J. Smith’s research while affiliated with Flinders University and other places

Policy analysis can be useful for learning about ‘what works’ in policy. Contemporary policy studies literature highlight that such learning is influenced by power relations in government that shape our ways of knowing the world. This paper offers a critically reflexive narrative account of power relations present during Indigenous higher education policy analysis research conducted in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia to shed light on how to effectively negotiate policy analysis. We reflect on tensions that arose by applying Nakata’s concept of the ‘cultural interface’, which accounts for the complexity of meaning making across diverse knowledge spaces. Narratives from an Indigenous Project Reference Group member are included to provide a perspective on these tensions from an Indigenous standpoint. The paper concludes by describing enabling conditions and strategies that were necessary for effective policy analysis, and considers implications for Indigenous higher education policy analysis in the NT.

‘The numbers speak for themselves’ is a phrase often linked to statistics supporting claims about the success (or otherwise) of policies. Quantitative data are usually viewed as objective and somehow exempt from the same critique that qualitative data faces. QuantCrit theory challenges these assumptions by considering how structural racism impacts on the use of statistics in research and evaluation. This paper applies QuantCrit to the Indigenous higher education policy context in the Northern Territory (NT), Australia. It aims to elicit hidden assumptions within the use of statistics to measure the success of Indigenous higher education policies in the NT. We explore the historical utility of Indigenous higher education student statistics for policy evaluation in the NT. We argue that quantitative success measures should always be considered within the context of the structural racism that shapes policy goals. We conclude by highlighting that quantitative data can be useful for Indigenous higher education policy evaluation and research, but that alternative views for measuring policy success must be considered.