There are 6 articles to read and to take notes on. These mainly focus on education, motivation, and psychology. Please ensure plagiarism free. Remember to follow all instructions well and carefully.

Keywords:queer theory; Māori epistemologies; race; school-based health education; New Zealand how does one think the relationship between power and obligation, rather than retreat into one’s identity? How does one inhabit these more awkward worlds of obligation and analyze the differentials of power shooting through them? The reflexive gesture seems radically insufficient for this analysis, for the task of this analysis isn’t to think about oneself or one’s personal history. It is to think about how to remain in the obligations that we find ourselves responding to and at the same time understand the arts of governance that disrupt and contain and redirect these immanent modes of obligation. (Di Fuscia,2010, p. 93) Introduction In this paper, we utilise queering as a mode of critique to interrogate the ways in which the politics of liberal recognition (Povinelli,2002,2006) problematically shape how health education in New Zealand (NZ) schools responds to its bicultural obligations.

We utilise queer theory’s orientations to problematise, confound and provoke notions of normalcy to engage with normative constructions of race as they are enacted in late *Corresponding author. Email:[email protected] Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education,2014 Vol. 35, No. 3, 393–404, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01596306.2014.888843 © 2014 Taylor & Francis liberalism. Research findings from a case study on religious and cultural differences in school-based sexuality education are drawn on to problematise how the‘cunning of recognition’(Povinelli,2002) shapes school-based health education’s responses to biculturalism. The deployment of the Māori concept ofhauorain both the intended and operational NZ Health curricula (Ministry of Education,1999) is critically engaged.

Findings from our study show that cultural, rather than epistemological, orientations underpin the deployment ofhauora, both in the development of classroom resources and in the operationalisation of the curriculum in the classroom.

Within the context of a Year 10 Health classroom, we argue, understandings ofhauora are domesticated (Smith,2012) through being aligned with individualistic notions of well-being that reflect the individual enterprise subject (Povinelli,2002). In practice, the obligations of both curriculum developers and teachers to value Māori ways of knowing within a bicultural nation are trumped by discourses of individual self-maximisation.

Problematically, the deployment ofhauoraat the levels of both the intended and the operational curricula privileges Eurocentric ways of knowing and devalues Māori epistemologies.

This article begins by exploring how queer theoretical approaches can critically engage with how‘liberal recognition’(Povinelli,2002) shapes the conceptualisation and enactment of health education in late liberalism. Following that, we consider how school-based health education works as a site of normative liberal constructions for healthy subjects. Next, we outline the methodologies underpinning the case study which sat within a broader research project exploring the extent to which sexuality education can engage with racial, religious and cultural difference. Then, we draw on data from the Kauri College case study to critically engage with how the utilisation of the Māori concept ofhauora, interpreted through liberal politics of recognition (Povinelli,2002, 2006), shapes normative understandings of subjectivity for young people. We close by considering the affordances of queer radical deconstructionism and what Povinelli (2011) defines as negative critique.

Problematising liberal recognition: putting queer theory to work on race in the Health education classroom A rich historical and contemporary tradition of queer theoretical work calls into question the desire for liberal recognition, and emphasises the application of queer theory to problematise a wide range of social normalisation (Sedgwick,1990; Warner,1993). In 1993, Michael Warner argued the need to‘make theory queer and not just have a theory about queers’when he advocated that: The preference for‘queer’represents, among other things, an aggressive impulse of generalization; it rejects a minoritizing logic of toleration or simple political interest- representation in favor of a more thorough resistance to regimes of the normal. (Warner, 1993, p. xxvi) In more recent times, Eng, Halberstam, and Muñoz (2005) and others (Halberstam,2008; Halley & Parker,2007) have built on the potential of Warner’s(1993) queer radical deconstructionism to oppose what they see as the assimilationist drive of liberal queer politics. Noting that normalising social processes are not confined to sexuality, Eng et al.

(2005) argue that social classifications, such as gender, race and nationality, are constituted by a‘governing logic’(2005, p. 4) and require an urgent epistemological 394K. Quinlivanet al. intervention through queer theory. Interrogating the homonormative whiteness of much liberal queer scholarship (Halberstam,2005; Perez,2005), Eng et al. (2005) contends an important priority: At such a historical juncture, it is crucial to insist yet again on the capacity of queer studies to mobilize a broad social critique of race, gender, class, nationality and religion, as well as sexuality. (2005,p.4) Recent scholarship has taken up this call and explored the affordances of bringing queer theory together with a range of diverse theoretical frameworks, including anthropology, postcolonial theory, native studies, psychoanalysis, history and cultural studies, to utilise queer theory as a mode of critique that moves beyond the queer subject (Hawley,2001; Smith,2010). The production of normative constructions of race, sexualities and nationalisms within the macro-locus of late liberalism is a particular focus of this work (Ahmed,2010; Alexander,2005,2007; Berlant,1997,2011; Cruz-Malave & Manalan- san,2002; Gopinath,2005; Povinelli,2006; Puar,2007). Recent queer scholarship in education has explored the ways in which the production of sexualised, raced, gendered and classed subjectivities connect to broader national and transnational citizenship assemblages (Alexander,2007; Coloma,2006; Crowley & Rasmussen,2010; Meiners & Quinn,2010; Sykes,2011). Within educational contexts, Talburt (2009), Talburt and Rasmussen (2010) and others (Sykes,2011) acknowledge the challenges facing queer schooling research in untangling itself from the impossible ideals of liberalism. They advocate the usefulness of queer theory in interrogating the wily ways in which late liberalism is shaping normative subjectivities. This article speaks to a desire to move beyond the whiteness of queer theory (Halberstam,2005; Perez,2005) by critically queering normative liberal constructions of race in school-based health education. We argue that the liberal discourses of recognition underpinning the use of the Māori notion ofhauorain the Health and Physical Education in the NZ Curriculum (HPENZC; Ministry of Education,1999) shape understandings of race in ways that re-instantiate and privilege normative European ways of knowing.

Working within remote Australian indigenous communities, anthropologist Elizabeth Povinelli’s work shows how the liberal politics of recognition can arise within an ethos of multiculturalism that is ethically committed to engaging with difference. However, the form and effects of that recognition can impact negatively on lived indigenous lifeworlds.

Povinelli (2002,2006,2011) traces how the liberal politics of recognition are underpinned by two dominant interrelated discursive forms of liberal discipline: the autological subject and the genealogical society. The autological subject refers to the multiple discourses and practices which invoke the autonomous and self-determining subject. The genealogical subject relates to discourses and practices which operate as constraints on the self-authorising subject through construing the subject as bound by obligations of social constraints and kinship inheritances. Povinelli argues that within late liberal nation states, self-making is always enclosed within these two discursive grids which, while appearing to value difference actually privileges normativity in ways: that animate and enflesh love, sociality and bodies, that operate as strategic manoeuvres of power whose purpose or result is to distribute life, goods, and values across social space, and that contribute to the hardiness of liberalism as a normative horizon. (2007, p. 570) It is the tensions between the autological subject and the genealogical society that, we argue, are evident in the utilisation of the Māori concept ofhauora, in the resources and Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education395 their operationalisation in the Year 10 Health classroom at Kauri College. Despite the best intentions of non-Māori to meet its obligations as a bicultural nation by valuing Māori epistemologies in policy and practice–the genealogical society, these aspirations are trumped by the dominance of‘the fantasy of self-authorising freedom’(Povinelli, cited in Di Fuscia,2010, p. 91) that characterises the autological subject. Liberal discourses of recognition underpinning the use of the Māori notion ofhauorain HPENZC (Ministry of Education,1999) actually shape understandings of race in ways that re-instantiate and privilege normative European ways of knowing.

The normative utilisation ofhauorain the Health curriculum can be seen as an attempt to craft healthy and happy citizens, particularly for the‘at risk’groups of low socio- economic status and Māori young women, who are framed as a problem that can be remedied through education in order to provide healthier life outcomes for these ‘disadvantaged’groups (New Zealand Families Commission,2012). However, the notion ofhauoraalso represents a genuine desire on the part of curriculum developers and policy analysts to demonstrate a respect for, and valuing of, Māori world views (Tasker, 2004). A close examination of the nature of the recognition that is made available through the deployment ofhauoraat the levels of both the intended and operational curricula raises some problematic questions.

Next, we situate the Kauri College case study within the broader research project and outline the methodological approaches drawn on in the case study.

Research methodologies The NZ Kauri College project was one of the four case studies undertaken in a two-year Australian Research Council Discovery Project Study (2011–2012) investigating how racial, cultural and religious diversities in sexuality education are addressed in two Australian and two NZ public schools (Rasmussen, Sanjakdar, Aspin, Allen, & Quinlivan,2011). Case studies were undertaken with sexuality education teachers and 13- to 14-year-old students in two schools in the northern suburbs of Melbourne, Victoria, and in two suburban schools in the North and South Island of Aotearoa/NZ. The research team was comprised of two NZ and three Australian researchers of diverse religions, ethnicities and sexualities, one of whom is Māori.

Kauri College is a decile 3, 1ethnically diverse suburban South Island high school. The demographic make-up of the school is NZ European/Pākehā 2(55%), Māori (30%), Pasifika (10%), Asian (3%) and Other Ethnicities (2%). We worked with nine (four young women and five young men) students in the high-ability Years 9 and 10 Health class representing a range of diverse racial and cultural backgrounds. Of the four young women, one was identified demographically as Māori and Christian, one as Pasifika and Māori, one as Chinese, and one as NZ European/ Irish. Of the five young men, three were identified demographically as Māori and two as NZ European.

3Preliminary individual face-to-face video-recorded interviews and regular focus groups were conducted with the students. Video-recorded participant observations of Sexuality Education units in the students’Health classes were undertaken in 2011 (5) and in 2012 (13). Artefacts in the form of classroom resources and students’notes and drawings were collected as data.

Two sets of fieldnotes were written by the researcher in 2011 (5) and in 2012 (13).

Informed ethical consent was gained from the students and the teacher participating in the case study. Students have provided feedback on the findings to date. Pseudonyms have been used to protect the confidentiality of the students, teacher and school. 396K. Quinlivanet al. Next we draw on queering as a mode of critique to problematise the normative ways in which the liberal politics of recognition shape understandings of subjectivity for young people in the Kauri College Health classroom.

The politics of liberal recognition: deployinghauorain the health and physical education-intended curriculum In this section, we show the ways in which the deployment ofhauorain both the intended (planned) and operational (in practice) curricula is an instance of liberal recognition (Povinelli,2002), which engages with Māori world views in ways that legitimate normative Eurocentric ways of knowing (Smith,2012; Penetito,2010).

The utilisation of the Māori concept ofhauorain the HPENZC document (Ministry of Education,1999) drew on the previous use ofhauorawithin the health sector as representing a Māori perspective of health and well-being (Heaton,2011). It was used in the HPENZC document to define the essential learning area of health and physical well- being, 4and informs the development and use of classroom–student resources for learning abouthauorain the classroom. The concept ofhauorawas utilised in both the health and education sectors to demonstrate NZ’s obligation as a bicultural nation to value Māori ways of knowing, and create a space for Māori voice within educational policy (Heaton, 2011). Ross (2001) explains thathauorawas chosen as a Māori concept in the development of the HPENZC because it was seen to best equate with the English notion of well-being. Equatinghauorawith well-being in the curriculum document seriously debases the epistemological and etymological power and depth of the concept (Heaton, 2011; Ross,2001; Salter,2000). While on one hand the use ofhauoracan be seen to reflect a space within curricula for a Māori voice, its equation with well-being, as can be seen in bothFigures 1and2, privileges dominant Eurocentric ways of knowing through placing the dominant culture and language at the centre of understandings (Heaton, 2011). The Year 10 title page of thehauoraunit (Figure 1) depicts European symbols of the heart and ubiquitous smiley faces to instantiate a relentless neoliberal preoccupation with happiness and health (Ahmed,2010, Berlant,2011), although the slightly schizoid eyes provide a rather disturbing counterbalance! The use of wordhauoraor any Māori iconography is conspicuously absent.

The equation ofhauorawith well-being also bears little relation to Māori thought.

Heaton (2011) and others (Salter,2000; Ross,2001) note thathauorais a significant and complex cosmological concept that encompasses the animation of life itself, and also relates to metaphysical understandings of ancestry in Whakapapa and Māori creation stories. The‘domestication’(Smith,2012)ofhauorais also evident in the alignment of hauorawith Durie’s(1994) Te Whare Tapa Wha model, a visual model of which is included in the student resources. The Te Whare Tapa Wha model equateshauorawith a four-sided wharenui, 5including the dimensions of taha wairua, taha hinengaro, taha tinana and taha whanau. 6These four concepts are equated with Eurocentric under- standings of spiritual, mental and emotional, physical, and social well-being in ways which pay little attention to the Māori meanings of those concepts (Heaton,2011; Ross, 2001; Salter,2000).

The adoption of these concepts in the use of Year 10 Health classroom resources at Kauri College instantiates understandings of the relationship betweenhauoraand the dimensions of Te Whare Tapa Wha deployed in the HPENZC. Despite the best intentions of the curriculum and classroom resource developers to legitimate Māori epistemologies, Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education397 equating understandings ofhauorawith normative Eurocentric understandings legit- imates the Pākehānorm and subjugates Māori ways of knowing.

Tensions between the two intertwined modes of governance that Povinelli identifies as features of liberal recognition–the autological subject and the genealogical society (Povinelli,2002,2006)–also manifest themselves in the classroom resource designed to enable students to engage with one of the four dimensions ofhauora(Figure 2). The resource that the Year 10 Health class uses to understand taha wairua uses the European notion of spirituality to understand the concept, displacing Māori understandings and reiterating Eurocentric understandings of spiritual well-being. The puzzled and question- ing‘everyman’stick figure seems to suggest that the dimension of taha wairua and meaning ofhauoraare perhaps so obtuse as to need explaining. Almost all the definitions invoke the autonomous and self-determining subject, rather than Māori understandings of interdependence and collective responsibility (Bishop,2012; MacFarlane,2004). The normalising understandings of spirituality reify discourses of the autological subject and denigrate those of the genealogical society, while also failing to do justice to the deep and complex ways in which taha wairua is fundamental to Mātauranga Māori (Erueti & Hapeta,2011).

TheHauoratest (Figure 3) also reflects the dominant normative discourses of the autological subject over those of the genealogical society.Hauorais seen in terms of individual well-being, rather than aligned with Māori ontological notions of interrelation- ality and interdependence such as Whanaungatanga, Manaakitanga and Kotahitanga 7 Figure 1.Hauorastudent resource title page.

398K. Quinlivanet al. (MacFarlane,2004). As with the other resources, the dimensions ofhauoraare filtered through normative Eurocentric understandings which privilege those epistemologies.

Defining and explaining the content ofhauorain ways that align with normative European definitions take precedence over considering the implications ofhauora, not only for the individual, but for the broader interrelational contexts that they are situated within. The test reflects a broader liberal facts-based risk approach to health education– the belief that providing students with rational‘facts’will enable them to make the right (rather than the wrong) decisions (Lesko,2010). Getting the facts‘right’takes precedence over a deeper engagement with the more nuanced interpersonal affective demands of the Figure 2. What is spirituality?Hauorastudent resource. YEAR 9/10 HEALTH EDUCATION HAUORA PRE/POST TEST Name:

1. Give a definition of Hauora.

2. Name the four dimensions of Hauora.

3. How could moving to a new school affect your social well-being?

4. How could smoking affect your social well-being?

5. How could the use of alcohol affect your physical well-being?

6. When we speak of Hauora, we speak of a house. Explain why.

7. What is spiritual well-being?

8. Give a definition for the word whanau.

9. Name two characteristics of mental/emotional well-being. Figure 3.Hauorapre-/post-test. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education399 genealogical society (Povinelli,2002)–the interrelational, holistic potentialhauora might offer in terms of conceptualising subjectivities beyond individualism for students (Erueti & Hapeta,2011).

Despite well-intentioned attempts to engage with Māori epistemologies in developing the classroom resources, cunning acts of liberal recognition (Povinelli,2002) equate indigenous concepts with Eurocentric ways of knowing, in effect privileging normative whiteness, and undermining Māori ways of knowing.

While the adoption and utilisation of the concept ofhauorain the development of the HPENZC has been critiqued (Salter,2000), less attention has been paid to what happens in the classroom when students and their teachers learn together to understand and make meaning ofhauorain health education (Fitzpatrick,2005). We have argued here that the taking of thehauorapost-test within the context of the competitive Year 10‘high ability’ Health class exacerbates the demand for the students to produce themselves as autological subjects while simultaneously reducing the significance ofhauora.

The limitations of liberal recognition: crafting normative subjectivities in the Health classroom In this section, we explore the ways in which liberal recognition through the utilisation of the Māori concept of hauora, while appearing to value indigenous ways of knowing, actually instantiates normative subjectivities in a‘high ability’health classroom. We show how two interrelated discursive forms of liberal discipline, the autological subject and the genealogical society (Povinelli,2002,2006), operate in classroom practices to privilege normalising Eurocentric understandings of well-being.

The physical environment of the classroom reflects the key focus that notion ofhauora has had on the development of the HPENZC document, and the development of classroom resources that we have previously discussed.Hauoraand its features as signified by Durie’s(1994) Te Whare Tapa Wha model are prominently displayed around the walls of the classroom, both as definitions and visual posters illustratinghauoraand its four dimensions of well-being: taha wairua, taha hinengaro, taha tinana and taha whanau as a wharenui. Classroom observations note that they are frequently looked at by students when the teacher asks them to define and identify the dimensions ofhauora.

The ways in which Māori concepts and iconography are utilised in the classroom, as liberal forms of recognition (Povinelli,2002,2006), have been identified by NZ Māori educational academics as problematic (Bishop,2012; Cooper,2012; Penetito,2010; Smith,2012). They note that teachers’understandings of culturally responsive learning contexts are underpinned by an understanding of culture as an external commodity, which they can import into the classroom in order to meet students’ needs. However, as Bishop (2012) points out, incorporating iconography, pronouncing Māori words correctly and incorporating Māori examples into lessons leaves Eurocentric epistemologies intact and fails to challenge their dominance (Cooper,2012). This article builds on this existing research to consider utilising a queer critique that attends to the ways in whichhauorais realised in the health classroom which one of the authors, Quinlivan, observed.

Specifically, this critique is inspired by Povinelli’s queering of how particular notions of kinship are intrinsic to the production of both the autological subject and the genealogical society.Haoura, as taught in the classroom observed by Quinlivan, provides no future for young people beyond the autological subject. 400K. Quinlivanet al. The dominant normative forms of liberal recognition shaping learning abouthauorain the classroom resources were exacerbated by the culture of individual self- maximisation and competition actively displayed and encouraged in the‘high ability’Year 10 Health class. This is underpinned and supported by the New Zealand Ministry of Education’s relentless neoliberal emphasis on raising academic achievement, especially for‘low performing’Māori and Pasifika students (Ministry of Education,2007). The transcript below of students talking of thehauorapost-test shows the extent to which the powerful and alluring discourses of the autological subject drove students self-making and a sense of the teacher’s competency:

[Unlike the usually noisy classroom, there is total silence while students do the test] Teacher: [Emphatically] Remember how intelligent you guys are so use your whole brain… [They swap their tests to mark each others’] Teacher: The first thing if you put your name you get a point, can I say it doesn’t matter as long as I can read it.

Aroha: [Demandinglyto Matiu]: Mark it neatly!… Teacher: [Commandingly] When we speak ofHauorawe think of a house, why?

Another student: The four dimensions… April [Triumphantlyto Huia]: Exactly! and that’s what you wrote!

Teacher: [Commandingly] What is spiritual? Your beliefs, your values, your goals and your directions in life?

Teacher: What is a definition ofwhānau?–Your family and friends… Teacher: Anything to do with thoughts and feelings… Matiu: It’s not out of 15, it’s 14!

[Incensed] Miss, you said number 4 is one mark!

Aroha: [Threateninglyto Matiu]: Don’t muck it up, Matiu, don’t make it look ugly!

[The teacher records all the students’marks. The students are all asking one another what mark they got] Graeme changes his mark on his sheet when he gets it back.

Aroha [To Graeme]: She’s gonna check it now!… Matiu: [Disbelievinglyto the teacher]: You said 15 but it was 13!

Teacher: Every single person improved!

[Then she reads out how much they improved by] It’s important to listen to your peers and see how much they improved… [One student gets a pencil for improving the most.] [Participant observation Year 10 Health Classroom, 29 March 2012] In addition to dominant Eurocentric knowledge defininghauoraand its dimensions, any engagement with the concept is limited by a fact-based orientation to knowledge that revolves around getting the answers correct (Lesko,2010). Both the students and the teacher in the Health class value liberal individualism–the enterprising autological subject. And the stakes are high–intense feelings of concentration, urgency, competition and anxiety permeated the room; the students relentlessly policed themselves and each other in order to produce themselves as academic winners.

The incident provides an illustration of the extent to which, despite the best intentions of curriculum developers and policy-makers to engage with the obligations of the genealogical society, discourses of the autological subject dominate (Povinelli,2002,2006). In the culture of this‘high ability’classroom, getting the right answer appears to be more important than engaging substantively with Māori epistemologies and ontologies and notions of kinship, obligation and care. Despite the lip service being paid to Māori ways of knowing, students know that enacting the individualistic competitive and academically successful‘enterprise subject’is the measure of success in the classroom in this low decile school.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education401 Conclusion In this article, we have drawn on queer theory’s propensity to move beyond heteronormativity and the queer subject to critically engage with the politics of race as a site of social normalisation (Eng et al.,2005). Recognising the homonormative whiteness of much queer scholarship (Perez,2005), our analysis has critically interrogated the ways in which the politics of liberal recognition (Povinelli,2002, 2006) problematically shape normative constructions of raced subjects within the intended and operational Health curricula. While appearing to legitimate indigenous knowledge, the deployment ofhauorain the Kauri College Health class paradoxically reiterates Eurocentric epistemologies and marginalises Māori ways of knowing. The analysis speaks to the tensions between two intertwined but antithetical discourses of belonging which shape how Health education can engage with racial difference: the autological subject and the genealogical society (Povinelli,2002,2006). We contend that it is all but impossible to engage with the creation of diverse subjects outside the demands of liberal recognition. Despite the best intentions of non-Māori to engage with Māori epistemologies in policy and practice, in conceptualisation and enactment they can be dominated by individualistic notions of well-being that reflect the autological enterprise subject. The‘cunning politic’of recognition (Povinelli,2002), while appearing to legitimate Māori epistemologies and ontologies, operates in ways that reproduce rather than disrupt networks of power.

In conclusion, we feel that it is important to consider what might be generative in drawing on queering as a mode of critique to interrogate the liberal politics of race in school-based Health education. In the face of local and global contexts characterised by growing social inequalities and injustice, it is easy to dismiss the role that queer theory can play in critiquing a wide range of social normalisation, as an empty gesture which curtails, rather than enables, change. Povinelli (2011), Cruz-Malave and Manalansan (2002), and others (Cooper,2012; Jones & Jenkins,2007) disagree. They emphasise the role that opening up, interrupting and interrogating normative logics play, in providing the preconditions for alternative imaginaries. Povinelli (2011, p. 191), in outlining an ‘ethics of negative critique’, notes that critical interrogation is neither neutral nor disinterested. She maintains that directing her critique at the architects of liberal governance, and arguing‘not this’, acts positively in troubling taken for granted liberal moves to engage with difference. Such approaches, she notes, do not preclude other actions from being taken.

Attempting to disrupt the normative cultures of whiteness within educational institutions whose modus operandi is normativity requires an analysis that goes beyond feeling grateful for liberal white forms of inclusion. A critical engagement with the implications of the recognition that is being afforded is necessary. Queering as a mode of critique provides an analysis that critically engages with the wily politics of liberal recognition, enabling a thoughtful and considered negotiation of the complexities of engaging with difference within formal educational contexts.

Notes 1. In NZ, schools are ranked from deciles 1 to 10 according to the socio-economic status (SES) of the community from which the young people are drawn, with 1 being the lowest. Kauri College is a decile 3 school, indicating that it is situated within a low SES community.

2. Pākehāis the term for a New Zealander of European descent.

402K. Quinlivanet al. 3. While the students were identified demographically in these ways, most of them felt ambivalent about personally identifying themselves as belonging to those racial groups.

4. The separation of health and physical well-being reflects European rather than indigenous epistemologies (Heaton,2011).

5. Māori meeting house.

6. To read more about these terms in the context of the NZ curriculum see:http://health.tki.org.nz/ Teaching-in-HPE/Curriculum-statement/Underlying-concepts/Well-being-hauora.

7. Whanaungatanga: building relationships; manaakitanga: an ethic of caring; and kotahitanga: an ethic of bonding (MacFarlane,2004).

References Ahmed, S. (2010).The promise of happiness. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Alexander, J. (2005).Pedagogies of crossing: Meditations on feminism, sexual politics, memory, and the sacred. London: Duke University Press.

Alexander, B. K. (2007). Queer(y)ing the postcolonial through the West(ern). In N. Denzin, Y. Lincoln, & L. Tuhiwai-Smith (Eds.),Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 105–133). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Berlant, L. (1997).The queen of America goes to Washington City: Essays on sex and citizenship.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Berlant, L. (2011).Cruel optimism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Bishop, R. (2012). Pretty difficult: Implementing Kaupapa Māori theory in English-medium secondary schools.New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies,47(2), 38–50.

Coloma, R. S. (2006). Putting queer to work: Examining empire and education.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,19, 639–657. doi:10.1080/09518390600886437 Cooper, G. (2012). Kaupapa Māori research: Epistemic wilderness as freedom?New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies,47(2), 64–73.

Crowley, V., & Rasmussen, M. L. (2010). After dark in the antipodes: Pedagogy, place and queer phenomenology.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,23(1), 15–32.

doi:10.1080/09518390903447143 Cruz-Malave, A., & Manalansan M. (2002). Introduction: Dissident sexualities/alternative globalisms. In A. Cruz-Malave & M. Manalansan (Eds.),Queer globalisations: Citizenship and the afterlife of colonialism(pp. 1–19). New York: New York University Press.

Di Fuscia, T. (2010). Shapes of freedom: An interview with Elizabeth A. Povinelli.Altérités,7(1), 88–98.

Durie, M. (1994).Whaiora: Māori health development. Auckland: Oxford University Press.

Eng, D., Halberstam, J., & Muñoz, J. E. (2005). Introduction. What’s queer about Queer Studies now? In D. Eng, J. Halberstam, & J. Muñoz (Eds.),Social Text,23(3–4), 1–12.

Erueti, B., & Hapeta, J. (2011). Ko Hauora raua ko Te Ao Kori: He Whānau Kotahi Holisticwell- beingand the world of Māori movement: One family. In S. Brown (Ed.),Issues and controversies in physical education: Policy, power and pedagogy (pp. 125–136). Auckland:

Pearson New Zealand.

Fitzpatrick, K. (2005). Hauora and physical education in New Zealand: The perspectives of students.Waikato Journal of Education,11(2), 37–48.

Gopinath, G. (2005).Impossible desires: Queer diasporas and South Asian public cultures.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Halberstam, J. (2005). Shame and white gay masculinity. In D. Eng, J. Halberstam, & J. Muñoz (Eds.),What’s queer about queer studies now? Social Text,23, 219–234.

Halberstam, J. (2008). The anti-social turn in Queer Studies.Graduate Journal of Social Science,5, 140–156.

Halley, J., & Parker, A. (2007). Introduction: After sex? On writing since queer theory.South Atlantic Quarterly,106, 421–432. doi:10.1215/00382876-2007-001 Hawley, J. C (2001). Introduction. In J. Hawley (Ed.),Post-colonial queer: Theoretical intersections(pp. 1–18). Albany: State University of New York Press.

Heaton, S. (2011). The co-opting of‘hauora’into curricula.Curriculum Matters,7,99–117.

Retrieved from September 27, 2013,http://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn = 709725170648724;res = IELHSS> ISSN: 1177-1828. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education403 Jones, A., & Jenkins, K. (2007). Rethinking collaboration: Working the indigene colonizer hyphen.

In N. Denzin, Y. Lincoln, & L. Tuhiwai-Smith (Eds.),Handbook of critical and Indigenous methodologies(pp. 471–485). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Lesko, N. (2010). Feeling abstinent? Feeling comprehensive? Touching the affects of sexuality curricula.Sex Education,10, 281–297. doi:10.1080/14681811.2010.491633 MacFarlane, A. (2004).Kia hiwa ra! Listen to culture: Māori students’plea to educators.

Wellington: NZCER Press.

Meiners, E. R., & Quinn, T. M. (2010). Doing and feeling research in public: Queer organizing for public education and justice.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,23, 147– 164. doi:10.1080/09518390903107507 Ministry of Education. (1999).Health and physical education in the New Zealand curriculum.

Wellington: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2007).The New Zealand curriculum. Wellington: Author.

New Zealand Families Commission. (2012).Teenage pregnancy and parenting in New Zealand.

Retrieved fromhttp://www.familiescommission.org.nz/sites/default/files/downloads/teenage- parenting-poster.pdf Penetito, W. (2010).What’sMāori about Māori education? The struggle for a meaningful context.

Wellington: Victoria University Press.

Perez, H. (2005). You can have my brown body and eat it, too! In D. Eng, J. Halberstam, & J. Muñoz (Eds.),What’s queer about queer studies now? Social text,23, 171–191.

Povinelli, E. (2002).The cunning of recognition: Indigenous alterities and the making of Australian multiculturalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Povinelli, E. (2006).The empire of love: Toward a theory of intimacy, geneology, and carnality.

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Povinelli, E. A. (2007). Disturbing sexuality.South Atlantic Quarterly,106, 565–576. doi:10.1215/ 00382876-2007-015 Povinelli, E. (2011).Economies of abandonment: Social belonging and endurance in late liberalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Puar, J. (2007).Terrorist assemblages: Homonationalism in queer times. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Rasmussen, M. L., Sanjakdar, F., Aspin, C., Allen, L., & Quinlivan, K. (2011).Sexuality education in Australia and New Zealand: Responding to religious and cultural difference. Australian Research Council Discovery Grant, 2011–2012. Melbourne: Australian Research Council.

Ross, B. (2001). Visions and phantoms.Journal of Physical Education New Zealand, 34(1), 3–14.

Salter, G. (2000). Marginalising indigenous knowledge in teaching physical education: The sanitising of Hauora (wellbeing) in the new HPE curriculum.Journal of Physical Education New Zealand,33(1), 5–13.

Sedgwick, E. (1990).Epistemology of the closet. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Smith, A. (2010). Queer theory and Native Studies: The heteronormativity of settler colonialism.

GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies,16(1–2), 42–68.

Smith, G. (2012). Kaupapa Māori: The dangers of domestication.New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies,47(2), 10–20.

Sykes, H. (2011). Hetero and homonormativity: Critical literacy, citizenship education, and queer theory.Curriculum Inquiry,41, 419–432. doi:10.1111/j.1467-873X.2011.00561.x Talburt, S. (2009). Toys, pleasure and the future. In R. De Palma & E. Atkinson (Eds.), Interrogating heteronormativity in primary schools(pp. 85–94). Stoke-on-Trent: Trentham Books.

Talburt, S., & Rasmussen, M. L. (2010).‘After queer’tendencies in queer research.International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education,23(1), 1–14. doi:10.1080/09518390903447184 Tasker, G. (2004). Health education: Contributing to a just society through curriculum change. In A.

O’Neill, J. Clark, & R. Openshaw (Eds.),Reshaping culture knowledge and learning? Policy and content in the New Zealand curriculum framework(pp. 203–224). Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.

Warner, M. (1993).Fear of a queer planet: Queer politics and social theory. Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press. 404K. Quinlivanet al.