“Ko te manu kai i te miro, nona te ngahere;
Ko te manu kai i te matauranga, nona te ao.
The bird that feeds on the miro berry, his is the forest;
The bird that feeds on knowledge, his is the world.”

The objective of the essay is to give context and validation to the vital role of the Whare Wananga in the survival of our culture and language through continuing education from both a traditional and contemporary perspective.

The Whare Wananga has generally been described as a house of learning, although recently it has become associated with tertiary education.
Traditionally it was a place where practical skills were taught, based on strongly held esoteric principals moral codes and strict adherence to prescribed rituals, the closest comparative in western institutions is that of a medieval monastery.

There is however some disagreement Elsdon Best (1992) and Johannes Anderson (1948) on wether the Whare was actually a physical entity. Best declared that there were no permanent buildings dedicated to teaching and learning, and he believed that the word ‘whare’ was figurative, where others Anderson (1948), Best (1992), Mitchell (1972)
Tregar (1904), and Makareri (Maggie Papkura,1938) give physical descriptions of the Whare Wananga and therefore argue the existence of buildings, reserved for teaching and learning, however in the context of this assignment there is no real relevance as to wether it’s existence was physical or figurative, as it is the actual existence and purpose of the Whare Wananga that has sustained the survival of our language and culture and will preserve it in the future .

To give context to the traditional role of the Whare Wananga, we must explore Akonga Maori: Ako is a traditional Maori concept that can be translated as Maori pedagogy. In tradition-based Maori society, ako was an educative process that was integral in the creation, conceptualisation, transmission and articulation of Maori knowledge. More recently the term ako has appeared in some of the New Zealand educational literature as Maori and other educators alike, seek to improve the disparities in Maori academic achievement.
The difficulty in attempting a description of ako is that there is no clear separation between ako and other Maori cultural concepts. Ako was determined by and dependent on Maori epistemologies, values, knowledge and constructions of the world. In a description of ako as a Maori educational framework, Pere states “[traditional] institutions do not stand in isolation, but actually merge into each other” (1990:5). It was in the interconnections and fusion of Maori cultural notions that furnished ako with meaning. To fully describe ako would require explanations of an enormous array of other concepts.
Apart from the more formal teaching and learning of esoteric and sacred knowledge that took place between tohunga (experts) and tauira (students) within the Whare Wananga, ako was not bound by age, gender or social status in tradition-based Maori society. In the article “Traditional Maori Education”, Linda Tuhiwai Smith and Graham Hingangaroa Smith (1993) provide insight into the ways in which pre-colonial education has been documented. The article affirms the existence of a traditional functional system of ‘education’, and outlines some of the key concepts and methods used in the education process. This article critiques works by early ethnographers such as Best, Buck and Smith as being overly descriptive (i.e. The generalisation from the observation of single incidents), overly interpretative (the use of Pakeha concepts to describe Maori practices) and ethnocentric. The authors argue that the most productive sources of information have been sourced from manuscripts and personal descriptions of Maori themselves, such as the writings of Nepia Pahuhu, Te Matorohanga and Koneke. Smith and Smith (ibid.) view ‘akonga’ as being both informal and formal. In the informal learning and teaching process, important life skills related to survival were taught through everyday living and activities. Linda Tuhiwai Smith (1986) indicates that knowledge was considered tapu and therefore sanctions were put in place that ensured it was protected, used appropriately and transmitted with accuracy. This too was a part of the wider belief that knowledge served the interests of the collective. Formal akonga refers to controlled or restricted knowledge. These forms of knowledge were guarded by tikanga and restricted by tapu (sacredness). This form of knowledge was passed on through whare wananga and separated into two distinct forms, Te kauae runga and Te kauae raro (These forms are discussed later in the review in more depth).
Hirini Moko Mead (2003) discusses traditional methods and ideas of learning, with particular emphasis on wananga, or houses of learning. The article provides a base understanding for how learning and teaching was carried out in traditional Maori society. He describes that both women and men were separated into different houses of learning. The whanau (the extended family) as a whole played an integral part in the education of the child by observing children’s talents, encouraging learning and in some circumstances choosing specialist education for those children with exceptional skills or traits.
A number of authors indicate that the early education of Maori children was couched within the structure of `whanaungatanga' (relationships and connections between whanau) (Te Rangi Hiroa 1949, Makareti 1986, Hohepa 1990, Ka'ai 1990, Pere 1991, Royal-Tangaere 1992). Particular members of the whanau were selected as kaitiaki (guardians) of some forms of knowledge. For the child the earliest "personal instruction" was received from their tipuna (grandparents), this was made possible due to the whanau living arrangements (Te Rangi Hiroa 1949). The child lived within an environment that embraced at least three generations and was exposed to a lifestyle that allowed for their nurturing and education from their elders. Makareti (1986) describes how children were taught all aspects of life through living and sleeping with their parents, grandparents, granduncles through whom they would learn of folk-lore, traditions, legends, whakapapa (genealogical connections),
Kaupapa Maori is more closely associated with contemporary times, according to Tuakana Nepe (1991) Kaupapa Maori derives from distinctive cultural epistemological and metaphysical foundations. Kaupapa Maori is not new, but has its foundations that reach well beyond the colonisation of these lands. As Leonie Pihama (1993) noted that in the New Zealand context, distinctive modes of theorising have emerged, from Maori communities, which have as a common element the validation of Te Reo and Tikanga Maori. These movements have been framed under a range of broad terms, ‘Tino rangatiratanga’, ‘Maori Sovereignty’, ‘Maori perspectives’, and ‘Kaupapa Maori’. These modes of analysis and theory are by no means contemporary phenomena. Since colonisation Maori people have been actively asserting their positioning in this land as Tangata Whenua. Inherent in these struggles has been an ongoing demand for the recognition and legitimation of Te Reo Maori and Tikanga.
The marginalisation of Maori, has meant the privileging of Pakeha Knowledge, over that of Maori, which originates from the colonisation process, and the establishment of colonial institutions, including our education system.
In more recent times of course we have seen an emergence of desire by Maori to rectify this imbalance, part of that progress has seen contemporary expressions of Kaupapa Maori develope Their development and ongoing survival has been driven by Maori. Te Kohanga Reo (Immersion Maori Language Nests) and Kura Kaupapa Maori (Immersion Maori Language Primary Schools) are two well known examples. Te Kohanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa Maori developed as resistance to a mainstream Pakeha centered system that failed to address key needs of Maori. As a founding member of Kura Kaupapa Maori in Tamaki Makaurau (Auckland Isthmus), Graham Hingangaroa Smith has argued that Kura Kaupapa Maori is a successful intervention for Maori. One of the key elements is that the development originated from and is driven by Maori. Within Kura Kaupapa Maori key features are consistently evident.
Contemporary expressions of Kaupapa Maori have been summarised by Graham Hingangaroa Smith (1990:100) in the following way:
A Kaupapa Maori base (Maori philosophy and principles) i.e. local theoretical positioning related to being Maori, such a position presupposes that:
• the validity and legitimacy of Maori is taken for granted
• the survival and revival of Maori language and culture is imperative
• the struggle for autonomy over our own cultural well-being, and over our own lives is vital to Maori survival.
These features speak not to content per se, but to Maori aspirations, philosophies, processes and pedagogies, which are consistently found within successful Maori interventions. The term intervention is used in this sense to relate to the need, to bring about specific positive transformation in the experiences and positioning of Maori.
Where much existing material related to Kaupapa Maori initiatives is located within the Maori education field, Kaupapa Maori is not limited to any one sector. Graham Smith (ibid.) notes that Kaupapa Maori is relevant to all aspects of society. The success elements that are evident in Te Kohanga Reo and Kura Kaupapa Maori derive from wider Maori knowledge’s, they are inherently a part of tikanga Maori. Kaupapa Maori can not be seen to be bound to any one sector. (education or justice) as Kaupapa Maori does not know the parameters that are a part of defining those sectors. Those parameters are defined within western philosophies not Kaupapa Maori.
In conclusion, wether you look at the Whare Wananga within the realms of Akonga, or Kaupapa Maori, there is not only irrefutable proof that the Whare Wananga has played in interregnal role in the preservation or our language and culture, to date but it existence is absolutely essential it’s future development.