AHED Client Timothy Dhimala discusses his market garden enterprise with an AHED Facilitator

2. Supporting motivation

Passion and motivation die hard.  We came to Galiwin’ku to support motivated individuals and groups 18 months ago. In that time, more than 18 different people and groups have engaged with us in enterprises they are actively developing, based on their own internal motivation and effort.  This is despite 30-40 years of  crisis, demoralisation and welfare disincentives in their community.  But without support, people give up.  Motivated individuals must be supported to overcome all the barriers involved in participating in the economy and running an enterprise.  They need help to find resources, supplies and the practical things that come with managing money, staff and analysing business decisions etc.  This is not much different to the needs of mainstream entrepreneurs.  However, for many remote Aboriginal people, support must also include learning the “white man’s” rules about how to start and run a corporate structure, eg. understanding the taxation system and the function of a corporation.  They also need help overcoming cultural barriers.  As many remote locals have English as a second language, they cannot communicate well with the mainstream and don’t know where to start to find even basic information about their needs.  Without support in these areas, they find themselves in the dark and isolated, unable to succeed and not knowing why.  This turns motivation into depression and other mental disorders.

Motivation cannot be created by outside influence.  Real, empowering education gives people the ability to find their vision, but passion is birthed within the person by their own soul. No one can insert it.  This makes it a valuable commodity indeed. So when and within whom it blossoms it must be supported.

Surprisingly, in 2008 we found that very few (almost no) services existed to provide such support to economic visionaries in Arnhem Land remote Aboriginal communities.  Programs were designed to help write business plans, and get loans or even small business grants, but mostly there was nothing designed to give no-strings-attached help to the everyday learning, information and resourcing needs of Indigenous people with big ideas.  This support to local visionaries is the second key to successful and sustainable economic development, because it enables those with the passion and internal motivation to overcome barriers to create new productive nodes in the local economy.

Let’s look at an example.  One of our clients many years ago was sucessfully running a lush tropical market garden, using treated effluent from the local sewage farm.  The effluent was being pumped onto his land, but he did not know that he could not use it under Balanda (Australian) law without a special license.  His access was shut off.  At this point no one offered to help him get the right licenses or teach him how to use the water safely.  Even while the local community garden  in town failed time and time again, no one asked how can we provide long term help to allow this visionary to maintain his once  flourishing garden.  He got help here and there, but when he came to us shortly after we started the AHED project in his community, he was successfully growing sugar cane, but his bananas were still failing for lack of nutrients.  He was also an old man now so he needed workers to help in the garden.  Thus supporting his motivation meant finding and importing a sugar cane juicer he could afford, helping him learn to run a market stall for his juice, bringing in expert advice on how to get nutrients with his low income, looking into the law on sewage reuse and working towards a reuse license, helping him find strategies to save for vehicles and equipment, and helping him find and motivate a workforce.  Despite some set backs his garden is gradually improving without the nutrients from the effluent and we are working toward him getting his license.  Despite his age and the barriers he has faced his motivation and activity in his enterprise has increased.

Supporting visionaries in their passion unfortunately is not as simple as diving in and helping everyone with anything they want.  If the support person ends up running around doing everything for the visionary, this is not empowerment, but rather, leads back to an unhealthy dependency and can undermine a person’s drive.  The visionary will likely creep into laziness at the hands of an overzealous program or supporter.  The supporter  can also get into the danger of  managing the client and their vision, which strips their sense of control from the client and also ruins motivation. So, support must focus on keeping the visionary informed, educated, and the principal party in all decisions. We must focus on supporting a person’s motivation by removing the real barriers they face and leaving the barriers that they have the ability to change themselves.  By this process the short term success will not be shown in statistical outcomes, but in the direct effort the local visionary/ies put in, and this effort should well exceed that of the dominant culture supporters. In the example above, our gardener today proves to have as much or more motivation in his enterprise than when he started, even though his workforce failed him many times and his garden was lost to a bush fire on one ocassion.  Still, his motivation is demonstrated by his increasing commitment to put in hours and effort every day to improving his garden.

To support motivation for economic growth in Indigenous communities, we must do so through mechanisms that allow the entrepreneur to do the hard yards – to allow them to fail and get back up. Motivation can only be supported if the models for economic and enterprise development value the person and human process over the economic outcomes their enterprise might achieve.  The result is not rapid economic growth and the sudden rescuing of these Aboriginal economies (a dangerous hope), but it is gradual, sustainable growthm with the potential for the exponential expansion of these economies in the long term as people’s hopes and hearts turn mistakes into learnings – and finally success.

See the AHED project website for more information about the model we are using to provide this support without encouraging dependency.

The Dhurili Nation, comprising the Datiwuy, Golumala, Marrakulu and Marrangu clans have previously confirmed to the Northern Land Council and the Minister for Indigenous Affairs that they are lawful traditional owners of some areas of land that are affected by a new mining lease and agreement with Rio Tinto Alcan in the Gove Peninsula in the Northern Territory.

“We feel very sad because our rights under Madayin Law have been pushed aside and much pain and division has been created. This shows that colonisation is still happening today creating disharmony, by people ignoring due process. Again the failures of the Australian Government and the NLC to work with Yolngu people through a proper process of law has created division between the clans of Arnhem Land. We will not be celebrating along with others the signing of this agreement” said Dr Gondarra.

The Northern Land Council and the Minister have allowed a new lease to be signed, despite the Dhurili Nation raising its concerns about a lack of lawful consultation and a failure to seek the consent of its members in line with the requirements of traditional Madayin law and the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976.

The Dhurili nation, part of the Yolngu people, were previously recognised as traditional owners of parts of the affected area. For reasons presently unknown to them, they were not properly consulted about the recent negotiations with Rio Tinto Alcan. As a result, the clans of the Dhurili Nation consider that their rights under Australian and traditional Aboriginal law have been breached and that they have been improperly excluded from the negotiation process.

The Dhurili Nation is considering challenging the actions of the Northern Land Council and the Minister for Indigenous Affairs in the Courts.

Dated: 7 June 2011

Contact: Rev. Dr. Djiniyini Gondarra, OAM (on behalf of the Dhurili Nation)

Culture shock is a very real psychological phenomenon that people experience when they enter a culture they are unfamiliar with for a significant amount of time. In a new culture, or  in a space where an unfamiliar culture controls the social environment, there is a lot that  we will not understand, we will not naturally know how we should act, we encounter awkward situations and experience a loss of control over our own circumstance. Our mind and body copes well with these stresses for a time, but after an extended period of dealing with a different language, manners, lifestyle and expectations, these stresses accumulate and the mental and emotional cultural machinery eventually packs it in and goes through an adjustment phase.   This adjustment is experienced as CS and often resembles an emotional break down, but with some rather unique characteristics.  Most Dominant culture people, Indigneous or Non-Indigenous, who come into an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander community for more than a few weeks are likely to encounter Culture Shock (CS) and need to understand it to overcome its effects.

What Causes Culture Shock.

The process of adjusting to a new cultural environment often begins with a ‘honey moon’ phase (often about 3 months), where everything new can seem exciting, and differences in culture are a source of fascination and interest. But in this  time we are actually dealing with high levels of physiological stress.  We are coping with a lack of control, because we are not sure what will happen next, and we are forced to maintain constant conscious effort in most social interactions.  Our attempts to understand what is going on and to respond appropriately can be overstimulating and exhausting. Thus the mind and body is on sustained high alert as we try to fit in and find our way through new environments, new experiences and strange social responses.  CS occurs because of the cumulative effect of  this sustained high alert and the many stressful event that we encounter along the way.

Our mind and body can only cope with these strange stressors for a time.  The onset of CS can vary enormously (anything from a few weeks to 6 months), mainly depending on the degree of immersion in the community and new culture. My wife had a stint in South Africa many years ago where she was living with families in a poor rural township. She had been given little preparation, had little support, and experienced severe cultural shock within 2 weeks (the tipping point being when she asked if she could go to the toilet and was handed a bucket) . In my own experience of full immersion, living with a Yolŋu family (who always spoke in the local Indigneous language, as I was suppose to be learning), I experienced severe CS from the 4th week.  In our most recent experience together, moving to an Aboriginal Community permanently, we started in our own house and already had significant cultural experience and language skills.   Having this space that we controlled culturally and lots of preparation meant that we did not experience CS until after 4 months.

The Symptoms of Culture Shock

I can only describe CS as a feeling of deep sadness, lethargy and sometimes hopelessness. It is very much like depression, quashing any desire for positive action and engagement with the community.  It is characterised by a powerful desire to give up and leave the community.  So strong is this desire that some people literally up and leave. The feeling is understandable because the body and mind wants desperately to escape the foreign cultural space.  But this should be an indicator to us to recognise that our feelings are the symptoms of CS and this will help us to work through the emotions we will be feeling.  As well as the strong desire to leave, there are several other characteristics (from my experience) that will help you recognise culture shock:

• No real reasons for underlying sadness.  While there may be many things that you could be sad about on reflection you might find that these things are not what is underlying your feelings.  The sadness may seem to come from nowhere, even though it may have initially started because of a stressful event.
• An increase tendency to think badly of the local people/culture, and blame the local people/culture for problems you encounter (even though this might be out of character for you).
• An aversion to social interaction, particularly with those of the foriegn culture.
• The sense of stress and depression improves in a familar cultural space.

You should also be aware and prepared for these possible symptons of culture shock:

• The  desire to leave and give up can be overwhelming, and in some  may even encourage suicidal thoughts and feelings.
• A strong desire to indulge, which can encourage very unhealthly behaviour.
• The tendency to be short tempered and feel tired.
• Unreasonably strong feelings of anger, sadness, depression and hopelessness may arise in response to the smallest and silliest of things.

The symptoms of CS only last for about 2 -3 weeks at a time. They may reappear several times at different intervals over your first year in the new culture.

How to manage its effects

To manage culture shock we need to be on the look out for the symptoms I have mentioned.  When you begin to feel such things you should stop and consciously recognise “I am probably experiencing Culture Shock.” Once you have identified CS take the following steps

1. Recognise that what you are experiencing will pass.  You can leave if you still wish in a few weeks when you are feeling less emotional.
2. Take time out, your body is telling you it needs an escape, so take some space where ever you can get it and rest.  I feel that employers should recognise the need for short stress leave at these times.  However, taking short respite outside the community at this time may not be benificial as you may find the symptons reoccur very soon after your return.
3. Indulge a little in harmless familar cultural activities and if you can spend a little time with people of your home culture. This will give you some relief and remind you that you are still sane.  Find little things like music, some food items or some movies that connect you to your first culture.  This is an opportunity for your cultural machinery to relax in an environment it knows.
4. Get plenty of sleep and try to maintain healthy behaviours such as exercise.
5. Remember you don’t have to do anything you don’t want to, you have chosen to be where you are.
6. Between breaks,  push your self just a little to get back out in the unfamiliar. Don’t go more that a couple of days without engaging in the local culture a little… you might visit some locals, go to a cultural event, just go for a walk in the community.  Increase the difficulty of these activities as you start to feel better.  The better you balance taking a break and engaging with the new culture the more complete your recovery will be.

Remember CS symptoms may reoccur over the beginning months or year of your stay, so don’t be disillusioned if the feelings come back from time to time.  Remember each time you experience CS this is your body acclimatising to the new culture and with each adjustment you will be more comfortable and effective working with the local Indigenous people.

If you are aware and prepared for Culture Shock when moving to an Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander community, this will help you to survive the difficult adjustment period, where many personnel lose their way. Be kind to yourself- experiencing CS is not a sign that you are not suited to cross-cultural work, nor that you disrespect the other culture or don’t care for the people. It is just a normal part of the process that needs to be worked through, in order to be able to truly engage with the other culture. This experience can also be enriching, as it shows us what cultural beings we are, and opens our eyes to many of the complexities of cross cultural interactions.

“Why don’t you Balanda explain to us what are your plans for us?  What is the Government’s plan for us or the Shire’s or whoever’s plan for us? What do you have in mind for our future?  Someone come and explain it to me? We don’t know? You don’t talk to us.  You just change things. Where is the consultation, where is the negotiation.  We have our own parliaments; our own system of law.  You should be talking to us first.”

His speech demonstrated that Indigenous people in some remote communities feel like all the decisions about their community are being made for them.  Not only do they want to know what is going on, they feel they have a right to know and a right to be part of the decision making process.  Yolŋu have been demanding this right since the Balanda first imposed on them. The jurisdiction that their own systems of law gives them over the use of land and governance of their own society, means that decisions made by the Balanda systems without consulting the appropriate person in their own system are seen as imposing, controlling or illegitimate.  These are not naive thoughts.  Yolngu struggle to understand how our political system really works,  but they are fully aware that their land owners, leaders and elders have no say in the constant changes that complicate their lives, and determine how their land is used, despite a system that is supposed to support them.  The last year has been particularly difficult with the coercive tactics of the intervention, removing the permit system, imposing police forces and compulsory income management all without preliminary consultation.  On top of this the NT government disbanded the local community councils, forming them into super shires and so severely limiting local control of the townships.  The statement summarised above implies an anger and perhaps a fear of the Government and the ‘Balanda’ system’s plans for them.  This is evidence of the lack of information people have about the mainstream Australian system, leaving a big question mark about how the power that Balanda exerts over them will be used.  Just as this Yolngu man suggests, Indigenous communities are dependent on non-Indigenous personnel to keep them informed of the plans of Government and other organisations.  The lack of real consultation also means that Indigenous people are excluded from the debates.  Take for example the debate about bilingual education.  This year at the word of the Minister Indigenous languages are all but banned from being taught and used for teaching in the class room.  On such issues the media presents us with rarely more than a couple of Indigenous people who may or may not represent informed local opinion.  Meanwhile a whole range of non-Indigenous experts get to comment on the issue.   In addition, those Indigenous people that do get to speak in the media must do so in English, a foreign language to them, as a result they sound simple minded and shallow when their experience and meaning is deep. That Indigenous people are excluded from decisions that effect them is a real experience they face regularly ( hear about this directly from an remote Indigenous voice).   We must create ways to consult throughly using the local and traditional systems that the people are using.  Consultation takes time.  But taking that time to listen and include the peoples system is part of the solution to Indigenous problems because it allows for learning, it encourages, demonstrates respect and empowers Indigenous Australians with the opportunity to speak.   In fact, time for good consultation reduces many future complications; but that is another story…

Misunderstandings about literacy education on remote communities.

1. The children in remote and bilingual schools are not being taught English.
   

   Reality:The children on remote communities and in bilingual schools are taught English and grow up with the ability to speak English and write english.  The problems are that many have a limited vocabulary, poor written literacy and numeracy skills.

2. Bilingual schools are teaching in local languages
   

   Reality: Bilingual schools are unable to train, and thus do not have, specialist teachers who know the local Indigenous language. You would be forgiven for thinking it should be otherwise. They are provided with funding for only one linguist and the rest relys on the linguistic skill of locally employed indingeous teacher aids who recieve little additional training.

3. Children in remote communities are not being taught in English.
   

   Reality: English is the language spoken by almost all teachers in remote Indigenous classrooms already.  If there is any education using the local language, it is provided by Teacher Aids from the local community.  Conssequently at least 50% of education has been taught in English for the last 30 years.  Teaching in english has not help indingeous kids learn to speak or read english well.

4. Someone out there wants to stop English being taught.
   

   Reality: No one, including Indigenous groups, have argued against Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders being taught English. Aboriginal people have always asked to be taught English.

5. The forcing of teachers to use English in the classrooms is new policy that has not been tried before.
   

   Reality: This is not the first time a policy like this has been introduced.  The education department introduced a policy of English only education (100% of the time)  about 4-5 years ago. It did not apply to bilingual schools, but in a number of bilingual schools new priniciples encouraged the use of english in class rooms. Schools that currently use english only models did not perform better than the bilingual schools in recent tests.

6. The current thinking in the NT and around Australia seems to be that the best way to teach a new language is to force people to listen to it as much as possible.
   

   Reality: Such an approach only works if the student is immersed in the language and removed from peer groups that speak their first language That is, for immersion to be successful at teaching English, the kids must be taken away from their families and friends – Australia has been there done that, No thanks.

   Reality: We do not use this approach when we teach foreign languages to English first language speakers. Have you ever learnt French or Indonesian at school or university.  What do we do?  We teach the new language using the student’s first language, English.  Why? Because language acquisition is fastest if it is charted in the first language -  eg. djugu = contract, guyaŋa = think… you just learnt 2 new words in a new language using your first langauge.  Untill the student has a good grasp on the langauge we must use structured programs that teach English using the language the students already know.  Why don’t we do this in Indigenous schools?

7. Indigenous languages are not powerful or accurate enough to teach difficult English concepts.
   

   Reality: Indigenous languages are highly effective, accurate and contain all the meanings necessary to teach mathematical, scientific and humanitarian subjects. I know this because I teach economic literacy, governance and germ theory using an Indigenous language

8. We have to do something. We have tried almost everything.
   

   Reality: The one policy no government has ever implimented to solve low literacy and numeracy rates in Australian remote Indingenous schools is the training of EFL teachers to use local Indigenous languages to teach english and other subjects. This would enable true bilingual education rather than what actually happens today.

Considering that mainstream support, rather than research and local community knowledge, tend to drive government policy it is possible that these misunderstandings or assumptions are driving the current push to once again force english only environments on children in remote Indigenous schools.  I hope this clarifies the issue for you and helps you to explain some of the issues to others.