The United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (United Nations, 2007) challenged the tertiary education system at a global and individual country level to meet the needs of Indigenous peoples. In New Zealand, the indigenising of education is premised on Te Tiriti o Waitangi | Treaty of Waitangi (hereafter Te Tiriti), the founding partnership document of the nation signed in 1840. The intention of Te Tiriti, as advanced by Matiaha Tiramorehu, a high-ranking rangatira | chief, was that the “white skin would be made just equal with the dark skin” (as cited in Ngāi Tahu, 2005, section 1, Te Kerēme). To give effect to this partnership, all education leaders and managers must develop and foster stronger and more meaningful partnerships with iwi (Indigenous tribes) based on shared aspirations, goals, and outcomes. This relationship should be premised on Te Tiriti, with a recognition that power and authority need to be in balance with a focus on meeting the interests of both. Historically, this has not been the case; Māori interests and aspirations have rarely been met. However, the future can no longer be about one group being dominant over another, nor can it be about compromise by only one group – Māori. Lifting the educational achievement of Māori (the Indigenous people of New Zealand) will help to raise the overall performance of the New Zealand education system, the economy and productivity (Ministry of Education, 2013; Penetito, 2010). Future Māori leaders will need to be skilled in Māori culture and lore, as well as the universal disciplines of science, business, law, and the humanities. Therefore, a significant rationale for a strong Māori presence in higher education is linked to the national benefits likely to accrue from knowledge creation at the interface between indigenous knowledge, science, philosophy, and commerce (Durie, 2009).

This case study contributes to our understanding about leading and implementing bicultural change within a university setting and to how a Te Tiriti-based relationship is manifested. Specifically, it examined how the wider institutional context created conditions for change in initial teacher education (ITE) programmes. To date, most research on bicultural change and leadership has tended to focus on the compulsory education sector, with little consideration given to the tertiary sector, particularly universities. This study therefore extends our knowledge base by examining the university sector. In this study, ‘bicultural’ was contextualised as incorporating at least two epistemological traditions; Māori and non-Māori (Penetito, 2010). Addressing this research gap is important, as future teachers within the compulsory education sector develop their pedagogical skills and knowledge and gain their qualifications from the tertiary education sector, whilst also drawing upon their own educational experiences. This study investigated the drivers and mechanisms for bicultural change and leadership within a university, and sought to acknowledge the issues and challenges, opportunities and successes that arose for academic staff as they developed their bicultural competence and confidence. Whilst this research focused on a case of ITE, it is hoped that the findings provide insights for other academic units and other areas of universities more broadly and contribute to the literature on bicultural change and leadership within a tertiary education context.