The Australian Educational Researcher

, Volume 46, Issue 2, pp 213–229 | Cite as

‘Aboriginal Voices’: An overview of the methodology applied in the systematic review of recent research across ten key areas of Australian Indigenous education

  • Kevin LoweEmail author
  • Christine Tennent
  • John Guenther
  • Neil Harrison
  • Cathie Burgess
  • Nikki Moodie
  • Greg Vass


The ‘Aboriginal Voices’ project is a consortium of researchers invested in seeking long-term solutions to the many and varied issues that have been identified as factors contributing to the underachievement of Indigenous students in education across Australia. The Aboriginal Voices systematic review project established an agreed methodology and protocols in order to map ten reviews to an overarching question: ‘What are the issues affecting the underachievement of Indigenous students in Australia and how can research inform solutions to the complex and inter-related issues needing to be addressed?’ The Project focuses on bringing clarity to the overarching question by applying a rigorous process with an Indigenous methodology to undertake these unique reviews. This introductory paper outlines the development of a critical Indigenous methodology used in these discrete but inter-linked systematic investigations. Using a consistent systematic methodology facilitated the re-aggregation of separate review findings to achieve new whole-of-systems insights into the complex issues affecting the educational opportunities of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students.


Systematic review Methodology Educational research Aboriginal Voices Indigenous education 



  1. Bazeley, P. (2009). Analysing qualitative data: More than ‘identifying themes’. Malaysian Journal of Qualitative Research, 2(2), 6–22.Google Scholar
  2. Booth, A. (2016). Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A structured methodological review. Systematic Reviews, 5(1), 74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Byrd, J. (2011). Transit of empire: Indigenous critiques of colonisation. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Campbell Collaboration (n/a). So, you want to write a Campbell systematic review? Retrieved from
  5. Cochrane Collaboration. (2011). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Cochrane. Retrieved from
  6. Coughlan, M., et al. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: Quantitative research. British Journal of Nursing, 16(11), 658–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davies, P. (2003). Systematic reviews: How are they different from what we already do? In L. Anderson & N. Bennett (Eds.), Developing educational leadership (pp. 25–38). London: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Denzin, N. (2005). Emancipatory discourses and the ethics and politics of interpretation. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (pp. 933–958). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  9. Denzin, N. (2010). Grounded and Indigenous theories and the politics of pragmatism. Sociological Inquiry, 80(2), 296–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixon-Woods, M., Sutton, A., Shaw, R., Miller, T., Smith, J., Young, B., et al. (2007). Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 12(1), 42–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Drawson, A., Toombs, E., & Mushquash, C. (2017). Indigenous research methods: A systematic review. The International Journal of Indigenous Policy, 8(2), 5.Google Scholar
  12. Foley, D. (2003). Indigenous epistemology and Indigenous standpoint theory. Social Alternatives, 22(1), 44–52.Google Scholar
  13. Gough, D., Oliver, S., & Thomas, J. (Eds.). (2017). An introduction to systematic reviews (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Grande, S. (2004). Red pedagogy: Native American social and political thought. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  15. Guenther, J. (2018). Factors contributing to educational outcomes for First Nations students in remote communities: A systematic review. Manuscript in preparationGoogle Scholar
  16. Head, B. (2008). Wicked problems in public policy. Public Policy, 3(2), 101.Google Scholar
  17. Joanna Briggs Institute. (2014). The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers manual 2014: Methodology for JBI mixed methods systematic reviews. Adelaide, Joanna Briggs Institute University of Adelaide. Retrieved from
  18. Korhonen, A., Hakulinen-Viitanen, T., Jylhä, V., & Holopainen, A. (2013). Meta-synthesis and evidence-based health care—A method for systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 27(4), 1027–1034.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Long, A. F., & Godfrey, M. (2004). An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 7(2), 181–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lowe, K. (2017). Walanbaa warramildanha: The impact of authentic Aboriginal community and school engagement on teachers’ professional knowledge. The Australian Educational Researcher, 44(1), 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marsden, B. (2018). The system of compulsory education is failing: Assimilation, mobility and Aboriginal students in Victorian State schools, 1961–1968. History of Education Review, 47(2), 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Meyer, M. (2008). Indigenous and authentic—Hawaiian epistemology and triangulation of meaning. In N. Denzin, Y. Lincoln, & L. T. Smith (Eds.), Handbook of critical and indigenous methodologies (pp. 217–232). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  23. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Med, 6(7), e1000097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Wong, R. (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 27(2), 114–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Padstow, UK: Blackwell Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. PRISMA. (2009). PRISMA 2009 checklist. Retrieved from
  28. Rigney, L. (1997). Internationalisation of an Indigenous anti-colonial cultural critique of research methodologies: A guide to Indigenist research methodology and its principles. Journal for Native American Studies, WICAZO sa Review, 14(2), 109–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Ryan, F., et al. (2007). Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative research. British Journal of Nursing, 16(12), 738–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Sandelowski, M., Voils, C. I., & Barroso, J. (2006). Defining and designing mixed research synthesis studies. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 29.Google Scholar
  31. Schroeder, R. (2014). Exploring critical and Indigenous research methods with a research community: Part I—The leap. In the Library with the Lead Pipe. Retrieved from
  32. Smith, L. T. (2000). Kaupapa Maori research. In M. Battiste (Ed.), Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision (pp. 225–247). Vancouver: UBC Press.Google Scholar
  33. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonising methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books Ltd.Google Scholar
  34. Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision. (2014). Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: Key indicators 2014—report. Canberra: Productivity Commission.Google Scholar
  35. Steering Committee for the Review of Government Service Provision. (2016). Overcoming Indigenous disadvantage: Key indicators 2016. Canberra: Productivity Commission.Google Scholar
  36. Stern, C., Jordan, Z., & McArthur, A. (2014). Developing the review question and inclusion criteria. American Journal of Nursing, 114(4), 53–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Vass, G. (2013). ‘So. What is wrong with Indigenous education?’ Perspective, position and power beyond a deficit discourse. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 41(2), 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Victor, L. (2008). Systematic reviewing. Social Research Update, 54(1), 1–4.Google Scholar
  39. Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Australian Association for Research in Education, Inc. 2019
corrected publication 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Macquarie UniversityMacquarie ParkAustralia
  2. 2.The University of SydneyCamperdownAustralia
  3. 3.Batchelor Institute of Indigenous Tertiary EducationBatchelorAustralia
  4. 4.Melbourne UniversityParkvilleAustralia
  5. 5.Griffith UniversityBrisbaneAustralia
  6. 6.University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations