Balancing Phonics and Te Reo Māori in Early Literacy: A Critical Examination

Introduction

In recent months, the Minister of Education has announced a significant change to early literacy materials in Aotearoa New Zealand: early years readers will no longer contain te reo Māori (Māori language), except for proper names. This article has been written in response to what the author views as a pattern of policy decisions by the current coalition government that risk marginalising te reo and tikanga Māori (Māori protocols). This stance is supported by Moss (2025) who argues that what is being taught within our schools has increasingly been determined by Anti-Māori, libertarian ideals. Although the government’s stated rationale for this change focuses on supporting English phonics instruction, the decision also sits within a wider context of cultural and political debate about the place of te reo Māori in public life. A key driver of the curriculum (re) fresh describes the inclusion of te ao Māori ways of knowing as an “emptying out of academic knowledge” (Moss, 2025, para. 8). The stated rationale is that the presence of Māori words could confuse children who are just beginning to learn phonics in English. The Minister’s position is that by limiting texts to English in the earliest years, children can focus on mastering foundational decoding skills before encountering the complexities of a second language.

This decision has sparked a national conversation, touching on evidence from reading science, bilingual education research, and the cultural responsibilities of the education system. In this article, I explore the potential advantages and disadvantages of this approach, weaving together research findings and the voices of educators to assess whether removing te reo Māori from early readers will genuinely benefit children’s literacy outcomes.

Author Positionality

Our analysis is shaped by our positioning as Māori and Pacific educators and researchers working within Aotearoa New Zealand’s education system, with collective experience across primary, secondary, and tertiary contexts. Our work is grounded in kaupapa Māori and relational Indigenous perspectives, which foreground the importance of language, identity, and cultural knowledge in educational success.

We approach this topic with a shared commitment to the revitalisation and normalisation of te reo Māori, and to literacy practices that affirm the identities of tamariki (children) Māori and tamariki of the Moana. This positioning informs our critical stance towards policies that may marginalise Indigenous language within schooling.

At the same time, we acknowledge that our advocacy for culturally sustaining approaches shapes how we interpret the evidence presented. Although we draw on research from literacy science and bilingual education, we privilege perspectives that recognise language as inseparable from identity, culture, and tino rangatiratanga (self-determination).

Through a He Awa Whiria lens, we seek not to position structured literacy and Indigenous knowledge as competing frameworks, but as interconnected streams. This enables us to consider not only what works in literacy instruction, but for whom, and within what cultural conditions.

The Case for an English-Only Phonics Focus

One of the strongest arguments in favour of the policy change rests on decades of research into systematic, explicit phonics instruction. Phonics refers to a method of teaching reading that focuses on the relationship between letters or groups of letters and the sounds they represent. These sounds are called phonemes, the smallest units of sound in a language that can change the meaning of a word (for example, changing the /m/ in mat to /c/ makes cat). International studies have consistently shown that early readers benefit from structured, sequential teaching of these letter–sound correspondences, especially in alphabetic languages like English (Ehri et al., 2001; National Reading Panel, 2000). By introducing sounds and letters in a carefully controlled sequence and matching them to decodable words, children build the automaticity needed for fluent reading.

Advocates of the Minister’s approach argue that adding te reo Māori words particularly those containing sounds or grapheme phoneme correspondences not yet introduced in English may create unnecessary hurdles. A grapheme is the smallest unit of written language that represents a phoneme, such as the letter “a” for the /a/ sound or the letters “sh” for the /ʃ/ sound. This is especially relevant for children at risk of reading difficulties, for whom early confusion can slow progress and erode confidence (Moats, 2020).

A second argument concerns cognitive load. Cognitive load is the amount of mental effort being used in the working memory. Cognitive load theory (Sweller, 1988) suggests that working memory has a limited capacity, and when it is overloaded with new or unfamiliar information, learning can be compromised. For a 5-year-old who is just beginning to decode CVC words that is, words following a consonant–vowel–consonant pattern such as “cat” or “dog” encountering unfamiliar orthography (spelling conventions), such as the “wh” in Māori pronounced /f/, could require mental effort that detracts from consolidating early English phonics skills. Simplifying early reading materials to only include taught English patterns may, therefore, help to keep the learning pathway straightforward.

Finally, the approach aligns with structured literacy principles. Structured literacy refers to a comprehensive, explicit, and systematic approach to teaching reading, writing, and spelling that is especially beneficial for students with dyslexia or other reading challenges. By postponing the introduction of Māori vocabulary until Year 2, educators might ensure that all children, including those from homes with no exposure to Māori, have a secure English phonics base before tackling bilingual decoding. This staged approach could be seen as a pragmatic compromise between literacy acceleration and cultural inclusion.

An example of the success of this compromise is the Better Start Literacy Approach, one of New Zealand’s largest structured literacy approaches. The book “At the Marae” (Boston & Smith, 2023) from the series, was written to correspond to that scope and sequence. Data published by Gillon, McNeill, et al. (2024), peer-reviewed work alongside their MOE reports, reports statistically significant gains in phoneme awareness, decoding accuracy, and word reading fluency across more than 77,000 children, with accelerated progress for learners in lower socio-economic communities.

The Case Against Removing Te Reo Māori From Early Readers

While the phonics-first rationale has merit, critics of the decision argue that it underestimates the benefits of early bilingual exposure and overstates the risk of confusion. Bilingualism, the ability to use two languages fluently has been shown in a growing body of research to have positive effects on literacy development in both languages, rather than causing interference (Bialystok, 2017; Cummins, 2000). Bialystok (2017) synthesises decades of research demonstrating that bilingual children show measurable advantages in executive control tasks, including cognitive flexibility and attentional switching. Bilingual children often develop metalinguistic awareness of the ability to think about and manipulate language structures which can support phonics and decoding in the primary language of instruction. International research provides compelling evidence that children raised in bilingual or multilingual families and communities can thrive academically in both languages. In Canada’s French English immersion programmes, children from English-speaking homes often achieve equal or higher levels of English literacy compared to their monolingual peers, while developing functional proficiency in French (Genesee & Jared, 2008). Similarly, research in Wales demonstrates that children learning Welsh alongside English reach comparable outcomes in English reading tests by the end of primary school, even when early literacy instruction occurs mainly through Welsh (Gathercole & Thomas, 2009). In multilingual contexts such as Singapore, where English is learned alongside Mandarin, Mal ay, or Tamil. In Singapore, these languages are referred to as mother tongue languages and are given equal value within Singapore’s education policies (Silver & Elaine Bokhorst-Heng, 2016). Early multilingual exposure has been shown to enhance vocabulary breadth, critical thinking skills, and adaptability in switching between linguistic systems. In the United States, Spanish English dual language programmes benefit both heritage speakers of Spanish and English-dominant students, improving biliteracy without hindering performance in English reading assessments (Lindholm-Leary & Genesee, 2014). Across these contexts, any short-term lag in one language typically resolves by the middle primary years, with bilingual students often surpassing monolingual peers in certain cognitive and literacy tasks (Bialystok, 2017; Cummins, 2000).

It is important, however, to acknowledge that French, Spanish, and English are all globally dominant languages with strong institutional support. Te reo Māori, by contrast, is an Indigenous language that has endured systematic suppression and remains in a process of revitalisation. The sociolinguistic dynamics are therefore not identical. Nonetheless, the cognitive and literacy findings from bilingual research remain relevant in demonstrating that exposure to more than one language does not inherently impede early reading acquisition. Recent New Zealand–based research mirrors these global findings. A longitudinal exploratory study of 5- to 7-year-old bilingual learners correlational analyses showed that increases in te reo Māori oral language and phonological awareness were significantly associated with gains in English phonological awareness and related literacy skills. These results suggest that developing te reo Māori oral language did not impede English literacy growth rather, the two developed in parallel (Denston et al., 2024). Evidence from Aotearoa further supports this position. In a longitudinal study of Year 2 students in total immersion Māori programmes, Rau (2005) found that early literacy instruction in te reo Māori did not impede later English literacy development. While English literacy scores were initially lower than monolingually educated peers, a common pattern in immersion contexts internationally students demonstrated cross-linguistic transfer of phonological awareness and decoding strategies. Over time, literacy skills in both languages developed in parallel, challenging assumptions that exposure to two languages creates cognitive confusion.

There are also significant cultural and identity considerations. Te reo Māori is an official language of Aotearoa and a taonga a treasured resource under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. Early exposure to te reo in school readers can normalise its use, affirm Māori identity, and contribute to ongoing revitalisation efforts (Hond, 2013). In her seminal work Mirrors, Windows, and Sliding Glass Doors, Bishop (1990) posits that when children are not reflected within the stories they read, “they learn a powerful lesson about how they are devalued in the society in which they are a part” (p. 1). More recent works echo and build upon Bishop’s metaphor of windows and mirrors.

When this reflection is absent, children “learn a powerful lesson about how they are devalued in the society in which they are a part” (p. 1). In other words, a curriculum that fails to reflect students’ identities can implicitly communicate that their language, culture, and experiences are less important or less legitimate than those represented.

In the context of Aotearoa, this issue carries particular cultural and political significance. Te reo Māori is an official language of the nation and is recognised as a taonga under Te Tiriti o Waitangi. When te reo Māori appears in school readers and classroom texts, it helps normalise the language in everyday learning environments, affirms Māori identity, and supports broader revitalisation efforts (Hond, 2013). Conversely, when Māori language and perspectives are absent, Māori children may struggle to see their identities validated within formal education, which can undermine their sense of belonging and cultural pride. The absence of such representation can therefore reinforce historical patterns of marginalisation within schooling.

Providing texts and curriculum content that reflect Māori language and experiences ensures that Māori learners encounter mirrors of themselves in their learning while also offering non-Māori students windows into the histories, languages, and worldviews of tangata whenua. In this way, representation within curriculum materials is not only a matter of inclusion but also a critical component of identity affirmation, cultural respect, and the ongoing revitalisation of te reo Māori. Representation is also something Initial Teacher Education programmes need to consider.

Tschida et al. (2014) consider the importance of encouraging students within Initial Teaching Education Programmes to think critically about representation as they design the curriculum for their future classrooms. When te ao Māori is seen as an “emptying out” of valid knowledge and when our tamariki Māori have their language stripped from the pages in their classroom this leaves the question of what the long-lasting effects may be for our tamariki and how they may start to see their worth as Māori within Aotearoa’s society. Removing Māori words from the very first books children encounter in the education system sends an implicit message about which languages are valued in formal learning. For tamariki Māori, and indeed for all children in Aotearoa, this early signal can shape attitudes towards language and culture for years to come.

Stanford claims to have asked kura leaders whether they would accept English words within their Te Reo Māori books to which she was allegedly told no (Gerritsen, 2025) she used this as part of her reasoning to stick to her decision. What this standpoint ignores, however, is the purpose of kura and revitalising a language that was deliberately stripped from Māori by force. It is important to note that not all tamariki have the option to attend kura due to waitlists and location. Reducing this decision based on language inclusion within kura misses the point and historical significance of the kohanga reo and later kura. Including te reo Māori within books is an example of honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi. It helps to provide equal representation and given value. Hoskins and Jones (2022) write of a need to move past “inclusion” towards indigenisation. The latter, referring to when the incorporation is normalised, a powerful way to move towards normalisation is to include this in resources at the very beginning of children’s learning journeys.

Perhaps most importantly, there is little empirical evidence to support the notion that including Māori words in early readers causes confusion. Teachers working with the Ready to Read series have reported that their students manage the presence of Māori vocabulary without difficulty, often enjoying the opportunity to learn new words (RNZ, 2024). In many cases, the Māori words in early readers are supported by illustrations and context clues, enabling children to draw on their prior knowledge and use meaning-making strategies to understand the text. At the same time, these supports complement the phonics skills children are developing, showing that literacy growth comes from the interplay of multiple approaches rather than reliance on a single pathway. This mirrors culturally responsive literacy approaches used internationally, where unfamiliar words are embedded in predictable text to maintain decoding flow.

In many cases, Māori words in early readers encourage children to draw on their prior knowledge and oral language, as many are familiar with the te ao Māori concept due to their school or cultural experiences, or these words and concepts are already part of their linguistic oral language repertoire. These linguistic and conceptual resources breach the gap, making them accessible without requiring the phonics knowledge. This approach mirrors culturally responsive/culturally informed literacy methods used internationally (Dukes et al., 2021; Kelly et al., 2021) and locally (Gillon, Smith, et al., 2024), where unfamiliar words are embedded in predictable text to maintain a smooth decoding flow. Taken together, both local and international evidence suggests that removing te reo Māori from early readers is likely to deprive children of the cognitive, cultural, and identity benefits that bilingual education has been shown to provide worldwide. Māori Words in the Oxford English Dictionary and Their Integration into New Zealand Vernacular The influence of te reo Māori on New Zealand English is both deep-rooted and dynamically evolving. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) has acknowledged this impact through multiple updates that officially include Māori-origin words now used widely in everyday Kiwi speech. In March 2023, the OED added a batch of 47 New Zealand English words and phrases, most of which are of Māori origin such as e hoa, whenua, rohe, kaupapa, iwi, rangatiratanga, tino rangatiratanga, kaitiaki, rāhui, moko kauae, pōwhiri, koha, kōrero, and kia ora e hoa (NZ Herald, 2023). Another source notes the inclusion of 36 Māori-related words in a similar update, underscoring the OED’s ongoing process of capturing burgeoning Māori contributions to New Zealand English. These entries reflect everyday expressions, kia ora e hoa (“hi mate”) or koha (gift), alongside words embodying deeper cultural concepts such as whenua (land), rāhui (ritual ban), or rangatiratanga (self‑determination) (The Guardian, 2023). Beyond the formal dictionary, Māori-derived vocabulary is embedded throughout everyday speech and place names. Linguistic research from the Wellington Corpus found Māori-origin terms comprised approximately 0.6% of the New Zealand English lexicon, mainly in place and personal names (Macalister, 2006; Maclagan et al., 2008). Lists of Māori loanwords in English illustrate how pervasive these terms are from kiwi, haka, whānau, mana, and pounamu to hui, tamariki, waiata, and many more. This blend of formal dictionary recognition and lived vernacular use shows just how thoroughly te reo Māori has shaped and enriched everyday English in Aotearoa. In the context of early literacy policy, it underscores the argument that Māori words are not foreign intrusions but an integral part of the linguistic landscape in which all children in Aotearoa are immersed from birth.

A Historical Perspective: Māori Embracing Literacy and Outpacing Early Traders

The debate about the place of te reo Māori in early readers is not without historical precedent. In the early contact period of the 19th century, Māori enthusiasm for literacy both in te reo Māori and in English was remarkable. Missionaries arriving in Aotearoa found that Māori were keen to acquire reading and writing skills, often seeing literacy as a way to access new knowledge, maintain records, and engage with emerging political and economic systems (Ballara, 1998; Jones & Jenkins, 2011).

By the 1830s and 1840s, mission schools were teaching literacy primarily in te reo Māori, using translated biblical texts, primers, and school readers (Belich, 1996). Māori quickly adapted to the written word, with literacy in te reo Māori spreading rapidly through kura (schools) and community-led learning. In some iwi and hapū, literate Māori became the teachers, spreading literacy far beyond mission stations (Binney, 2001).

Historical records suggest that by the mid-19th century, Māori literacy rates especially in their own language were in some areas higher than those of the European traders, whalers, and sealers they encountered (May et al., 2014; McKenzie, 1985). Many of these early Pākehā arrivals were working-class men from Britain or America with limited formal education. In contrast, Māori who embraced literacy could often read and write fluently in Māori, and increasingly in English, giving them a significant communicative advantage in trade negotiations, correspondence, and legal matters.

The acquisition of English literacy was not a rejection of te reo Māori, but rather an expansion of linguistic repertoire. Māori engaged with English for pragmatic reasons such as conducting trade, navigating colonial bureaucracy, and participating in political dialogue while maintaining strong oracy and literacy in their own language. This adaptability created a generation of Māori who could operate confidently in both worlds, often outpacing their European counterparts in cross-cultural literacy skills.

This historical experience challenges any suggestion that exposure to two languages in literacy learning is inherently confusing or detrimental. On the contrary, the early contact period shows Māori as skilled bilingual learners, able to acquire new literacy systems rapidly while retaining and valuing their own.

Māori Concepts of Literacy Beyond the Written Word

While Western definitions of literacy often privilege the ability to read and write printed text, Māori have long upheld sophisticated literacies grounded in mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge systems). These literacies are multimodal, incorporating oral, visual, symbolic, and performative dimensions that serve to transmit knowledge, values, and identity across generations (Royal, 2009; Smith, 1999).

Oral Literacy: Oral tradition is central to Māori literacy. Whakapapa (genealogy), pūrākau (stories), waiata (songs), karakia (incantations), and whaikōrero (formal speech-making) are highly developed oral forms that require mastery of language, timing, metaphor, and audience engagement. These oral literacies are not simply spoken equivalents of written texts; they are living performances in which meaning is co-constructed between speaker and audience (Higgins, 2014).

Visual Literacy: Māori have also sustained literacies in the visual realm, including the symbolic language of whakairo (carving), tukutuku (woven latticework), and kōwhaiwhai (rafter painting). These art forms encode genealogies, histories, and moral lessons in visual motifs that require cultural knowledge to “read” and interpret (Mead, 2016).

Performing Arts Literacy: Forms such as haka, poi, and mōteatea blend movement, rhythm, and language in ways that embody complex messages and histories. Performing arts literacy involves understanding the choreography, symbolism, and cultural protocols that give these expressions their meaning (Kāretu, 1993). As Trinick and Dale (2015) explain, “the effectiveness of music as a mnemonic device is attributed to storage in the memory in both speech and musical codes” (p. 87). This dual encoding strengthens retention and recall, suggesting that waiata and other musical forms of knowledge transmission engage multiple cognitive pathways simultaneously. In this sense, Māori performative literacies are not peripheral to literacy development but reflect neurologically supported strategies for deep learning.

Symbolism, Metaphor, and Analogy Māori discourse is rich with metaphor (whakataukī, pepeha, kīwaha) and analogy, which convey layers of meaning beyond the literal. Comprehension in this context depends on shared cultural frames, historical references, and intergenerational teaching. Such figurative language fosters deep critical thinking and nuanced understanding (Pere, 1994).

These literacies demand sophisticated comprehension skills, but they are evaluated by criteria different from Western schooling such as the appropriateness of delivery, accuracy of cultural references, and ability to maintain mana (prestige) and uphold tikanga (protocols). As such, when discussing literacy in contemporary policy debates, it is essential to acknowledge that Māori have always valued literacy in its broadest sense, and that written English literacy is but one form among many.

Finding a Way Forward: A Braided Rivers Approach

The debate over te reo Māori in early readers does not have to be an either-or choice between cultural inclusion and phonics-based literacy. He Awa Whiria, the Braided Rivers Approach, offers a way to weave together the strengths of two knowledge streams, te ao Māori and Western literacy science so that each enhances the other (Macfarlane et al., 2015). In this model, one river carries the current of structured literacy, with its evidence-based sequence for teaching phoneme–grapheme correspondences, decoding, and fluency. The other river carries the current of te reo Māori as an official language, a taonga, and a source of identity, connection, and cultural wellbeing. Rather than merging into a single stream that dilutes each knowledge base, the two rivers run alongside each other, intersecting at deliberate points to enrich the whole system.

Practically, this could mean the following:

Understanding that literacy is a decisive protective factor for later life success, it is essential that we support educators to find an optimal intersection between cultural connection and structured literacy instruction. When structured literacy approaches draw on a braided rivers approach to achieve this aspiration, they find constructive collaboration between Māori and non-Māori knowledges in their approaches to literacy instruction. Seeing the power in seeing your cultural or familiar concepts in a student’s literacy learning draws on not only cognitive research on how to develop the academic Eurocentric skill of reading and writing but also draws on ecological elements of cultural resonance and psychological elements of engagement and motivation (Gillon, Smith, et al., 2024)

By braiding these streams, educators can uphold the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and the revitalisation of te reo Māori, while also ensuring that all tamariki build a strong foundation in reading. This approach reframes the conversation from exclusion to integration, where cultural and linguistic diversity is not a barrier but a strength in early literacy.

Conclusion

The Minister’s decision to remove te reo Māori from early readers is framed as a way to protect phonics instruction, but it risks narrowing the linguistic and cultural experiences of young learners. While there is unmistakable evidence that systematic phonics supports early literacy, there is also growing research suggesting that bilingual exposure can be beneficial both for reading skills and for identity formation.

In the absence of definitive evidence that Māori words cause harm to early reading acquisition, policy makers might be better served by pursuing integration rather than exclusion. Doing so would acknowledge the dual imperatives of educational effectiveness and cultural responsibility ensuring that children in Aotearoa grow up literate not only in English but also in the shared heritage of te reo Māori.