Wharerātā

Key concepts: best and wise practice

Best Practice

The term "best practice" has been used to describe what works in a particular situation or environment.· A "best practice" insinuates that the action taken in one situation can be transplanted and applied in another, with equal positive results.·

There are·complexities·with the term.· The singular term "best practice" can reinforce the risky "one size fits all" approach, which is not especially useful in mental health and addictions.· Humans are a diverse mob, and the "one size" invariably excludes more people than one would expect.·

From a frame of cultural competence, the potential for error can get even bigger.·If the dialogue on "best practice" is based in majority culture, then the result runs the high risk of not being inclusive of Indigenous cultures.·

"One problem with the notion of best practices is there are different conceptions of what criteria are to be used in defining a practice as a "best practice". The term is sometimes criticized as being narrowly responsive to one or another ideological lens. Thus, what is identified as a key criterion for a best practice may differ, for example, between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people. Stephen Cornell argues that the middle class dream of success in the U.S. is not necessarily the definition of success that most Native Americans hold (Cornell, 1987).·Furthermore, some argue that best practices in adult education runs the risk of eroding its traditional grounding in an ethic of social justice and the common good.(Bartlette, 2008) ·We cannot assume that what works in one situation, context or culture will not necessarily work in another.(Krajewski and Silver, 2008).·

"There is a growing skepticism about the universality of best practices and the extent to which those standards can be judged and utilized according to universal levels (Dahlberg et al., 1999). For example, and directly in line with Aboriginal perspectives on best practices, these authors asked, “How could [quality] take into account context and values, subjectivity and plurality? How could it accommodate multiple perspectives, with different groups in different places having different views of what quality was or different interpretations of criteria?”. As Aboriginal leadership has articulated time and again the authors also pointed out that, “This problem became more acute as people began to talk about the importance of the process of defining quality and best practices and how this should include a wide range of stakeholders, not only academic expert but children, parents and practitioners.”(Dahlberg, et al, 1999:4) There is a growing tendency to recognize the fact that there is no practice that is best for everyone or in every situation, and no best practice remains best for very long as people keep on finding better ways of doing things". (Wesley-Esquimaux &·Calliou, 2010 in· Best Practices in Aboriginal Community Development: A Literature Review and Wise Practices Approach).

Wise Practice

The Wharerātā Group deliberates chose to also use the term "wise practice", to give intentional space to cultural knowledges and Indigeous intelligence. The most sustainable work in Indigenous communtiies is that which builds on the assets and culture in community, so is community-based. There is much diversity between Indigenous cultures and tribes and communities, and the Group strongly advocates for an empowerment approach in which the community has the authority to define its own wise practices.

"Wise practices reflect the richness of relationships, respect for uniqueness, and the contextual nature of community and leadership development where nothing is static, as people bring in and send out different experiences, views, and energies." (Wesley-Esquimaux &·Calliou, 2010).

“The ‘dance’ between western assumptions of evaluation superiority and Aboriginal assumptions of uniqueness are at the root of the question of how to satisfy the evaluation needs of funders without trampling on, or otherwise marginalizing, the Aboriginal ways of knowing and communicating.” (Johnston, “Guest Editor’s Introduction” (2010) 23:1, Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 1)