The paper was presented at a in the year . It focuses on the fact that, at that time, Pacific countries were starting to realise that their education systems still resembled their colonial forebears, despite most countries having been long . The concern was that crucial issues of access, equity, relevance, quality, efficiency and effectiveness appeared no better than they had done three decades earlier, in spite of significant in the sector over that period. Moreover, there has been little change to the way children are taught and assessed, with curricula, methods, languages and the style of management still those from many decades earlier.Puamau ties this problem back to the of colonialism – the enduring impacts of the colonial education system, supported both by and a new class of local who the system they have . The nature of education is such that familiar practices become so that people are no longer able to question them.Foreign aid – itself a component of neocolonialism – has had enormous influence in Pacific education over the years. While acknowledging many positive effects in terms of infrastructure and building, Puamau is critical both of the approaches taken by aid donors, and of the overall educational outcomes arising from aid. She asks whether Pacific people can their mindsets sufficiently to “truly own and control” their own education system.In response to questions, such as these, the Rethinking Pacific Education Initiative (RPEI) was developed by Professor Konai Thaman, Dr ‘Ana Taufe‘ulungaki and Dr Kabini Sanga. The vision was for a new approach to education to be developed and for Pacific people. A series of colloquia and conferences were held at the level, as well as some at the level (e.g. in Vanuatu). The ‘Tree of Opportunity’  was chosen to represent the way Pacific education must be  in Pacific ways of knowing, doing and being. The challenge was then to determine how donor agencies and Pacific educators could work together more effectively, so that the latter retained full over the agenda.The PRIDE project (Pacific Regional Initiatives for the Delivery of basic Education ) emerged from this movement. It differed from previous education projects in that it was designed and approved by Pacific people, rather than ; it is built on a firm cultural, linguistic and epistemological ; it is regional, collaborative and participatory; and it is committed to a more holistic and lifelong vision for education. However, there remains the need to reconceptualise certain aspects of PRIDE.Firstly, the between academic and non-academic aspects of education needs to be addressed, so that each of the pillars of ‘knowing’, ‘doing’, ‘being’ and ‘living together’ is adequately in the curriculum. The current between what most children experience outside and inside school needs to be removed by a more culturally inclusive curriculum. The spiritual dimension is also currently missing. Importantly, to be truly holistic, the education system must combine the best of and perspectives, so that curriculum is both grounded in solid foundations and responsive to the circumstances of the 21st century. Such an approach will guarantee cultural, social and survival.To achieve this vision requires a strong body of Pacific knowledge to develop, which first requires colonial mindsets and assumptions to be . Doing this requires asking questions about what exactly it means to know and do and be and live together as a Pacific Islander and, more importantly, how we know and understand these things. The Rethinking Pacific Education Initiative is grounded in these questions.

The final reading quiz of the course is a summary of the whole paper you have read. Complete each space in the following summary of the whole text, using ONE word only that you have read in the text. The paper was presented at a in the year . It focuses on the fact that, at that time, Pacific countries were starting to realise that their education systems still resembled their colonial forebears, despite most countries having been long . The concern was that crucial issues of access, equity, relevance, quality, efficiency and effectiveness appeared no better than they had done three decades earlier, in spite of significant in the sector over that period. Moreover, there has been little change to the way children are taught and assessed, with curricula, methods, languages and the style of management still those from many decades earlier.Puamau ties this problem back to the of colonialism – the enduring impacts of the colonial education system, supported both by and a new class of local who the system they have . The nature of education is such that familiar practices become so that people are no longer able to question them.Foreign aid – itself a component of neocolonialism – has had enormous influence in Pacific education over the years. While acknowledging many positive effects in terms of infrastructure and building, Puamau is critical both of the approaches taken by aid donors, and of the overall educational outcomes arising from aid. She asks whether Pacific people can their mindsets sufficiently to “truly own and control” their own education system.In response to questions, such as these, the Rethinking Pacific Education Initiative (RPEI) was developed by Professor Konai Thaman, Dr ‘Ana Taufe‘ulungaki and Dr Kabini Sanga. The vision was for a new approach to education to be developed and for Pacific people. A series of colloquia and conferences were held at the level, as well as some at the level (e.g. in Vanuatu). The ‘Tree of Opportunity’  was chosen to represent the way Pacific education must be  in Pacific ways of knowing, doing and being. The challenge was then to determine how donor agencies and Pacific educators could work together more effectively, so that the latter retained full over the agenda.The PRIDE project (Pacific Regional Initiatives for the Delivery of basic Education ) emerged from this movement. It differed from previous education projects in that it was designed and approved by Pacific people, rather than ; it is built on a firm cultural, linguistic and epistemological ; it is regional, collaborative and participatory; and it is committed to a more holistic and lifelong vision for education. However, there remains the need to reconceptualise certain aspects of PRIDE.Firstly, the between academic and non-academic aspects of education needs to be addressed, so that each of the pillars of ‘knowing’, ‘doing’, ‘being’ and ‘living together’ is adequately in the curriculum. The current between what most children experience outside and inside school needs to be removed by a more culturally inclusive curriculum. The spiritual dimension is also currently missing. Importantly, to be truly holistic, the education system must combine the best of and perspectives, so that curriculum is both grounded in solid foundations and responsive to the circumstances of the 21st century. Such an approach will guarantee cultural, social and survival.To achieve this vision requires a strong body of Pacific knowledge to develop, which first requires colonial mindsets and assumptions to be . Doing this requires asking questions about what exactly it means to know and do and be and live together as a Pacific Islander and, more importantly, how we know and understand these things. The Rethinking Pacific Education Initiative is grounded in these questions.

Why is it that the Philippine Educational System is being regarded as colonial?

Consider how colonial education still impacts the Philippines today."

“The essence of education, our traditional national aim, is to promote benevolence, justice, loyalty, filial piety, and knowledge and skill. But recently, people have been going to extremes by embracing a foreign civilization whose only values are fact-gathering and technical-skill. These values bring harm to our customary ways. We try to incorporate the best features of foreigners in order to achieve the lofty goals that the Meiji emperor desires. We have tried to abandon the undesirable practices of the past and learn from the outside world. But these policies have had a serious defect. They have reduced benevolence, justice, loyalty, and filial piety to secondary goals. If we indiscriminately imitate foreign ways, our people will forget the great principles governing the relations between ruler and subject and the relations between father and son.”Motoday Nagazane, adviser to the Meiji emperor, treatise written following a tour of Japanese schools with the emperor, 1879QuestionThe Meiji government’s “emulation of foreign ways” was most directly a response to which of the following nineteenth-century developments?ResponsesThe Qing Empire forcing Japan to accept tributary relationsThe Qing Empire forcing Japan to accept tributary relationsWestern states forcing Japan to open itself to tradeWestern states forcing Japan to open itself to tradeThe Qing Empire requiring Japan to make territorial concessions following the Sino-Japanese WarThe Qing Empire requiring Japan to make territorial concessions following the Sino-Japanese WarWestern states requiring Japan to accept Western advisers at the imperial court following the Opium Wars

“The essence of education, our traditional national aim, is to promote benevolence, justice, loyalty, filial piety, and knowledge and skill. But recently, people have been going to extremes by embracing a foreign civilization whose only values are fact-gathering and technical-skill. These values bring harm to our customary ways. We try to incorporate the best features of foreigners in order to achieve the lofty goals that the Meiji emperor desires. We have tried to abandon the undesirable practices of the past and learn from the outside world. But these policies have had a serious defect. They have reduced benevolence, justice, loyalty, and filial piety to secondary goals. If we indiscriminately imitate foreign ways, our people will forget the great principles governing the relations between ruler and subject and the relations between father and son.”Motoday Nagazane, adviser to the Meiji emperor, treatise written following a tour of Japanese schools with the emperor, 1879QuestionWhich of the following states in the nineteenth century experienced social tensions resulting from the introduction of foreign cultural influences in a way most similar to that described in the passage?ResponsesThe Ottoman EmpireThe Ottoman EmpireRussiaRussiaAustraliaAustraliaThe United States