition and the lack of goal setting and ambition are additional cultural setbacks
to the indigenous child at school. In sum then, some lack on the part of the culture of
Indigenous Fijians and their children has been identified as an impediment to their success in
school.
School Factors
School factors such as time management, the availability or otherwise of suitably
qualified teachers, and inferior educational facilities and resources are emerging as key
external factors that affect the quality of education that students receive. In this section,
164
some informants have identified a deficit in the school environment as detrimental to the
success of Indigenous Fijian students in particular.
In terms of school organisation, time management has been defined as a major factor
contributing to performance. Kolinio Rainima Meo, Deputy Secretary of Administration and
Finance at the MOE, argues that Indigenous Fijians in predominantly Fijian schools do not
perform well in examinations because their time is not spent efficiently on learning activities.
Surveys conducted by the Ministry to determine the number of hours spent on academic
activities have shown that those Indo-Fijian schools that had excellent examination results
spent more time on learning activities than those predominantly Indigenous Fijian schools
that did not have 'good' results, Meo maintains that predominantly Indigenous Fijian
schools concentrate a lot of learning time on sports and other extra-curricular activities
compared to predominantly Indo-Fijian schools. As he puts it, "one of the biggest reasons
for the decline in Fijian education is the misuse of time" (T41: 6),
Amraiya Naidu, the Permanent Secretary for Education, reiterates Meo's point about
efficient use of school time on learning activities. Naidu was principal of Ratu Kadavulevu
School (RKS), an Indigenous Fijian boys' boarding school, for four years. He has also
served as principal in predominantly Indo-Fijian schools. He attributes success to actual
contact time in the classroom between the teacher and the students. He states:
From my perspective, the only difference I can see between a traditional Fijian school
and a non-Fijian school is the extent of time that children have in contact with the
teachers because of the importance...we place on extra-curricular activities, as a result
of which there is an enormous sacrifice of the actual teaching time between the
teacher and the children. (T3: 5)
The Permanent Secretary for Education pointed out that in his four years as principal
at RKS, the external examination results improved dramatically because of the emphasis he
placed on contact time between the teacher and the students in the classroom. As well, he
changed the focus from sports to academic pursuits. For instance, he increased study time,
subject teachers supervised during study time and, during the third term prior to final exams,
there were extra tutorials and additional morning study for external examination forms.
The importance of time management is supported by Jagdish Singh of Rishikul
Sanatan College and Dewan Chand of Bhawani Dayal High School who are both currently
principals of predominantly Indo-Fijian schools, They both maintain that time management
is a critical factor in academic achievement. Like Naidu's experience at RKS, both
principals increase the academic emphasis in the final term of school, In Singh's case, he has
165
even gone to the extent of preparing a home study timetable for the students which "tells the
child what to study, when to study, when to eat and when to sleep" (T7: 5). Both maintain
that this academic emphasis, where sports and other extra-curricular activities are excluded
for examination classes, has resulted in an improvement in exam results,
Much has already been said of the lack of resources in predominantly Indigenous
Fijian schools, particularly those in the rural area. Tokasa Vitayaki, a curriculum
development officer who has visited many schools in the country, highlights the difference in
the school infrastructures and resources of Indo-Fijian and Indigenous Fijian schools, In the
former, she notes, they "have just about everything". In contrast, the facilities available in
the Indigenous Fijian schools "are not very conducive to learning as far as the students are
concerned". Vitayaki draws our attention particularly to the lack of library facilities and
books in many Indigenous Fijian schools, particularly in rural areas. This is supported by
Professor Konai Thaman, Head of the School of Humanities of USP who emphasises that
"you need books if you want to succeed in academic studies, you need books. There is no
simple way around that" (T4: 3).
The issue of the lack of kindergartens in the rural area is introduced by Joeli Kalou,
Member of Parliament and former Minister for Education. In his view, emphasis should be
placed on early childhood education. He points out that kindergartens are the result of
community initiatives and are basically urban-based because these communities can afford to
establish and maintain them. In contrast, rural areas do not have the financial capacity,
technical expertise or trained pre-school teachers to establish kindergartens so "Fijian
students mainly from the rural areas [will continue] to miss out...until kindergartens become
part and parcel of the national education system" (T33: 3).
An insight into the availability or otherwise of resources in rural Indigenous Fijian
boarding schools can be gleaned from what Sister Genevieve Loo experienced in one.
Currently Principal of St Joseph Secondary School in Suva, Sr Loo reminisces on her
experiences at a rural Indigenous Fijian boarding school. On her arrival, she recalls:
That was my first shock, there was absolutely nothing in the school. There was just a
bare table and the chairs. I asked for a typewriter and they didn't have it and in terms
of equipment there was just nothing and there was not even a library. So the students
depended entirely on what the teachers gave. (T21: 6)
Sister Loo also raises the point that basic needs such as water, decent sanitation and a
balanced diet are not generally met in rural boarding schools. As she puts it, "We were even
short of water and the food was so shocking. The diet was not balanced, there was too much
166
starch and a lot of carbohydrates....How can the students learn?" As she explains it, the
shortcomings in rural boarding schools are not just due to lack of funds but just as
importantly to a lack of knowledge about what is important on the part of adults in charge.
The spotlight seems to be on the lack of proper resources and facilities in rural
Indigenous Fijian schools, However, because of this emphasis on rural Indigenous Fijian
schools, Indigenous Fijian urban schools and Indo-Fijian rural schools, which are just as
impoverished, are understated. As Ledua Waqailiti, Head of Languages at Nabua Secondary
School points out, some urban Indigenous Fijian schools are also impoverished in terms of
resources, She notes, "The school simply can't afford to buy the textbooks and the students
can't afford to buy their own textbooks. So we were working on photocopies. Now our
photocopier goes kaput every three months" (T24: 10). Similarly, as Krishna Datt points out,
rural lndo-Fijian schools are just as disadvantaged as rural Indigenous Fijian schools. He
notes:
i :!
When you put through rural Fijians, you've got to pitch them against rural Indians for
a comparison. The Indo-Fijians are just as disadvantaged in the rural area compared
to the Indo-Fijians in the urban area (T28: 16).
The consensus of these informants is that rural Indigenous Fijian schools do indeed
face many setbacks. Many of these revolve around the general lack of funds in the
community. As well, the further away the school is from an urban centre the more difficult it
is to obtain needed supplies. And as Sister Loo pointed out, how can students learn in
unsatisfactory living conditions such as lack of water, lack of proper sanitation, lack of
physical facilities and educational resources, poor diet and a relatively uneducated school
community? Add the problem of untrained, underqualified teachers and the odds are stacked
against the students succeeding in school.
Irrespective of its locality, racial make-up or racial ownership - facilities in schools
depend on what the community can provide. Thus, a school attended by many Indigenous
Fijians who come from low socio-economic backgrounds could be just as disadvantaged,
whether they are in the rural or urban areas. The same can be said of lndo-Fijian schools.
They are not all advantaged in terms of facilities and resources, particularly in rural areas.
What matters, then, can be summed up by Tahir Munshi, Chief Education Officer Secondary,
who notes "the communities which provide the right kind of educational environment for the
children in terms of books, resources and the classroom.-.play a very important role in
creating that education background,...atmosphere,..and motivation" (T42: 2),
167
starch and a lot of carbohydrates...,How can the students learn?" As she explains it, the
shortcomings in rural boarding schools are not just due to lack of funds but just as
importantly to a lack of knowledge about what is important on the part of adults in charge.
The spotlight seems to be on the lack of proper resources and facilities in rural
Indigenous Fijian schools. However, because of this emphasis on rural Indigenous Fijian
schools, Indigenous Fijian urban schools and Indo-Fijian rural schools, which are just as
impoverished, are understated, As Ledua Waqailiti, Head of Languages at Nabua Secondary
School points out, some urban Indigenous Fijian schools are also impoverished in terms of
resources. She notes, "The school simply can't afford to buy the textbooks and the students
can't afford to buy their own textbooks. So we were working on photocopies. Now our
photocopier goes kaput every three months" (T24: 10). Similarly, as Krishna Datt points out,
rural Indo-Fijian schools are just as disadvantaged as rural Indigenous Fijian schools. He
notes:
When you put through rural Fijians, you've got to pitch them against rural Indians for
a comparison. The Indo-Fijians are just as disadvantaged in the rural area compared
to the Indo-Fijians in the urban area (T28: 16).
The consensus of these informants is that rural Indigenous Fijian schools do indeed
face many setbacks. Many of these revolve around the general lack of funds in the
community. As well, the further away the school is from an urban centre the more difficult it
is to obtain needed supplies, And as Sister Loo pointed out, how can students learn in
unsatisfactory living conditions such as lack of water, lack of proper sanitation, lack of
physical facilities and educational resources, poor diet and a relatively uneducated school
community? Add the problem of untrained, underqualified teachers and the odds are stacked
H
i
against the students succeeding in school,
Irrespective of its locality, racial make-up or racial ownership - facilities in schools
depend on what the community can provide, Thus, a school attended by many Indigenous
Fijians who come from low socio-economic backgrounds could be just as disadvantaged,
whether they are in the rural or urban areas. The same can be said of Indo-Fijian schools.
They are not all advantaged in terms of facilities and resources, particularly in rural areas.
What matters, then, can be summed up by Tahir Munshi, Chief Education Officer Secondary,
who notes "the communities which provide the right kind of educational environment for the
children in terms of books, resources and the classroom...play a very important role in
creating that education background,...atmosphere...and motivation" (T42: 2).
167
The quality of teaching has been identified as another school factor that affect
students' academic performance. Adi Kuini Speed, for instance, maintains that it is the
combined effects of poor facilities and poorly qualified teachers that contribute to the
continuing underachievement of Indigenous Fijians, She also raises the issue of the politics
of location where "the Indo-Fijian teachers don't go out to the rural areas for some reason"
(T32: 15). Indo-Fijian teachers prefer to remain in the urban centres so it is the Indigenous
Fijian teachers who are posted to teach in rural Indigenous Fijian schools. Adi Kuini's
conclusion is that Indo-Fijians "are getting the better of Fijians at every level - the parenting,
the social commitment to progress, the better facilities and the better teachers" T32: 15-16).
Susana Tuisawau explains that inequalities in teachers' qualifications is "one of the
contributing factors to the poor performance of Fijians in secondary schools". She points out
that Indigenous Fijians teaching in rural schools face difficulty in qualifying for Government
in-service award scholarships because of the difficulty in doing extension or distance courses
at USP. A teacher is given an in-service scholarship if he or she has completed a required
number of extension courses. Tuisawau mentions that at one point, the number of required
courses to qualify for a scholarship was fourteen units which seriously disadvantaged
Indigenous Fijians teaching in the rural areas. She points out that non-Indigenous Fijians are
urban-based and have access to the university or to the postal service and so forth. In
contrast, Indigenous Fijian teachers had to contend with the problems associated with
distance. She notes;
Most of the other races are urban-based and they [have] access to the extension
service here and to a good postal service if they [are] doing extension. Our teachers
are in the secondary schools of the rural areas like Yasawa, Rotuma, Lau, Kadavu, the
interior. They don't even have a regular postal service, they cannot do units, or come
here. These people who stay around here...go to USP and out of hours. But these
people out in the outlying areas, they can't even use the extension service because of
the difficulty with the post. The people in the interior don't even have a regular bus,
don't even have a bus service going up to the schools. So whenever they want to
come to town, like Namosi Secondary School, they have to hire a truck. So the Fijian
teachers in Fijian schools are in very remote areas and it's very costly for them to
come. Hence the quality of the teaching...must be one of the very significant factors
that has perhaps caused the poor performance of students. (T30: 5)
It needs to be explained here that the majority of teachers in the rural area would
either have teaching certificates or diplomas and in order to qualify for a scholarship to
pursue a degree, they are required to take a certain number of extension courses at the USP.
In her comments above, Tuisawau raises some pertinent issues to do with the politics and
problems associated with distance, Non-Indigenous Fijians are urban-based and have ready
168
access to the university where they can either do extension courses in order to qualify for '<
government scholarships or pursue a degree using their own resources. Indigenous Fijian
teachers in rural schools, on the other hand, are greatly disadvantaged by distance. The
further away one is from the university, the more problematic it is to do distance education
(Wah 1997a, 1997b). There are problems with the postal system to the islands, in particular,
and in some schools on the main island, transportation poses a major problem as well. As
Wah (1997a: 57) has put it, "The problem is not only one of getting the message to its t
destination but also of getting it there in time, and of getting a confirmation that the message ,
was indeed received".
Hari Ram highlights the need to have well qualified teachers who would be able to
adapt their teaching style to particular locational contexts. He points out that "a good teacher
[should] be able to teach a particular subject in a somewhat different way in a rural area from
the way he uses it in an urban centre, using examples which students are familiar with in the ;
rural area" (T5: 7). Unfortunately, the quality of teachers that Ram raises here is difficult to
attract in rural Indigenous Fijian schools. One of the reasons for this is their level of teacher
training. As mentioned earlier, many Indigenous Fijians in rural schools are certificate or
diploma holders and are in need of further training.
Another reason is the lack of professionalism evident in rural Indigenous Fijian f
schools. For instance, Krishna Datt points out that he found a difference in the i
professionalism of Indigenous and Indo-Fijian primary schools during his visits in his g
capacity as curriculum development officer. He observes that Indo-Fijian school !
headmasters would generally be in readiness for the inspection visit. In contrast, he found g
that Indigenous Fijian school headteachers would generally not be ready. Datt observes: "*
"you see him from a long distance, coming out of his home wrapping this sulu[i, having
grogged whole night and not having got up till 10.30, walking to school". As he puts it:
This kind of slackness and unprofessional ism makes you wonder....The walls are
dirty, the floor has been unswept,...How would students walking in there find it
conducive to learn...be excited and want to know about the rest of the world?
Everything is so dampening and sad (T28: 12).
i
Officials at the Fiji Teachers Union (FTU) have highlighted problems associated with j
a shortage of suitably qualified teachers. For instance, Pratap Chand, General Secretary of ^
the FTU, highlights the shortage of teachers in middle-level decision-making positions. He
argues that teacher quality has been a major problem in the last decade and "it's going to
15 A sulu is a piece of cloth worn as casual wear in the home by Indigenous Fijian men and women,
169
worsen". He points out, "Now we don't have about 140 Heads of Department in our schools,
particularly in key areas like Maths, Physics and Commerce, If you don't have good teachers
to teach our kids, they will have no chance....Here anyone walks into teaching now" (T35: 2).
This is reiterated by Jagdish Singh, Principal of Rishikul Sanatan College and the
President of the FTU. Singh emphasises that the FTU survey has found "fifty per cent of the
teachers who are untrained, inexperienced, underqualified" (T7: 6). Singh maintains that
some schools have no choice, particularly out in rural areas but to hire people who have [
reached form five, six or seven to teach the upper levels of secondary school. As well, Singh
notes that school managers hire untrained, underqualified people to save funds which is "bad
because you cannot compromise the qualification of a teacher with quality education" (T7:
In sum, the poor quality of teachers, combined with poor teaching facilities and j
resources and the actual time spent on learning activities are school factors identified as
playing a significant role in Indigenous Fijian underachievement. The emphasis placed on
sports and other extra-curricular activities by Indigenous Fijian schools was raised. The lack
of basic facilities and necessary educational resources, particularly in rural areas, has been
emphasised. Note that rural disadvantage features prominently in the data here. The politics
of location, in relation to teacher placement, is seen as significant. The high level of *
untrained, underqualified teachers is particularly noted as a contributing factor to Indigenous j
underachievement. £
The whole of section one, then, has examined the data on physical, social and cultural s
factors perceived to impinge on Indigenous Fijian achievement. It particularly looked at g
4
spatial, social, cultural and school factors identified by the informants as significant. I now „'
shift the focus to informants' psychological explanations reported to impact on school
performance.
j
Psychological-Deficit Models
In the literature on underachievement in the United States (e.g., Gould, 1981) and
Australia (e.g., de Lacey, 1974), the failure of indigenous groups was historically based on
models of mental deficit, psychological lack or low IQ. In these discourses of mental deficit,
the dominant idea was that the fault for failure was due to internal deficiencies in the mental
make-up of students, that is, students were perceived to be internally flawed. Historically,
the ideology of colonialism is based on mental deficit models as I have outlined in Chapter
Three. "Natives" were perceived as savages, unparalleled in their physical, cultural and
170
mental ugliness. This abhorrence for indigenous peoples everywhere rested on the belief that
the internal mental processes of these people were deficient. The 'science' of phrenology or
craniology was used in the latter part of the nineteenth and early twentieth century by 'white
scientists' to legitimate the beliefs of'white' society that indigenous or 'black' people were
mentally deficient, All this was done in the quest of Western science for 'new knowledge1.
But equally repulsive was the legitimation, by any means, of colonial power and authority to
represent the colonised as psychologically deficient. To show indigenous peoples how
different they were to the ideal (i.e., European/white, usually male) was to demonstrate the
cultural, social and mental superiority of white men and women.
What is remarkable is the absence or silence of psychological/mental deficit in the
accounts of the informants. There seems to be an across the board agreement that Indigenous
Fijians are not mentally deficient. For instance, Indo-Fijian Dr Vijay Naidu emphatically
states that "in terms of intelligence and aptitude, ethnic Fijians are as good as anybody else
so there's no inherent mental attributes which disadvantage them" (T6: 7). Similarly, an
Indigenous Fijian informant who is Chief Education Officer, TVEd at the MOE argues that
"we [Indigenous Fijians] are slow learners, not slow as in dumb but slow to mature". Adi
Kuini Speed, another Indigenous Fijian informant, argues that the assumption of AA that
Indigenous Fijians are lacking intellectually "as if there is something wrong with us...is
flawed" (T32: 5). Expatriate Europeans also share the same sentiments. For instance, Sir
Len Usher, now a Fiji citizen, maintains: "I don't believe for one moment that it's due to any
inherent intellectual inferiority" (T26: 4). This resonates with Professor Randy Thaman who
argues "in general, Fijians do worse but it is not because of their ability",
When we talk about psychological models in the Fijian context, then, there is
consensus that the capability of Indigenous Fijians is not linked in any way to mental
deficiencies but are strongly associated with problems in attitudes, which in turn, are tied to
culture and location. I now turn to an examination of informant representations of attitudinal
deficit. This will be followed by what informants perceive to be another issue that poses
psychological problems for Indigenous Fijian students: that of living away from
home/boarding with relatives in urban centres, Finally, I will examine what informants say
about parallels and distinctions between Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians about
psychological explanations for success in school.
171
Attitudes
Much has already been said in the previous section about the attitudes of Indigenous
Fijians to education in terms of priorities in life and their cultural orientations. The
consensus from the data seems to be that for Indigenous Fijians who have not had much
formal education, they have let cultural and social obligations take precedence over the
education of their children. As pointed out earlier, rural Indigenous Fijians are obligated to
participate in ceremonies and social functions otherwise they are ostracised.
Another point that has emerged from what informants say is that while many
Indigenous Fijians might value education, their lack of formal education disables them from
knowing what is required to facilitate the educational needs of their children. A senior
academic suggests that "Fijian parents, on the whole, lean more towards the school and say
that is the responsibility of the school for my child to achieve and it's not my responsibility"
(T50: 2). As well, a senior Indigenous Fijian bureaucrat notes that the awareness of the
importance of education is lacking in Indigenous Fijians (T 56:2).
There also seems to be a consensus that something needs to be done about inculcating
in Indigenous Fijian parents a greater appreciation of the schooling process if AA policies in
favour of Indigenous Fijians are to work. There is the recognition that if AA policies are to
work better, then Indigenous Fijian attitudes towards education need to change. For
example, Bessie Ali, Principal of Yat Sen Secondary School, argues this
boils down to this day to day detail that somehow we have to reinforce. There have to
be somehow more educational programmes for them about daily routines, what to do
for their children when they are home with them for the first five years because those
are the most important years....! believe there should be less emphasis on fundraising
and more on advising parents what to do, how to improve their children's
performance. (Tl8: 1-2)
Likewise, a high ranking Indigenous Fijian bureaucrat at the MOE argues that AA
policies will not work unless people's attitudes are changed. As she has put it, "We can
address certain issues like capital infrastructure, like resources, like books. We can only go
so far in affirmative action but the more important half,,.is the people's attitudes". As she
explains it, "It's been a battle because you're working with people's culture, with people's
attitude to learning and education in general, with how they view life. It's their view of life
you're up against". In her view, "Without parental support, without teacher support, without
family support and student willingness to learn, all these affirmative actions are just useless"
(T15: 5),
172
Using a comparative approach, Dr Ahmed Ali, Minister for Education from 1982-
1986 and currently Director of the Policy Analysis Unit in the Prime Minister's Office,
highlights the difference between the communal orientation of Indigenous Fijians and the
Indo-Fijian individual emphasis. According to Ali, "some of the responsibilities towards the
overall community will work against the needs of the immediate family". As Dr Ali puts it:
I think very often there are greater demands on Fijian family members...Fijian society
is more fluid, more communal, more community oriented, too flexible..,,I think the
responsibilities of the extended family in the Fijian community sometimes work to
the disadvantage of the immediate family members whereas the rest of us are more
selfish, My kids are my own kids, my own concern but if something happens to them
then I cannot rely on my family automatically whereas with in the Fijian community
it's already assumed that help will come.,,.(T2: 12-13)
Esther Williams, Librarian at the USP, provides us with an insight into how
Indigenous Fijian parents in urban areas value education in the same way that Indo-Fijians
and the Chinese community do, whereas Indigenous Fijians in rural areas would value the
church above all else. She carried out a survey of parents of all ethnic groups in both the
urban and rural areas to assess their perceptions of the value of education relative to the
church and government. She notes:
Of course, the Indians will say education, and the Fijian will say the church, and
that's an obvious kind of answer you'll get, But it was interesting in the urban areas
all the Fijians said it was education which was very important, and they felt that
education opens up a lot of areas for everyone. So in a way you can compare the
Fijians in the urban areas similarly to the Indians and the Chinese,(T27: 4)
Yet another factor that has been identified as contributing to Indigenous Fijian
underachievement is the idea that too much security leads to complacency. As evidence of
this, Ratu Mosese Tuisawau, Rewa High Chief and former Member of Parliament, argues
that too much security is a demotivator and does not encourage individuals to work hard in
school. As he puts it, "The non-Fijians, mainly the Indians, are raised in an environment
where their minds are suffused with ideas of security...where in the Fijian koro16, there is
generally an attitude of laissez faire, why worry about the morrow..,where the preservation of
cultural values is more important than the future of the young" (T53; 3),
Similarly, a senior Indigenous Fijian bureaucrat wonders whether it is the fact that
Indigenous Fijians own land which gives them security that they are not driven to work hard
16 A koro is an Indigenous Fijian village or settlement.
173
to achieve in school, He draws our attention to those land owners who collect lease money
whose attitude towards education is dubious. He observes:
I don't know whether it's because this is our land, our country.,,that we don't seem
driven to be able to achieve whereas with the Indians who come from a system where
they're tenants and so the imperative for them is so much greater....You take the
Western division, you take the province of Ba which extends from Ra, you take
Nadroga as well - these places have collected millions in lease money and so their
attitude is why should they go to school, they have all this money, and the attitude is
'why should I invest it, it's money that I didn't sweat for1, (T31: 8)
An agency that has been identified as impeding the educational progress of
Indigenous Fijians is the church, particularly the Methodist church. For instance, Ratu
Mosese Tuisawau argues that the demands by the church impinge on educational priorities of if
Indigenous Fijians. He points out that Indigenous Fijian parents "have a vague notion about |J
what education might mean for their children". In his view, "a factor that moulds this kind of
attitude comes in from activities generated by church leaders so a lot of time is used up
because of church activities". For him, church directives "grip the minds of parents in a very
significant way and take away the kind of attention that they should be giving, focussing...for
the future of their growing children" (T53: 3).
A more extreme view is taken by a senior educator at USP who maintains that "the
church has become the biggest exploiter of Fijians" in the sense "they have taken a lot more
resources from Fijians and the church has become almost an opium kind of role" (Til: 13).
A similar view is taken by Pratap Chand, the General Secretary of the FTU. Chand is of the
view that Indigenous Fijian parents are too involved in church activities in terms of both time
and money which can act to the detriment of their children. He refers to this as "over-
churching".
To emphasise the hold the Christian church has on Indigenous Fijians, Dr Ahmed AH
compares it with what the Indo-Fijians went through under the indentured labour system
during the period of colonial rule. He notes, "The Indians went through the sub-imperialism
of the CSR company and that oriented them to success in this world and the Fijians went
through the sub-imperialism of the Methodist church which prepared them for salvation in
the next world" (T2: 14).
This is similar to what Josevata Kamikamica observes about the church, In his view,
the church does not encourage the valuing of education. As he puts it:
If we hear sermons in the church, they run down education. Na vuli, qori e na sega in
vakabulai keda. Na vakabulai keda ga o Jisu. Eda sa kila ni sa vakabulai keda tiko o
174
Jisu. But we all know that God has also called us to understand his creation. That is
so we can make better use of what is available to us. (T16: 7)
!
The Fijian phrases here are translatable as "Education will not save us. Only Jesus
can save us. We all know that only Jesus can save us". What Kamikamica is referring to
here is the notion that the Methodist Church seems to generate resignation on the part of the
followers that their and their children's education is unimportant. Religion is more
important. This seems to negate the Protestant work ethic which the Roman Catholic Church
is renown for. According to Adi Kuini Speed, we must not treat different Christian
denominations as a homogenous entity. As she puts it:
...Catholics [who] attend the Catholic schools.,.tend to do better than the
rest...because of the emphasis that the church gives to education. And because the
church gives emphasis to education within their social community in terms of the
congregation and the teaching...this rubs off from the parents to the children and so
they work as a team. Whereas in the Methodist Church, my church, this doesn't
happen. Our social calendar is more important, where we going to meet next Sunday,
who are we going to entertain, where are they from, can you get some food.. (T 32'
11)
Kamikamica also argues that Indigenous Fijians may have the natural resources in
terms of the land, sea and mineral resources but it is the Indo-Fijian community that has
"power" in terms of the information that they have gained through an education. He argues
that education is critical for Indigenous Fijians because "information is power". He points
out that Indo-Fijians "rely mainly on education" which "has been their strength" (Tl 6: 8).
Reverend Dr Ilaitia Tuwere, President of the Methodist Church in Fiji, endorses
Karnikamica's view by saying "education is power" and "whoever is educated has power in
today's society" (T12: 3). He goes on to say that the "the church should be a liberating force
in Fijian society", in every area including education. He notes:
It should not run its business as usual...just preaching and things like that. We should
attempt to interpret the faith so that it becomes a living force addressing the realities
of the day, what our children are facing and that is what should be happening to the
church. And we should be honestly asking ourselves as to what aspect of culture is
inhibiting progress and growth and we say 'this is the weak part of our culture' as
well as affirm those aspects of culture that encourage growth and progress. (T12: 3)
In sum, then, Indigenous Fijians are perceived to lack the appropriate attitudes that
lead to success in education. One way that this is manifested is in the prioritising of their
' 1
daily lives. It would seem that education is not viewed as the number one priority in their
lives, particularly as it cuts across lack of formal education and low socio-economic status.
175
This is exacerbated by the obligations and demands expected of Indigenous Fijians by their
traditional leaders, kinship community and the church. There is general agreement that
education needs to become top priority if AA policies are to work (AA policies will form the
focus of the next chapter). Another psychological factor identified to explain Indigenous
Fijian underachievement is to do with landowner leasers who have managed to attain
financial security from lease income at the expense of a 'good' education for their children.
Why should they bother with education when they are financially secure? However, there is
recognition that many Indigenous Fijians, particularly in the urban areas and some island
communities, consider education to be very important for the future well-being of their
children.
In this section, I have examined the data on portrayals of Indigenous Fijian attitude to
education as one psychological explanation for Indigenous Fijian underperformance at
school. The next section examines the data relating to the psychological impact of living
away from home for those Indigenous Fijian students, particularly from rural areas, while
attending a secondary school.
Living Away From Home
Many Indigenous Fijian students are sent to the urban or semi-urban schools for a
secondary education. This is because there might not be a secondary school in their area or -,
parents might perceive the quality of an education obtained in an urban school as superior. ; 4,
As a result of the great distance from their homes in the rural areas, these students either
board at school or with relatives. The psychological impact of this separation from the
immediate family is provided by some informants as an added explanation for the
underachievement of Indigenous Fijians in formal schooling.
There is the belief that children from the rural areas, who are sent to live with
relatives in the urban centres to pursue a secondary education, generally find that their
adopted home circumstance is not conducive to producing good results in schooling because
of the tendency by their relatives to consider their educational needs of secondary
importance. Ted Young, for example, draws our attention to this problem where these
children "become an additional problem". He points out:
A lot of rural parents...send their children to...live with their relatives and really, it's
quite difficult for their relatives in Suva, Lautoka, Nadi. They are not policed, not
monitored very well. Time is not given to them to spend on their school work.
Relatives use them as house girls....Urban families meet the usual problems and when
these relatives come to stay with them, they become an additional problem, (T29: 6)
176
This viewpoint is supported by Ameen Sahu Khan, a Senior Lecturer and Coordinator
of the Centre for Professional Development at the FIT. Drawing on his experiences teaching
in an all girls Indigenous Fijian school, Khan argues that Indigenous Fijian girls, in
particular, are considered "a burden on the family they were living with". He notes that
"they were obliged to do housework at home and all the errands" and their educational needs
were "regarded as a secondary matter by their hosts" (T58: 1),
Tokasa Vitayaki maintains that children who live away from the immediate family
are more likely to perform "poorly than the one who comes from home every day". She
explains that the emotional psyche of these students, whether at boarding school or living out
with relatives, is affected to such an extent that they develop a 'no care' attitude to
schooling. With that kind of attitude, they do not work too hard and consequently do not do
too well in examinations.
Asinate Gadolo, Curriculum Development Officer in Primary English taught for
thirty years, mostly in rural Indigenous Fijian schools. She argues that "boarding still has its
place in the school system" despite their shortcomings. However, committed and dedicated
teachers need to teach there. These teachers almost become surrogate parents so need to
possess caring and nurturing qualities. Recalling her experience in a boarding school, she M
notes:
I remember when I first came out, m y first school w a s a boarding school. The teacher T ?
on duty for the week is up twenty four hours. Y o u were the first to wake in the *»
morning at 5 a.m, run assembly at 6.00 then you supervised the morning work from jjjj
6.30 to 7.30 a.m. Then you supervised the students while they have their meals. You , | !
need committed teachers who would show concern for the students....So we need
really dedicated teachers who not only teach well but also look after the students. At *<*
boarding school, part o f the responsibilities we have as parents should be shouldered i
by these teachers so that should be recognised in t h e school. This should apply both
in the classroom and in the hostel. (T40: 4)
Here, Gadolo also raises the demands placed on teachers not only to be good teachers
in the classroom but also to b e good surrogate parents. W h a t she is indirectly pointing out is
that extra care needs to be taken in the selection of teachers who go out to teach in boarding
schools if there is to be an improvement in examination results of Indigenous Fijians in
boarding schools..
Those students who are accepted at boarding school may face problems of isolation
and loneliness as they are separated from close family, There are many adjustments to be
made and when these are compounded by loneliness, the students are not likely to succeed in
177
school. Sister Genevieve Loo expounds on the problems faced by students who board. She
has taught for twenty six years, ten of which were spent in a rural Indigenous Fijian boarding
school. Sister Loo talks particularly about the problem of loneliness and the tack of a
listening adult ear faced by students who are at boarding school. For instance, she notes:
The boarders, as a group...appear to be happy but if you delve right into their
psychological needs, you find that many of them are lonely.,.are unhappy....[TJhey
have personal problems but they have no opportunity to share that. Sometimes they
get letters from home and maybe a parent is sick.,..So there are personal problems.
Unless the students are courageous enough to share or if there is somebody willing to
listen, they very often kept their personal problems.
Sister Loo draws out the difference between those students who live at home with
parents and those who board in that the former have the listening ears of their parents
whereas those at boarding schools do not. She notes that the difference between boarding
school and day school is that "In a day school the students go home every day. They have
the opportunity there to go over their problems with their parents, whereas in boarding school
they don't and this contributes to poor performance" fT21: 4).
This problem, as explained by Sister Loo, is a significant one. Not only are there no
teachers who take on this role but there are no trained counsellors in boarding schools. There
is a lack of adult support in boarding institutions, The students are not willing to talk to
teachers of the same ethnicity because they are "limited by cultural expectations and so on",
As well, Sister Loo explains that teachers with families do not really have the extra time to
listen to students' problems. Another problem raised by Sister Loo associated with boarding
school is the lack of support from home in terms of pocket money for the students, This
creates anxiety which sometimes leads to stealing. In Sister Loo's words "Sometimes they
don't even have pocket money. They are short of things. They write home and the money is
slow in coming then they end up stealing from one another" (T21: 4). Sister Loo points out
that students at boarding school also contend with un-met basic needs, This could be in the
form of water shortage and an unbalanced diet full of starch and carbohydrates. As welt,
students have a lot of difficulty with English which, compounded by difficult and foreign
content, makes learning problematic. Boarding school experiences, therefore, do not seem
conducive to good academic achievement,
To sum up then, those students who live away from parents seem to face a lot of
difficulty in adjusting to the new situation in which they are placed. Those who live with
relatives find that their educational needs are perceived as secondary and those in boarding
178
school have to contend with many difficulties to do with loneliness, un-met basic needs and
problems with understanding complex curriculum delivered in an unfamiliar language.
An important finding of this chapter is that in Fiji, informants are in consensus that
AA is a response to social, cultural and locational disadvantage, compounded by attitudinal
limitations on the part of Indigenous Fijians. Why is there such a significant absence or
silence in psychological explanations in terms of attributing underachievement to lack of
innate ability or mental skills? There are three possible reasons. First, the majority
positioning/positions of Indigenous Fijians may have generated the situation where the
political consensus is that people do not see Indigenous Fijians as inferior, that is, it might be
politically risky for people to be saying that Indigenous Fijians are underachieving in school
because they are inferior. In other words, a Fijian version of 'political correctness' might be
an explanation for the significant absence of psychological models historically espoused in
Western nation states like the United States and Australia. Second, there may be a genuine
belief that Indigenous Fijians have proved, through their achievement and participation in the
public sphere, that they are just as capable as anyone else. Third, this might signal a genuine
postcolonial shift in terms of people deliberately shedding the discourses of inferiority
inherited from colonialism.
The next two sections examine some ot" the explanations for the success of non-
indigenous and Indigenous Fijian students in schooling to see whether there are parallels in
their experiences that might shed some light on these issues of school achievement and
underachievement.
Success of Non-Indigenous Fijians in Schooling
It is interesting to note that throughout my interviews with the informants, almost all
of them drew comparisons and contrasts between Indigenous Fijians and the Indo-Fijian and
Chinese communities. It is pertinent, therefore, to examine some of the explanations for the
success of non-indigenous students at school.
One factor that has been identified as a contributing factor to non-Indigenous Fijians
doing well at school is the belief that an education would provide a secure future. For
I
instance, Hari Ram maintains that "Educational success is considered to be very important
and to be the means of success in the future". To achieve this, "they make a lot of sacrifices
to ensure that their children are very well educated, very much more I think than Fijian
parents do" (T5: 10). Similarly, Dr Vijay Naidu points out that Indo-Fijian parents generally
have a very deep appreciation of education and they encourage...and motivate...have a sense
179
of competition for their children and a great interest in how they perform academically" even
to the extent that "there is this constant pressure on the child to do well at school" (T6: 10),
Here, Naidu and Ram are talking about the motivation many Indo-Fijian parents have to see
that they facilitate the educational interests of their children even to the extent where they
make sacrifices. They provide the necessary support, including the facilities needed like a
quiet study area, books and so forth. And as Naidu says> it puts a lot of pressures on the child
to perform well at school,
Ameen Sahu Khan explains how this pressure affects the Indo-Fijian child, even to
the extent that they commit suicide if they fail exams. He points out that "failure in the
exams means a lot of embarrassment for the students and it brings embarrassment to the
family as well" (58: 2). This is in contrast to Indigenous Fijians where, according to the Uai
Kuli, Member of Parliament, "Failure in the Fijian home is not taken seriously" (T71: 1).
Another factor identified by some informants is to do with the lack of security that
Indo-Fijians have in terms of land ownership. A strong motivation for Indo-Fijians to see
their children do well at school arises out of the situation where Indigenous Fijians own the
bulk of the land, thereby disabling other ethnic groups from purchasing any land, Indo-
Fijians, therefore, look to education to provide future security. Hari Ram points out that
"Indians do feel that because they don't have security in the area of land ownership, they
need to do something else that will compensate for it, And I think there is a grain of truth in
1 1
the saying 'education is to a non-Fijian what land is to the Fijians'" (T5: 10),
!
Similarly, Filipe Tuisawau explains the difference between Indigenous Fijians and
Indo-Fijians in land security and the motivations to pursue an education. He states:
Indians strive more to survive because I think they have this feeling of insecurity as
most of the land is owned by Fijians....The only security for Indians is
education....Once the son or daughter has a good job, they can look after the
parents...whereas for Fijians, their attitude is 'this is our country, we own the land, we
can go back to the land' so the urge or motivation in Fijian society to complete an
education, to strive for higher education, is not at the same level as the Indian
population. (T46: 1-2)
An additional explanation given for Indo-Fijians pursuing a good education for their
children is the struggle Indo-Fijians faced during the indentured labour period. As Krishna
Datt has put it, "the psychology of Indians,..springs from the indentured experience".
Education was perceived as "the only way out of all this quagmire and the recycling of the
same experience" (T28: 7). Datt goes on to elaborate that now that Indo-Fijians are no longer
under the indentured system, the other challenge that they face is the threat of expiring land
180
leases every thirty years. This situation has made Indo-Fijians more determined to get a good
education in order to get off the land and education is seen as the only way out for them,
what Professor Konai Thaman calls their 'safety net' when they attain an education and get a
job (T4: 17). And as Inosi Naga, Principal of Latter Day Saints Technical College, has put it,
Indo-Fijians and Chinese "work hard and desire to be successful" (T69: 2).
Moreover, many informants have identified the individual orientation of the Indo-
Fijian culture, as well as their ability to adapt, as factors that facilitate the success of Indo-
Fijians in education. Professor Tupeni Baba, Head of Education and Psychology at the USP,
for instance, points out that "The school culture is very much in line with the way they live
their own culture, not only with their own culture but also their ability to adapt" (T8: 3). In
his view, "Indo Fijians have shown great adaptability to cultures wherever they have gone.
They retain their own but they're very good at adjusting and adapting" (T8: 4).
Dr Ahmed AH maintains that Indo-Fijians and the Chinese are nuclear-family
oriented which advantages the children because their educational needs are provided for. He
notes:
Many of the Indian children and many of the Chinese students who are doing well
come out of situations where they receive greater attention. I think one of the things j k
that may favour the Indian and the Chinese student is the family structure. [It] is i %
m u c h m o r e a nuclear family. A n Indian kid goes h o m e - h e has a room to himself and >
he c a n switch on the light at 5.30 in the morning w h e n h e wants to study, (T2: 12)
T h e point that Ali is making here is that c o m p a r e d to the extended, c o m m u n a l
n e t w o r k s that Indigenous Fijians are renown for, Indo-Fijians and the Chinese c o m m u n i t y
are m o r e individually oriented. Resources are therefore contained within the nuclear family
in contrast t o t h e commitments to the extended family o f Indigenous Fijians. Indo-Fijians,
for e x a m p l e , are then able to provide m o r e for their children like a room for each child and
other m o d e r n amenities that children in the rural area are not accessible to. Indo-Fijian
children then, because of the individual orientation of the family, have better chances of their
educational n e e d s being met.
A s well, informants have pointed out that the Indo-Fijian and Chinese communities
are urban dwellers which m a y give them an edge over a significant number of Indigenous
Fijians w h o live in rural areas. As an example of this, Susana Tuisawau points o u t that t h e
experiences o f the Indo-Fijian and the Chinese child is complementary to school learning as
t h e y live in o r near urban centres. Their exposure to m e d i a and educational resources is far
greater than t h e rural indigenous child and hence have m o r e advantages that facilitate their
success in formal schooling (T30: 13).
1S1
Furthermore, Una Nabobo argues that the Indo-Fijian and Chinese child are
advantaged in that they have a culture of academic scholarship which Indigenous Fijians do
not have (T45: 2). This is supported by Dewan Chand. Chand notes that "Indians have a
very long tradition and history of education. In the Indian cultural set-up, respect for
education is an in-built thing" (T23: 4). Dewan Chand (principal) and Krishna Datt
(politician) both expound on their religious Scriptures which reinforce the importance of
knowledge and learning. This provides the conditions that make it easier for Indo-Fijian
children to adapt to school.
Explanations for Indo-Fijian success in school have implications from accounts of the
informants on Indigenous Fijian underachievement. One explanation given for Indo-Fijian
success at school is attributable to a strong individualist orientation. As their resources are
centred around the nuclear family, they are generally able to cater for the educational needs
of their children. This is in contrast to the communal nature of Indigenous Fijian families
and communities. Indo-Fijian school success is facilitated by the high premium placed on an
education. Indo-Fijian parents are perceived to have the 'appropriate' attitude to education
which facilitates their children's success in school. As well, Indo-Fijians are identified as
having an academic tradition which gives them a head start over Indigenous Fijians. tt|||
Furthermore, the point has been raised that Indo-Fijians and the Chinese communities are '(!
clustered around the urban or semi-urban areas compared to the wide scatter of Indigenous
Fijians, mainly around the rural areas. The advantages, therefore, associated with close
proximity to opportunities provided for by the infrastructures, facilities and educational and \
•f
other resources that are located more in the urban than rural areas have been highlighted. By i
the accounts provided this far, it needs to be reiterated again that rurality (spatial
disadvantage), low economic status and lack of formal education (social class) have worked
in complex ways to disadvantage Indigenous Fijians.
Success of Indigenous Fijians in Schooling
With all the emphasis placed on the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians, one
almost forgets that there are successes, that there are Indigenous Fijians who have made it
through school, even the rural low socio-economic status child who has conditions militating +|,
against their success. What are the factors that contribute to Indigenous Fijians passing '
school examinations and even making it through the tertiary system? Are there parallels in f
their success and the success of the Indo-Fijians and Chinese students? What are the i
implications of these for the education of Indigenous Fijians? How relevant are these i
\
1
182 (
findings on the implementation of AA policies in education? These are pertinent questions
that will need examination.
First, let us take a look at what 'successful' Indigenous Fijians identify as factors that
have contributed to their doing well academically in school and passing the relevant national
exams. A sense of struggle, parental encouragement and support, and hard work have been
identified as three factors that contribute to the motivation to succeed in life. For example,
Filipe Tuisawau notes that "We struggled to survive....That was the motivation in my life not
to go through that again and to make sure I succeeded" (T46: 3).
Similarly, Josevata Kamikamica points out that it was the support he got from his
parents, his inner desire to do well, and seeing his father working very hard to support his
education that spurred him on to the best he could. He points out that the element of struggle
"is centrally critical. We need to feel that we have to compete, that the world is not going to
fight for us or the Fijian society. We have to work hard, we have to do better" (T16:2). As
well, Kolinio Rainima Meo, Deputy Secretary for Education, attributes his father's struggle
to put him and his brothers through school as a motivating factor to succeed. As he puts it,
"where the parents were being driven to believe in education as the solution for anything, the
children are successful". Like Kamikamica, Meo believes "there is no substitution for hard
work" (T41: 17-18). Moreover, Mere Samisoni, Managing Director of Samisoni Enterprises
Ltd, points out that it was her mother's role model and the inculcation early in life of "an
ethic for work, an ethic for an education and an ethic for family" that contributed to her
success at school and in life (T22: 11),
Another 'successful' Indigenous Fijian is Mere Tora, who has a senior position at the
MOE. She attributes her success to her hardworking father who strove hard to put nine
children though school. Life was a struggle and her father saw education as a way out for his
children. She also saw hard work as necessary to succeed and her father was a role model for
her, She says "It was right from an early age that I saw he was a very hard working man
and...we emulated him at hard work. Right from an early age I associated hard work with
success" (T19: 12).
By contrast, Aloesi Vucukula, a Senior Lecturer at FCAE, attributes her success in
school to two factors: her family background and good teachers. She notes:
For me, the most important thing is my family background. I think that has given me
an edge over the other students, There was a lot of support from home and then my
parents were able to economically provide for me,...Also as a student I wasn't
burdened with...domestic duties, The schools I went to later played an important role.
183
I went to ACS and Natabua and in those two schools, the most important thing was
the teachers. I had really good teachers. (T47: 3)
This is supported by Professor Tupeni Baba. Drawing on his "own personal
experiences and some studies done by my own students that followed up a number of Fijian
achievers" he identifies "very good teachers, very good supporting environment in schools
and very good support from the parents" as significant factors for school success of
Indigenous Fijians, As well, he identifies another factor which has been raised earlier, that of
role models, what he calls "significant Fijians or significant others",
What seems to be emerging from the data is that Indigenous Fijians who succeed do
so for several reasons, For some, it is the economic circumstance of the family that provided
the impetus to work hard in order to succeed in life, This is very much like the experiences
of Indo-Fijians who were motivated to work hard to escape the drudgery of farming on leased
land, It is the element of struggle, of overcoming poverty, that provided the impetus of f
making a success in life, For some other Indigenous Fijians, whose socio-economic status
was better, it was parental support that provided the conditions for success in school. Two [
factors that cut across class and ethnicity are home support and good teachers. For '
Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians alike, a home environment that provided for the
educational needs of the children facilitated success. As well, for both categories, good
schools, but particularly good teachers, provided them with the conditions to succeed, For
some Indigenous Fijians, it is the internal desire to improve themselves that enabled them to
do well at school and in life. And for others, it is the role model of their parents and
"significant others", as Baba puts it, that have driven them to work hard and succeed at
school.
What I have done so far is to examine what the data has revealed to explain
Indigenous Fijian underachievement. The first main category of possible explanations has
been covered under the first section—Socio-cultural deficit models—where disadvantage of
location (rurality), home background, cultural factors and school variables were identified as I
some of the key components that impacted on achievement. The second main category to ^ \
explain why Indigenous Fijians are not doing too well at school has been covered in this , f'
section. This focussed on psychological factors that affect the success or otherwise of
students at school and covered areas such as attitudes, the impact of living away from home
and a more specific look at the reasons for school success of non-indigenous and Indigenous
Fijians. A significant absence in the accounts of the informants that cuts across all ethnic \
groups is the acknowledgment of the mental capability of Indigenous Fijians. Thus,
psychological models in the Fijian context are articulated as attitudinal problems, which in
turn, are intricately tied to culture and location,
Historical Structural Models
This section examines informant accounts of neocolonial educational structures that
are still in place, decades after the political and physical severance of colonial power. I begin
by examining what is said about the impact of colonialism on the Indigenous Fijian mind and
social institutions. Then I examine the data on the effects of a predominantly English-based
curriculum, pedagogical approach and assessment. As well, an examination of the impact of
the language of instruction is undertaken.
Colonial Historical Experiences
Dr Ali argues that "The so-called benign colonialism of the British was devastating in
its impact. There was a great deal of discrimination. The whole philosophy was that we
were not as good as the white man" (T2: 9). AH maintains that the "colonial experience has
worked against Fijians", Josevata Kamikamica elaborates on this by arguing that under the
period of colonial rule, Indigenous Fijis were protected by colonial policy in such a way that
independence was not encouraged. As he has put it, "after cession we have been subjected to
live within a controlled and protected environment and we were given the assurance that
everything will be looked after by the government, Her Majesty the Queen" (T16: 6).
One who shares this viewpoint is Dr Reverend Ilaitia Tuwere who argues that "the
protective principle that guided the colonisers" meant that "in some ways [Fijians] were
over-protected". Tuwere maintains that it was this overprotective policy on the part of "those
in authority during the colonial days" that was detrimental because it has led to the
development of a strong sense of dependence on outsiders to provide for the needs of
Indigenous Fijians. As Tuwere puts it, "When we had independence,..we did not
feel...independent" because "we were not really allowed to try to swim and.,,struggle" (T12:
1-2).
This protectionist policy of the Colonial Government is described by Dewan Chand,
Principal of Bhawani Dayal High School, as the policy of segregation, Chand also points out
that it is this policy which has kept Indigenous Fijians from competing with other ethnic
groups in social and economic terms. As Chand has put it:
185
When you look at the history of Fiji, for a very long time Fijians were segregated
under colonial rule. They were put into their little koro, they were not allowed to mix
much with the Indian communities, they had a school of their own, a church of their
own, very Fijianised communities. And this is one of the reasons why they have
missed out in the socio-economic competition of which Indians are a part. (T23: 5)
Adi Kuini Speed endorses this view and argues, like Kamikamica, Tuwere and
Chand, that Indigenous Fijians have led a "sheltered life" since the period of colonisation by
the British. She notes that this sheltered life has endured after independence with the advent
of AA. The "handout mentality" is prevalent today because government has continued to
provide assistance to Indigenous Fijians to the detriment of initiative and independence. As
she puts it, "it's the sheltered life that we've led under the colonial system and admittedly
after independence that we haven't really been given a chance to think for ourselves, do
things for ourselves, to use our own initiative" (T32: 6).
Noting the problem of dependence during colonial rule is Professor Asesela Ravuvu,
Director of the Institute of Pacific Studies at USP. Ravuvu identifies communalism as "the
biggest problem among Fijian communities" and argu^ that this was instituted by the
Christian church and the Colonial Government, in particular, to attain and maintain control
over the indigenous people. He then explains that it is this creation of communities that has
i
led to the development of "a sense of dependency", not on themselves as was previously the
case, but on the Colonial Government and the church for their survival. He continues by
arguing that it is the security given Indigenous Fijians by the Colonial Government that has
led to the demise of their survival instincts, their sense of independence and self-confidence.
This is how he describes it;
The ethos of the Fijian family has changed tremendously through the communal
aspects that has been imposed upon them. Before, the families were out there in the
rural areas, in the communities, up on the hills and suddenly the government came in,
the church came in. They created new communal communities which were wider and
have taken away from individuals the need to sustain themselves individually or as a
family and to be increasingly dependent on communal institutions like the church, the
school, the province, the tikina17, the koro. All these are communal institutions
created by the Colonial Government and the religious institutions have also created
communalism that has given all these people continued protection and continued
influence in relation to the individual to do things for themselves. I think this is
where the whole problem lies today and that is the overemphasis on communalism to
the detriment of the individual's ability to do something for his own survival. (T34: 2)
17 A tikina is a district, a subdivision ot&yasana or province (Capell, 1941).
186
On the other hand, another perspective is provided by Mere Samisoni who points out
that an elite group was used by the colonial power in such a way that their power is firmly
entrenched today. As she describes it, "To support colonialism...the colonial powers
appointed some elite, including the chiefly system to support their policies", According to
Samisoni, the British also "institutionalised the feudal system of production" and rewarded
the elite and chiefs for their assistance. Explaining the role of the elite, Samisoni notes, "The
elite were to support the 'core' (colonial power) so that in the event the core interests were
violated by the workers, by the proletariat, the elite would protect them and so today the elite
are still there". Samisoni believes that "the colonial powers really froze our development in
time because some of the chiefs justify their role today in the sense that they are contributing
to the economy". She asks, are chiefs "really helping the economy or are they just a group of
people who are paid once a year to sit in council and make decisions reinforcing feudalism
that is irrelevant to our economy?"
This section has presented some of the data that demonstrate the devastating
psychological impact of the process of colonialism. The policies of the Colonial
Government discouraged the development of independence, competitiveness and initiative
and created a dependency syndrome instead. As Ravuvu puts it, the creation of |
communalism by the church and the government has led to the demise of those *|
characteristics which enabled them to survive prior to the advent of the British to Fijian
shores, An elite group was also utilised by the colonialists, as Mere Samisoni has pointed
out, "to support colonialism". The impact of colonialism was covered in Chapter Three. In
what follows, I examine the data on the impact of one of the neocolonial educational
structures—the curriculum—on the achievement of Indigenous Fijians.
Curriculum
Several informants have identified a conflict in the culture of the school and that of 11
the home as an explanation as to why Indigenous Fijian students do not perform particularly * |
well at school. For example, Filimoni Jitoko makes the point that the home environment of
the Indigenous Fijian, particularly in the rural area, is not compatible with what occurs in
schooling. He notes:
I think [the curriculum] is disadvantaging...Fijian students mainly because their home
environment is different from the home background of other races and so their i
experiences when they go back to their home is different. It might be familiar for the
other races when they go back home in the sense that what they learn in school is
there also in the home. But you look at a student in Gau, or Koro or in Lau, he learns
something about dynamos in the Physics curriculum about motors and that's it.
187
jj
That's the only place that he's told. When he goes back to the village, he sees the
kerosene light and nobody is there to help him explain. (T13: 5)
Jitoko here points out that there is a conflictual relationship between what is taught in
school and the experiences of the rural Indigenous Fijian child at home. Many things that
students are taught at school are alien in the rural environment. The example given, of
dynamos and motors in a Physics lesson, is far removed from the local experiences of the
rural child. In an environment where cars are not commonplace and the only form of
electricity comes from a generator that is sacrosanct to the village community, how can this
student's learning be reinforced, let alone explainable, without having some experience of the
object under study? The implication of Jitoko's comment is that the child's very limited
experience of what is taught at school, when not reinforced by the experiences at home, is not
conducive to success at school.
Calls have also been made by some informants for the curriculum to become more
relevant and less academically oriented. As evidence of this, Josevata Kamikamica points
out that the curriculum needs to be less abstract and to be in keeping with the way Indigenous
Fijians learn. He describes Indigenous Fijian learning styles as thinking " in terms of the
totality of things. We want to know why things happen in a certain way". As he explains it:
We are more comfortable with relating ourselves to the totality of our existence. That
is to say that 'I handle this, this is a table, I can see it, I can handle it and if it's broken
I see why it's broken'. In a theoretical mode, in an abstract mode, some Fijians
generally find that a bit difficult to handle because we are not developed to think in
that frame of reference because if a young person in the village starts to ask those
kinds of questions earlier in life, tikolo1*, via kila na ka™ will be the answer he or she
gets. (T16: 9-10)
Here, Kamikamica also suggests that Indigenous Fijians are more practically-oriented
in their learning. This in reinforced by their world view and childhood practices which
discourage questions. As reiterated by a senior Indigenous Fijian bureaucrat, Indigenous
Fijians are supposed to know their place, whether as child or adult. This bureaucrat adds,
"Constantly one hears 'oh he doesn't know his place, he's too cheeky' or 'you're over-
educated, that's why you don't know your place'. This is a very strong social thing that also
needs to be overcome" (T31:11). \
Many informants are of the view that the curriculum is too academically oriented.
Joeli Kalou, for instance, maintains that "In essence, our education system is actually training
18 Tikolo is translated as 'shut up' or 'be quiet'.
19 Via kila na ka is translated as 'you want to know too much'.
I
188 I
students to become failures at the end because our academically oriented system only caters
for thirty or forty percent of students who are being taught". Like Kamikamica, Kalou would
like the curriculum to "be more practical" (T33: 10).
Moreover, as Professor Konai Thaman argues, because the formal school system does
not value other kinds of learning aside from academic book learning, this sets up many
Indigenous Fijian students for failure. She raises the point that a person is judged according
to his or her performance in examinations even when he or she is successful in other spheres
of life. She states:
If you take Fijian...kids who grew up in a semi-traditional situation the whole
socialisation, the goals of learning, just about everything is in opposition to the
school. There's just no valuing within the formal structure of anything that is done in
the informal structure. Now when that happens, unless you're an extraordinary kind
of person to live a kind of double life, it's very difficult for kids to adapt and when of
course they can't adapt, that means failing the exam. And they keep
failing....Eventually you're going to think you're a failure when in fact the only thing
you've failed in is the school in the formal education system. But this has been
translated into other spheres and unfortunately, the whole society looks at you now
and judge you according to whether you've done well at school or not. (T4: 4-5)
Arguing along the same lines as Professor Thaman above, Josevata Kamikamica
notes the contradictions between Indigenous cultural values and school values. As he has put
it, "the values of our system are not the same as the values that the educational system
encourage". He also compares the notion of success in the traditional system with that of the
modern system. In the former, he points out, "success means someone who can fit in very
well in society, does all the work that society requires and is prepared to perform when called
upon, whereas in the education system and the world outside.,.success means doing better
than someone else" (T16: 8).
Like Thaman and Kamikamica, Sefanaia Koroi reiterates the point that the curriculum
is foreign and does not put much worth on the cultural values of Indigenous Fijis, As he put
it, "The curriculum brought in were mere replicas of curriculum from other countries so
therefore we...have done away with some of the cultural values that children can understand"
(T9: 10-11). In consequence, Koroi argues, the curriculum could be inappropriate, especially
when an educated person finds that he or she cannot find a job and judges himself or herself a
success only in terms of passing exams,
Indirectly, what Thaman and Koroi are referring to here is that the curriculum in place
today is a replica of the curriculum in Great Britain or New Zealand (a past colony of Great
Britain), Despite its foreign nature and academic orientation, it continued on in neocolonial
189
hegemonic formations even after Fiji attained political independence in 1970. And as
Filimoni Jitoko has pointed out, teachers have not contextualised the curriculum to local sites
despite efforts to localise it after independence. As Jitoko puts it:
We have said that we have localised the curriculum but how far [is] the local flavour
there which the students are familiar with in terms of their experiences? I think we're
still far from attaining that. We might have localised it because it was produced
locally but the content might still be foreign...particularly for the students in the rural
areas.,.,[W]e haven't really localised to the extent that students can be confident or
familiar with it. And teachers don't give local examples when they teach..., We need
to tailor every aspect of the curriculum to the local context. (TI3: 4)
Picking up on the theme of rural disadvantage, Viliame Saulekaleka, Member of
Parliament and a former President of the FTA, maintains that the curriculum "disadvantages
Fijians out in the rural area". He stresses that the academic nature of the curriculum seems to
suit those in the urban areas more. As well, Saulekaleka raised the issue of failure in school
and Indigenous Fijians committing crimes which results in many of them ending up in
prisons, what he calls "the Republic's College".
Susana Tuisawau also believes that the curriculum is too urban-based. However, it is
her view that rural Indigenous Fijian students are disadvantaged primarily because of
inequities in access to resources. She says "We're using a common, a national curriculum
dictated from the centre. However, there is no equality of access to resources because of the
geographical location of the schools and the students,,.[and] this would always disadvantage
the Fijians" (T30; 8).
Taking a different perspective, the Minister for Education agrees that the curriculum
is urban-based and that the knowledge that rural students have is undervalued. Conversely,
Vakatale argues that the curriculum in place does not prepare urban students to survive in the
rural area. Using the concepts of efficiency and productivity as examples, Mere Samisoni
takes the Minister for Education's point about using Indigenous Fijian knowledge further by
arguing that the knowledge Indigenous Fijians have can be incorporated into the school
curriculum so that they can "apply the learning in today's market economy". This is how
Samisoni puts it:
[W]hen we talk about concepts, we have efficiency and productivity. They are both
in our culture. We see it growing up. For example, when we pull the tavioka20 out,
we cut the branches, we plant it again, to me that is efficiency. And then the leaves,
these are placed around the plant so that is waste management and
productivity.,..Those concepts should be worked through to present day environment,
20 Tavioka translates into tapioca, a tuber plant that is one of the main root crops for Indigenous Fijians.
190
to present day content so that our people can understand what it's all about and
understand where they've come from to apply the learning in today's market
economy. (T22: 3)
Similarly, Bessie Ali believes that the curriculum should be less Western-oriented
and should utilise more Indigenous Fijian knowledge. As she puts it, "I think the curriculum
could be a lot less Western-oriented. It could be a lot more Fiji-based so that Fijian students
with their knowledge of their background have an opportunity to express themselves" (T18:
3), This view is supported by Reverend Dr Ilaitia Tuwere who calls for a balance between
"the particular and the universal", between 'Fiji-oriented' and 'English or European based'
cultural knowledges. He points out:
It (The curriculum) has become part of our heritage, part of our history,...I'm not
saying it's necessarily bad....I think we have gained a lot from that too and it has
helped us as a nation. But I think there also is a point in saying that there is a balance
to be drawn...a balance between the particular and the universal. If the curriculum is
weighted in favour of the universal and the quality of life is not coming forth.,.then
we must explore that kind of curriculum that can be called essentially ours, that is
Fiji-oriented and not only English or European based, (T12: 9)
I began this section on historical structural explanatory models by introducing some
of the data to show the psychological impact of colonialism on Indigenous Fijian
independence, initiative and sense of competition, This section has examined the data on the
impact of the curriculum on Indigenous Fijian achievement. Two things are clear. First, the
issue of spatial disadvantage is a recurrent category of analysis in the informants' discussion
on Indigenous Fijian underachievement, Second, a foreign and academically oriented
curriculum is seen to disadvantage those students whose learning styles and cultural
orientation are different from that of the school. Calls have been made to make the
curriculum more relevant and practical. As well, calls have been made for the curriculum to
value indigenous knowledge and cultural values, This will be discussed further in Chapter
Seven. In the next section, another educational structure, the 'Western' pedagogies of
schooling are examined to demonstrate the impact they have on Indigenous Fijian
underachievement.
Pedagogical Methods
Several informants have identified the pedagogical methods of schooling as a
contributing factor to the poor educational performance of Indigenous Fijians. One
pedagogical issue identified is the contradiction between the culture of schooling and that of
191
Indigenous Fijian homes. Another concerns the conflict between the learning styles of
Indigenous Fijian students and contemporary teaching methods.
The contention that there is a contradiction in school culture and that of the
Indigenous Fijian home is made by several informants. For instance, Professor Tupeni Baba
argues that "the culture of the school is very different from Fijian cultures and ethos". A
serious problem for Baba is the notion that "the individual orientation of the
curriculum...emphasises largely academic learning and does not recognise the community-
based, home-based learning". What is more serious is that "the pedagogy, the whole
teaching approach on which the whole curriculum, the teaching-learning process of the
school is based, makes that assumption that...school based learning is important" (T8: 1).
What Baba is raising here is the subordination of "learning that is done in the community that
is brought into the school by the children, particularly their own cultural learning".
Indigenous knowledge systems are considered 'unimportant' in school because of the
assumption that "school based learning is important". And as discussed earlier in the section
on the curriculum, many informants have pointed out that the neocolonial curriculum in place
is Western-oriented, foreign, too abstract, too urban-based and, in many cases, irrelevant.
Professor Baba also criticises curriculum design where the assumption is that those
who develop curriculum know what is to be taught and that the teaching process is merely an
inculcation of what developers have designed, He finds this "a totally unacceptable way of
approaching teaching and learning". He argues:
That kind of approach does not acknowledge that the people...are coming with...
legitimate knowledge from their communities, legitimate knowledge which should
also be part of the curriculum. They should contest the knowledge that we have but
we don't encourage that. (T8: 3)
More importantly, Professor Baba calls for more critical pedagogy. As well, he
suggests a change to the whole ethos of schooling otherwise the Indigenous Fijian would
"remain on the periphery even though he is now in the majority in his own country". The
critical pedagogy that Baba envisages is one where "the form of teaching and learning would
have to be altered from more rote into a facilitateve..,process and examinations will have to
be based on how students articulate what they feel, what they think rather than what we want
them to think and feel" (8:3).
Another informant who thinks that school pedagogical practices are at odds with
Indigenous Fijian achievement is Professor Konai Thaman. Thaman argues that students do
well in school if their home culture is compatible with the culture of the school. She argues
192
that some research should be carried out into the learning styles of Indigenous Fijians to
determine how they learn best and that these findings should then be incorporated into
teacher training programmes. She specifically points out that Indigenous Fijians should not
necessarily change their culture and make it more European but that the teachers should
change their teaching methods to take into account the experiences of the Indigenous Fijian
students. She states:
[T]he teachers should change their methods of teaching to take into account
experiences of the Fijian kids so I think this is a problem, We have been looking at
Fijian culture as if it is so negative so that we say 'well you know you should become
kind of an honorary Palagi so that you could succeed in school'. That to me is the
wrong way to go about it. It's to say to the school what can you do to accommodate
these kids rather than saying these kids must change so that they can pass the exam.
(T4: 3)
Thaman maintains that culture should not be viewed as a negative thing but should be
considered a privilege. She disagrees strongly with the deficit models that blame the victim
for his or her failure but recommends that it is the schools that should change to
accommodate the students rather than the Indigenoi:: Fijian students changing so they can
pass examinations. As she puts it:
I hope that in the future we move into a scenario where culture is looked upon as a
privilege and not a negative variable in the whole education process because if we're
on about improving learning then ycu are going to have to find out from the learner
by whatever methods how you can bring about better learning. And you have to find
out the best way of bringing this about and therefore the deficit model is definitely out
as far as I'm concerned....(T4: 9)
Other informants have also noted this contradiction between the culture of the school,
which is more individualistic, and that of the Indigenous Fijian home, which is more
communally oriented. For instance, Filimoni Jitoko, in a similar argument to Professor
Thaman, contends that Indigenous Fijians "have failed in the system because...we have a
conflict in schooling and the culture of the student". As Jitoko explains it, students are
taught "in the school to work individually" which is reflected in the teaching methods used.
And yet, "when they go back to their homes, they are put back in the context of a communal-
type work environment". In his view, "we have two conflicting worlds where the student is
trying to learn" (Tl 3: 4).
Like Thaman, Jitoko suggests that the learning styles of Indigenous Fijians be
considered in teaching, particularly their cultural trait of working communally. He
recommends that teachers consider encouraging "students to work in groups" rather than the
current emphasis on individual exercises. Similarly, Davindra Nath, argues that the
193
curriculum is too individualistic and, therefore, disadvantages Indigenous Fijians who learn
better in groups. As he has put it, "the curriculum has very little place for cooperation for
which the Fijian culture is renown [and they] are really good at". He maintains that the
curriculum "places a very high priority on individual achievement and there is no reward for
collective achievement".
Reverend Dr Ilaitia Tuwere argues that because some subjects like Maths, Science
and Commerce are "late arrivals" for "a large number of Fijian students", a new way of
teaching them that accounts for their learning styles should be found. He points out: "Indians
have been exposed" to these subjects for a long time whereas they are "late arrivals" for I
Indigenous Fijians. He suggests that "another way of teaching them should be found...a
better methodology or simply more time or attention to be given to them in the school
system" (T12: 7-8). Here, Tuwere is indirectly referring to the academic culture associated
with Indian learning and their familiarity with Maths, Commerce and the Sciences which
gives them an advantage in school. In comparison, Indigenous Fijians are unfamiliar with
much of the language and concepts. As such, he suggests that some AA is provided, perhaps
in the form of more time and attention. Even better, he recommends that teaching methods
take this point into consideration,
In sum, then, many informants are concerned that colonial academic curriculum and
teaching styles ignore the learning styles of Indigenous Fijian students. As well, a call has
been made for changes to be made to both the curriculum and pedagogical styles (as one
cannot separate the two) in such a way that they become more appropriate and culturally
sensitive. In the next section I discuss what informants say about another educational
structure that is a powerful legacy of colonialism, the assessment system.
Assessment
Many informants consistently agree that Fiji's educational system is too heavily
examination oriented and that performance in examinations has become the criterion to judge
a person's 'success' in life. Professor Konai Thaman points out that the process of formal
schooling has caused Pacific societies to reconceptualise what an educated or learned person
is. The meaning has changed from "a very pragmatic one, one that is closely related to
survival in a particular society, to someone who has a string of degrees". The perception is
that a person becomes a total failure if he or she fails national examinations because people
have "been conditioned to think that schooling is more important than any learning outside of *"• i
the school which is very unfortunate" (T4: 5).
194
Sefanaia Koroi argues that school success is measured in terms of success in
academic-type exams and that the school system disadvantages those Indigenous Fijians who
have many talents and skills outside of the academic arena, In his view, the curriculum needs
to be restructured in order to cater for students who are not academically inclined, so that
"everybody can be recognised for the potential and skills that they have rather than their
ability in reading and mathematics" (T9: 11). In a similar way, a senior academic at USP
argues that people are labelled failures just because they are not successful at national
examinations and cannot attain a job in the professions, what he calls "a two-edged sword".
They may have other talents and be successful in areas that are non-academic and yet they
are perceived as failures because of the assumption "that the only success is to score high
marks in exams and become a professional" (T50: 3).
Highlighting the negative aspects of examinations, Tamarisi Yabaki, curriculum
development officer in charge the Social Studies curriculum for primary schools, argues that
the examination system can affect both teachers and students. On the one hand, failure in
exams stigmatises students in that they "have nothing to fall back on". On the other, exam i
results drive the teaching-learning process and also stigmatises teachers if the classes they
teach attain poor results. As Yabaki puts it:
[A] major factor that...affects Fijian performance is the examination system because
there is no alternative for failure. Once you drop out after failing these exams, there
is nothing else that you can fall back on to get you going. I think it affects the
teaching of subjects in school because if you are teaching an examination class, the
teacher is psyched up to think that the bottom line in teaching is the exam, You've
got to produce good results so that you're in the good books of the community. If
you're a grant-in-aid teacher, you can easily lose your position if the committee says
that you haven't performed well. (T38: 5)
Arthur Crane, Principal of Gospel High School, disapproves of examinations because
teachers teach to the examination at the expense of good teaching. He points out that "too
many teachers are able to just come along with the textbook, teach what it is and emphasise
the examination...and use the exam as a stick over the kid's back for the last...six weeks
before the exam". In placing an emphasis on exams, teachers " can almost sit back and be
satisfied with a mediocre performance for the large part of the year" (T55: 7),
Like Crane and Yabaki, Sister Genevieve Loo highlights the intense pressures put on
students and teachers in preparation for national examinations. She points out that "an awful ^
lot of rote learning and drilling" occur in these classrooms which do not prepare students to >
think for themselves when they reach senior level (T21: 9-10). What Sister Loo is raising [I
195
here is something she personally observed when she spent ten years teaching in a rural
Indigenous Fijian boarding school. It is her view that junior secondary schools prepare
students to be rote learners rather than independent thinkers mainly because of the demands
placed on teachers and students by an exam-oriented educational system. Similarly, Dr
Vijay Naidu reiterates what Sister Loo is saying by maintaining that examinations encourage
rote learning and are "a stumbling block for most people because it is very competitive" (T6:
14). Moreover, he argues that examinations make people competitive and if one does not
have a spirit of competitiveness, one cannot succeed in school.
A different approach is taken by Una Nabobo who raises an issue to do with
assessment procedures. She talks about the contradiction between what is required in exams
and the socialisation patterns of the child. As Nabobo puts it, "Not only are we exam-
oriented but I think the assessment procedures encourage people to speak their minds, to
express themselves. Now the socialisation of the Fijian child is not like that. The assessment
procedures are written and the Fijian is a very oral person" (T45; 3).
A similar perspective is provided by Susana Tuisawau who points out that Indigenous
Fijians do better at the practical application level but unfortunately, they are assessed on their
knowledge of theory. She notes, "They're more field oriented but the kind of assessment that
J*
we do is...paper assessment" (T30: 11). She adds: [\
I think we need competency-based assessments, criterion-referenced rather than
norm-referenced....I think that would bring out a lot more because...[the Fijians are]
more practically oriented. They are not people who would carry this much
information in their head and then regurgitate it....[They] are quite often concrete f*
learners. I notice that Fijians would like to see where something is applied and we *
learn by doing, experientially and then we learn. (T30: 11-12) J
I
Tamarisi Yabaki would like to see internal assessment as an alternative to
examinations but raises some practical issues associated with such a move. As she explains j
it, "We can have other alternatives but the problems are resources, finance and administering I
the internal assessment" (T38: 6).
A few informants have seen the need to abolish two national examinations, one
conducted at the end of year six and the other at the end of year eight. Krishna Datt describes
these exams as "just nonsense" and Ted Young describes them as "two of the most
destructive exams". Similarly, Hari Ram supports the abolition of the two exams but he
recommends the use of tests in the primary school purely for diagnostic purposes, and not for
the purpose of elimination. As he puts it, the main role of tests "at the lower levels is to find
out how effectively one is teaching and to adjust teaching styles in accordance with the test
196
results". However, Ram is of the view that exams at the higher levels are necessary "where
access to the next level of education is not possible for all" (T5: 8-9).
In sum then, the emphasis on national examinations drives the way the curriculum is
taught. In many cases, as many informants point out, rote learning in classrooms has become
the norm as a response to the focus the educational system places on exams. There is
recognition that more practical-based assessment and more internal assessment might better
accommodate the learning styles of Indigenous Fijians. However, the problems associated
with resources and administration have been raised. The point has also been made that
school learning is perceived to be the most important kind of learning and therefore success
in exams has reconceptualised the way Indigenous Fijians now view themselves and others.
Unfortunately, when a person fails national exams, this is perceived by society as that person
having failed in everything. The feeling seems to be that exams are there to stay because the
educational system does not have the scope nor the resources to implement a different
assessment system,
Language of Instruction
There are many contradictions in informants' views of English as the language of the
curriculum, of schooling and of learning, On the one hand, there is the view that English
should not be the language of instruction because it disadvantages Indigenous Fijians,
particularly out in rural areas. On the other hand, many informants believe that English >j
should remain the language of schooling as it is the international language of communication [|
and hence, students have a head start when they learn in English. As well, there is the view "
that since teaching in the vernacular is impractical in multi-ethnic Fiji, English should be \
r
retained as the medium of instruction.
One informant who argues that those Indigenous Fijians who do not have a good ,
grasp of the English language are disadvantaged when teaching is done in English is
Reverend Dr Ilaitia Tuwere. He argues that English is an "intellectual language" and has
"tremendous power in shaping our children, shaping their ideas". He maintains that "the
Fijian who hasn't got the capacity to grasp the English language,,.will be greatly
disadvantaged in school and society" since "English is the ruling language in the judiciary,
the law, commerce, information, education" (T12: 8).
Adi Kuini Speed agrees with Reverend Tuwere but argues that this should not be used
as a justification to explain failure because Indigenous Fijians are just as capable as students
of other ethnic groups in attaining good academic results, She notes. "English is a foreign
197
language. It's loaded with concepts that are foreign to our tradition and culture and we are
measured by those foreign concepts and they are foreign expectations made on our
performance and our thinking". However, she believes that " while there may be some basic
problem to do with a foreign language...we shouldn't use it as a justification because...Fijians
have the capacity...to adapt to any kind of conceptual demand...that's why we've produced
people with PhDs"(T32: 12).
Some informants hold the view that people in Fiji have no choice but to have English
as the medium of instruction. For example, Sefanaia Koroi maintains that judgements on
school success or failure are based on how well one knows the English language and how
well one learns through the medium of language. Because Fiji has "adopted a Westernised-
type of curriculum and that the key to success lies in the language that everybody has to
speak which is English", the people "have no choice because that is the language of the
,
curriculum, that is the language of the books" (T9: 10).
Similarly, Filipe Tuisawau argues that teaching in the English language disadvantages
Indigenous Fijians because it's "a second language for Fijians who speak Fijian all the time"
but he makes the case that we have no choice as it is the medium of communication in Fiji
and internationally, At the same time, Tuisawau maintains that "the Fijian language should
•i
not be undervalued". He points out that in "emphasising the English language, there is the J
danger.,.from the perspective of the children...that they might think the language, the Fijian ,,
language, is inferior" (T46: 2).
Una Nabobo points to the disadvantages that Indigenous Fijians who make up "the
rural majority" face, particularly where English is taken to pass exams but yet is not spoken I1
V
in the home as "they don't have the reason to be speaking English anyway". As well, she J1
raises the dilemma that teaching in the vernacular does not seem a viable choice given the
financial constraints and the fact that "English is something that you are made to do to pass f
school" (T45: 3).
On the other hand, Esther Williams argues that rural students should learn English
from an early age so that they are not disadvantaged at secondary school: "English is the
main means of communication so the earlier the start we get, the better". By contrast,
Tamarisi Yabaki contends that teaching in the English language disadvantages Indigenous
Fijians as it is not the first (dialect) or even second (standard Fijian) language that they have
to master. She envisages a day when rural students can learn in their own dialect and sit
exams written in their dialect:
198
In this model, socio-cultural, psychological and historical structural factors all play a
part in producing racial inequalities in schooling,
I now turn to a discussion of some of the important issues that have emanated from
the data. I first elaborate on the concepts of space and history as important categories of
analysis in the Fiji context. The notion of symbolic violence is particularly examined. I
then discuss the parallels in the data regarding the factors that contribute to school success of
Indigenous Fijians and 'others'. Moreover, I identify key silences in the data, such as the
lack of discussion on the disadvantages faced by non-Fijians minority groups. The issue of
gender is also underemphasised by the informants. Finally, I discuss some of the unresolved
issues that the data have not cleared.
Space as an Analytic Category
The dimension of space is significant because the bulk of Indigenous Fijians are
dispersed in rural locations compared to non-indigenous communities who are more urban-
centred. From an analysis of the 1986 Census Report, 67.3% of the Indigenous Fijian
population was rural-based. As a result of the many disadvantages associated with distance
and isolation from urban nerve-centres, Indigenous Fijians in the rural area do not perform
well at school. Of course, the notion of rural disadvantage is relative to what is defined as
urban advantage. Rural disadvantage is a reality that interacts in complex ways with the
dimensions of race, gender and class. As well, all these would further interact with
historical, social, cultural and political forces in just as complex and multi-faceted ways. The
issue of rurality is a very real and troublesome one because we are looking at rurality against
economic models of development and the constraints of the capitalist market economy,
Demographically, therefore, rural disadvantage was identified by my informants as a
major challenge to the academic achievement of Indigenous Fijians, The further away the
student lives from urban centres (with the assumed availability of educational resources,
better teachers and schools), the greater disadvantage he/she faces. The low socio-economic
status of rural Indigenous Fijians, in particular, has been pin-pointed as one of the major
contributors to poor performance in schools. The informants have noted that many rural
Indigenous Fijians are materially poor because they have not attained an education that
would enable them to migrate to those urban areas where they would earn a living.
There are not many opportunities for economic enterprise in the rural areas.
Indigenous Fijian rural dwellers are basically subsistence workers, growing enough for daily
sustenance and selling whatever is excess in order to buy the extras that would make life a bit
202
more comfortable, as well as pay for educational necessities. The poor economic base of
rural areas, coupled with the general lack of education of rural dwellers, then, are two factors
that have been identified as contributing to the poor performance of rural Indigenous Fijians
in rural Fiji,
In any discussion of the condition of spatial disadvantage, the dimension of place
should also come into play, The reason the bulk of Indigenous Fijians are dispersed in rural
localities is because of their close affinity to their land, Their village is where their place in
the world is, it is where they physically and spiritually belong. Many of them are bora there
and that is where they will be buried. Since success in life is increasingly redefined in terms
of succeeding at school, many Indigenous Fijian families are uprooting from traditional to
modern spaces. It is the perception that a good life can be obtained from getting a job that
has spurred the movement into the urban centres, So those who remain in the rural area do so
because of the strong sense of place associated with land ownership.
It is timely that we reconsider space and spatiality as a new way of viewing social
realities (Gregory, 1994; Soja, 1996).The category of space (and place) should be viewed as
seriously as the normative categories of race, class and gender in discussions of social
realities. As Sakeasi Butadroka has put it, how can Indigenous Fijian compete with other
ethnic groups when "most of the Fijian parents are still in the rural area without any provision
for electricity, for medical services, for roading, and for good housing" (T36: 5). Or as the
Minister for Education, Taufa Vakatale has argued, "Rural Fijians are disadvantaged".
The important issue raised by informants is how can rural communities be empowered
through education, decision-making processes, cultural emphasis and institutional changes, to
name a few, to ensure their access and participation in national life? The data consistently
identified spatial disadvantage as problematising and complicating the traditional notions of
class, race and gender. And yet, there is enough tension in the data to suggest that rurality
need not necessarily be considered in a negative light There are enough indications that
there are positives in the rural environment that can be harnessed, affirmed and developed.
For instance, there are references to the stress that middle-class Fijians undergo in urban
centres that are associated with a materialistic kind of lifestyle. The quest for a house (with
high mortgages) and the materiality that go with this ownership, such as furniture, bank loans
(with high interest rates) and the stress of keeping up with bills associated with urban living,
have been alluded to by several of the informants. As Rainima Meo has put it,
What do you mean by quality of life? Suppose somebody who has reached form
six...has gone to the village...they don't pay an electricity bill, they don't pay any bills
203
at the end of the day.,..Compare this to a better educated person...with a car, a fridge, a
washing machine and at the end, you scratch your head. Did you pay this? You pay
for everything and what does this bring you? Only hypertension and stress. (T41: 11)
As well, there is the suggested romanticism associated with niral living that may not
be borne out by rural dwellers. For example, the notion that there are no bills, etc, in the rural
areas might be counterpoised by the subsistence economy that would make life such a
struggle for many rural dwellers. A top ranking educationist at USP has argued that "Fijians
spend a lot of time in rural areas....Women in rural areas are spending a lot of their energy
trying to survive, getting the daily sustenance which most urban people are spared from" (Tl:
7).
In any case, the emergence of rurality as a prominent feature in the discussion on
underachievement and AA adds complexity because it is clearly not an issue of race, class or
gender. Rather, rurality cuts across these arenas so that there is ambiguity and contradiction
in the overall discussion. In the Fiji context, description and analysis of any social
phenomenon should not only include the categories of race, class and gender but should also
include a fourth category, that of spatiality or rurality.
History as an Analytic Category
The discussion in the third section of this chapter - historical structural models -
highlights an important category that is missing from discussions on racial inequalities—that
of history. The impact of a colonial past—socially, culturally, politically, psychologically,
ideologically—has been discussed in great depth in Chapter Three. The point has been made
that educational structures in place, at this historical juncture, are neocolonial in form and
content.
It is interesting to look at educational structures as a possible explanation for
underachievement because it takes the emphasis away from the underachiever. The focus of
examination moves from the student to the school to see whether structures, such as the
curriculum, school organisation, pedagogies and assessment, might disadvantage categories
of students. This argument holds the structures responsible because they disadvantage those
students whose culture, language, styles of learning, knowledge systems and epistemologies
are different from those desired by, and zealously guarded by, the school system,
I would like to revisit the literature review carried out in Chapter Two, where I
foregrounded the conceptual resources provided by postcolonial theory that were pertinent to
this thesis, The hegemonic neocolonial educational structures in play at this historical
204
juncture demonstrate how powerfully colonial metaphysical and epistemological 'realities'
are embraced by the ex-coloniser. As Raymond Williams (1976) has described it,
educational institutions are the main agencies for the transmission of an effective dominant
culture. In the case of Fiji, the dominant culture is the 'Western' culture that became
institutionalised during the period of colonial rule. The British-based system of 'knowing'
and 'doing' have so totally and deeply saturated 'the consciousness' of Fijian society that the
educational structures inherited from a colonial past have continued in hegemonic forms.
And as Michael Apple (1979: 6) has emphasised, schools not only process knowledge, they
also process people by acting as "agents of cultural and ideological hegemony".
Educational and political leaders in Fiji need to reflect on the answers to the questions
that Apple (1979) has asked regarding the supposedly "legitimate knowledge" that is taught
in schools. For instance, whose knowledge is it? Who selected what is taught in the
curriculum? Why is it organised and taught in this way? What knowledge is made available
and just as importantly, unavailable to students? Much local and national reflection needs to
be undertaken to examine closely the curriculum, pedagogies, school organisation and
assessment that are in play at this historical juncture, almost four decades after political
decolonisation occurred, *
Thomas and Postlethwaite (1984) also asked some questions that would assist leaders
in thinking about the continuing impact of colonialism on educational institutions. For ,
instance, in terms of the purpose or role of schooling, they asked who determined this, from !
what culture is this derived and whose welfare is served by the purpose of schooling. In
terms of the curriculum and instructional methodology, they asked Who determines the J
nature of the curriculum and teaching methods? What are the cultural sources of the \
curriculum and teaching methods? Whose welfare is served by the curriculum? These are
important questions that need deep examination otherwise colonial hegemony will continue
to hold power in supposedly politically decolonised nations.
One thing is clear. Educational structures in play, even at this historical juncture,
have not been decided by 'local' people. The curriculum and pedagogies or "teaching
methods", as Thomas and Postlethwaite (1984) have described it, are definitely 'Western' in
origin and content and have not been designed to serve the welfare of the people. During
colonial rule, they served the purposes and welfare of Western people in Fiji. They were
certainly not designed to serve the welfare of 'locals'.
205
Symbolic Violence
I would like to draw your attention to the notion of "symbolic violence" that I
introduced in Chapter Two. Sultana (1993), drawing on the work of Pierre Bourdiue, a
French philosopher and sociologist, emphasises the point that schools that do not value the
"realities, language and dignities" of their students are guilty of "symbolic violence". As
Sultana points out, these schools are violent and powerful in their labelling of who a school
failure is, and it is the experiences they provide for students who are 'different' that
marginalise and exclude. So powerful indeed are the people who do the labelling that those
students who are labelled failures internalise this attitude and are seriously marked for life,
Bourdieu and Passeron (1977: 18) define symbolic violence as "any power that
succeeds in imposing meanings and in imposing them as legitimate in disguising the relations
of power which are at the root of its force, adds its own force, that is a specifically symbolic
force, to those relations of power. It is the "violence which is exercised upon a social agent
with his or her complicity" (Bourdieu and Wacquant, 1992: 167-168). Symbolic violence,
then, is the power to dominate the disadvantaged groups by imposing "instruments of
knowledge and (sic) expression of social reality...which are arbitrary but unrecognised as
such" (Bourdieu, 1977: 115). Bourdieu's work in education has been to describe and account
for the objective processes which continually exclude underprivileged children (Harker,
1984). Schooling becomes the monopoly of those classes capable of transmitting through the
family the instruments ('habitus') necessary for the reception of the message of schooling.
As Bourdieu has put it:
The culture of the elite is so near to that of that school that children from the lower
middle class...can acquire only with great effort something which is given to the
children of the cultivated classes - style, taste, wit - in short, those attitudes and
aptitudes which seem natural in members of the cultivated classes and naturally
expected of them precisely because (in the ethnological sense) they are the culture of
that class. (Bourdieu, 1974: 39)
I argue that the neocolonial educational structures that are an inheritance from British
colonisation with their alien ideologies, epistemological bases and orientations represent a
form of symbolic violence. The curriculum, pedagogical methods and assessment do not
value the cultural knowledge, expertise and wisdoms that Indigenous Fijian students, and
indeed students of other ethnic groups, bring to the classroom. The fact that English is the
language of schooling, and the tokenism given to the teaching of the vernaculars, is testament
to the dominating presence of colonial authority and power. Because Fiji has continued with
Western models of assessment, those who do not pass the national examinations carry the
206
label of 'failure' in education. As Professor Konai Thaman has noted, the tragic outcome of
this labelling is when this is carried over to mean a failure in all aspects of life.
The curriculum, assessment and pedagogies that are in play in this postcolonial
moment are more or less a continuation of what was prior to 1970, that supposedly magical
moment when Fiji became a politically independent nation-state. The curriculum and the
ensuing pedagogies and assessment system are still 'Western' in focus and emphasis and are,
in many cases, considered too foreign, inappropriate, irrelevant and impractical. There has
been some measure of localisation of the content to include material on Fiji and the South
Pacific, However, the focus is still very academic, theoretical and fashioned after offerings
in the New Zealand and Australian curriculum,
This raises the question of social and cultural relevance and appropriateness. The
undervaluing of Indigenous Fijian language, knowledge and culture has been picked up by
some of the informants and is something I would like to discuss in detail in Chapter Seven.
As well, alternatives to the current educational system will be pursued later. I will, therefore,
pick up on this argument about hegemonic, neocolonial educational structures in greater
depth in Chapter Seven, The important question to ask is what would be an appropriate
hybridised curriculum that would be relevant in the Fiji context. This question will be
addressed in the final chapter where I will explore a vision of the postcolonial curriculum.
Success in Schooling
Given that educational structures generally do not serve the welfare of decolonised
nations, how and why do Indigenous Fijians, and 'other' ethnic groups in Fiji, succeed in
schools? The data seem to show that school success is contingent on several factors. First, !
there is an element of struggle, whether the student is Indigenous Fijian or not. The desire to
succeed in order to move out of poverty is one such motivator. Second, having parents who
value what a 'good' education brings, and no matter how poor, will strive to provide a
facilitative environment for the educational success of their children is seen as another
element that leads to success in school. Having this home support was cited as an important
contributing factor for both Indigenous Fijian and Indo-Fijian. Third, 'significant others', in
the form of 'good' teachers or role models of the same 'race', were reported to contribute to
the success of Indigenous Fijians in school.
An element that has been highlighted by several informants is the closer the home
culture of the student is to the culture of the school, the more advantaged that person is.
Children who count as middle-class are included in this category, as are those who live in
207
urban spaces compared to their rural counterparts, Students who have educated parents and
speak English in the home are perceived to have an advantage over those students who come
from low socio-economic backgrounds, particularly if they live in rural spaces.
The categories of location/place and social class have more salience in explaining
school success and failure than the overrated category of race. As consistently emphasised in
the data, the category of space (rurality) has intersected the normative analytical categories of
race, class and gender and as such, to explaining Indigenous Fijian underachievement.
Silences in the Data
Another point I would like to expand on is the silence amongst the informants
regarding the underachievement of non-indigenous children. With so much emphasis on
Indigenous Fijian failure, one does not hear about the large numbers of non-indigenous
students who do not do too well at school. As well, one hears very little regarding the
reasons why this category of students also faces the problem of inequalities in school inputs
and outcomes, What are the reasons for this silence? Is it because there is too much rhetoric
about indigenous failure that this drowns the 'others1 out? Why is there such an emphasis on
Indigenous Fijian underachievement to the exclusion of all other ethnic groups? In fact, why
is there a continuation of the notion of 'othering' that was the mainstay of the process of
colonialism? Is this because of Indigenous Fijian political hegemony that was a result of the
transfer of political power from the colonial 'masters' to Indigenous Fijians? My intention is
to explore many of these questions in Chapter Six.
There is also a silence in the data regarding gender, Only several female informants
have mentioned gender issues. Is this because the underrepresentation of females in
education and employment is seen as acceptable? Is this because male dominance is
perceived the hegemonically accepted practice? Is the silence in the data regarding gender
issues a result of the lack of available comparative statistics on the same? It is difficult to
decide what the reason is for this silence. Whatever the reason, the 'fact' is that Indigenous
Fijian women are heavily underrepresented in scholarship awards and consequently in
university admissions, and in middle to top positions in the private and public sectors. Local
and national leaders will need to decide whether this situation should be allowed to continue
or whether gender-based AA should become part of race-based AA. Or indeed, whether
gender-based AA is necessary.
208
Other Unresolved Themes
The analysis has raised more questions than there are answers. These questions relate
to the issue of comparisons, the status of current educational structures, the place of
vocational and technical education and the cultural orientations of Indigenous Fijians
juxtaposed against schooling and so forth. Is it appropriate to compare the educational
performance of Indigenous Fijians with those of other ethnic groups? Does the Indigenous
Fijian community need to change its cultural attitudes and orientations to provide more
success stories? Even if Indigenous Fijians changed their ways and attitudes and there was
an upsurge in their academic performance, is the economy able to provide them with gainful
employment? Should there not also be a restructuring of educational structures to ensure that
Indigenous Fijians, and indeed students of all ethnicities in Fiji, are not disadvantaged by the
structures? Can vocational education take an equal place with academic education in
people's perceptions and in practice?
Other unresolved questions relate to the issues of employment, the place of
indigenous knowledge and cultural value systems and the impact of globalisation. With the
limited resources available to a small nation state like Fiji, can it not have a vision where
there are alternative paths for students to take so that there is not such a high rate of
unemployment and the concomitant increase in crime perpetrated mainly by Indigenous
Fijians? Can the curriculum value Indigenous Fijian cultural and knowledge systems? Can
all community knowledges and cultural value systems be accommodated in the curriculum?
With regard to the explanations cited for the underachievement of Indigenous Fijians in
formal schooling, should not the current policies of the government, AA policies included,
be re-examined and re-directed if need be? And given the insidious and blatant impact of the
process of globalisation, where everything is ruled and judged according to the global market
economy, what is the status of all these questions? These are pertinent questions that need to
be addressed by Indigenous Fijian leaders in all walks of life and other ethnic communities in
Fiji. I will certainly attempt to answer some of these questions in the following chapters.
Summary
This chapter has documented and thematised informants' commentaries on the
underachievement of Indigenous Fijians in formal schooling. I have argued from a parallelist
position which recognises the interplay between the dynamics of race, class, gender and
location working with each other and amongst social, cultural, political and historical forces
to explain racial inequalities in education. Note here the addition of two additional
209
categories of analysis: those of space and history. I have argued against deterministic,
essentialistic, mono-causal explanations because on their own, they hold very little salience.
However, when one puts all these explanations together as in a jigsaw puzzle, the pieces
interweave into a multi-faceted, multi-layered, comprehensive, holistic and complex
explanation that begins to make meaningful sense of the issue of Indigenous Fijian
underachievement in schooling.
In terms of socio-cultural deficit models, some deficit in students' physical, social
and cultural environment was emphasised as the main contributing factor for Indigenous
Fijian underachievement. In particular, the disadvantages associated with location and space
from urban nerve-centres, the home background of students, their socio-economic status, the
cultural orientations of their parents and school variables, such as resource availability, time
management and teacher quality, have been identified as significant socio-cultural factors
that impact on Indigenous Fijian school performance.
The factors that were reported to have a significant psychological impact on
Indigenous Fijian educational performance were parental attitudes (deemed to be inadequate,
particularly amongst the poorly educated) and living away from home. Since a predominant
number of secondary-aged Indigenous Fijian students are either in boarding institutions or
live with relatives |