Abstract
Kungka (Kunga) Tjukurpa, roughly translated as ‘women’s story’, is an enduring part of Anangu (people or human beings in the Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara language) women’s culture. Descending from the Tjukuritja (ancestors), Tjukurpa is a vital cultural framework informing Anangu women’s way of being, living, and knowledge sharing. Kunga Tjukurpa therefore provided a lens to guide a study examining the relationship between 12 participants who identified as Aboriginal women. The study uncovered the hidden educational inequality, exploring the way this is normalised as a policy and social problem, characterised in Australia as a ‘gap’ in the federal policy Closing the Gap in Aboriginal Disadvantage. Qualitative methods were used without subscribing to any specific qualitative philosophy, as the foundation of this research was strongly supported by Indigenist theory methodologies. The study identified a clear disconnect existing in that which is defined, supported, and most significantly controlled by university policy – what it means to be Aboriginal and a woman.
Introduction
Descending from the Tjukuritja, Tjukurpa is a vital cultural framework that has always informed Anangu women’s way of being, living, and knowledge sharing (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). As a foundational epistemological and ontological framework within the Anangu culture of Central Australia, Tjukurpa encompasses the Tjukuritja narratives of law and ethical codes that structure both spiritual and material life (Goddard, 1996). Tjukurpa does not remain in the past, rather it is an enduring and evolving framework that carries meaning and authority across generations (James, 2015). It structures Anangu kinship systems, relationships to land, ceremonial responsibilities, and the intergenerational transmission of knowledge through oral narratives, songlines, and artistic practice (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). At the same time, it holds ecological knowledge and articulates spiritual obligations to Country, affirming the inseparability of people, place, and law (James, 2015). As a lived and adaptive philosophy, Tjukurpa sustains cultural identity and shapes ethical ways of being. The broader study informing this article was undertaken within this framework, acknowledging that participation in higher education and academia can be complex and challenging for Aboriginal people, particularly Aboriginal women.
Pursuing higher education in today’s world is deeply rewarding, and when guided by Tjukurpa it helps chart a path forward for future generations. Today, Universities increasingly publicise commitments to diversity and equity, yet many Aboriginal women describe higher degree research (HDR) environments as culturally unsafe and structurally misaligned with their responsibilities to kin, Country, and community (Baeza Pena et al., 2025). This mismatch turns recognition into burden, producing unpaid cultural labour and narrowing opportunities rather than widening them. However, this intersection of higher education and culture can also be a source of great strength for Aboriginal women, but it also comes with the real risk of being overburdened.
Being ‘identified’, and playing the role of ‘the Aboriginal woman’ in the university environment, often means that you are required to participate and engage in ways that non-Aboriginal students are not required to (Moreton-Robinson, 2015). Moreton-Robinson (2015) argued without exception that this involves navigating and working within contemporary contexts structured by colonial power, systems that have historically excluded Aboriginal people. Often, for the student this means carrying responsibilities beyond study such as teaching others about culture, mentoring peers, and navigating colonial structures. Quite clearly, a methodological problem sits at the centre of this tension: even where policy recognises difference, research practice often reproduces Western assumptions about identity, gender, data, consent, authorship, and authority.
As an Aboriginal woman and being a student in the university, the academy tends to be culturally unsafe, the perceived ‘cultural supports’ within universities, and the institutional norms still privilege Western epistemologies over Indigenous ways of knowing and being (Green et al., 2018). This is due to their often competitive and individually driven cultures of learning, which create an atmosphere in which people actively work against each other to succeed, resulting in broken working relationships and loss of safe learning places. Aboriginal women typically participate in communal spaces in distinct ways, prioritising relationships, cooperation, and trust. However, when these relational practices are not supported, or when communal ways of being are disrupted, the consequences can include fractured relationships, disengagement, and the erosion of vital cultural support networks, disrupting Tjukurpa. It is within this context that we must reflect on and critically examine how Aboriginal women are positioned in HDR within an Australian university.
The study asked broadly what are the impacts and effects on how Aboriginal women in HDR balance the opportunities and struggles of their higher education? It argues for Indigenous led methodologies like Tjukurpa as a legitimate Indigenous practice in knowledge as valid as essential to understanding how Aboriginal women pave the pathway for each other.
Integrating Aboriginal methodologies in research: the role of Kunga Tjukurpa
When research engages with any aspect of Aboriginal peoples and cultures, it is critical to both recognise the need to use established academic methodologies while simultaneously embracing Aboriginal ways of knowing, being, and doing. This dual approach ensures that research is both rigorous and respectful, fostering inclusivity across diverse epistemologies, values, and cultural frameworks. The incorporation of Kunga Tjukurpa grounds the lived experiences, cultural practices, and spiritual knowledge of Aboriginal women, embedding culturally responsive research that aligns with Indigenous protocols and community expectations (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). This centring of Tjukurpa in research conducted for and with Aboriginal women, scholars, affirms relational accountability, wherein researchers are ethically and respectfully responsible to the communities and knowledge systems they engage with, but also enhances the integrity of the research and contributes to the decolonisation of academic practice.
Research for and with Aboriginal women which adopts Tjukurpa as a guiding method ensures that the inquiry is both culturally responsive and epistemologically grounded in Aboriginal ways of knowing (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). Kunga Tjukurpa, rooted in the lived experiences and cultural practices of Anangu women, offers a distinct epistemological stance that challenges dominant Western academic paradigms. By foregrounding embodied, performative, and place-based knowledge, it enriches research methodologies with cultural specificity and depth, allowing for a more nuanced and respectful engagement with Indigenous knowledge systems.
The inclusion of Kunga Tjukurpa repositions Aboriginal women not as passive subjects or informants, but as authoritative knowledge holders and co-creators in the research process. This methodological orientation supports ethical and relational accountability, ensuring that research is conducted in alignment with community expectations and Indigenous protocols. It empowers Aboriginal women by validating their voices, experiences, and contributions within the scholarly domain. Furthermore, Kunga Tjukurpa facilitates a holistic and intergenerational approach to research. It connects past, present, and future through stories, ceremonies, and cultural practices, offering a temporal depth that is often absent in linear, extractive research models (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). This then supports methodologies that are community-driven and relational, emphasising continuity, responsibility, and care across generations. Such an approach ensures that research outcomes are meaningful and beneficial to the communities involved.
Finally, methodologies grounded in Kunga Tjukurpa possess significant transformative potential. By creating space for Indigenous paradigms within academic disciplines, they contribute to the decolonisation of research and the reimagining of scholarly practice. These methodologies foster intercultural dialogue and mutual respect between knowledge systems, encouraging collaborative learning and the co-production of knowledge. In doing so, they not only enrich academic inquiry but also promote justice, equity, and inclusion within research contexts.
From method to practice: applying the lens of Kunga Tjukurpa
Any research that involves Aboriginal women cannot be approached with methodological neutrality, particularly as knowledge is produced within relationships, shaped by Country, kinship, memory, and lived experience, and historically constrained by research practices that have positioned Aboriginal women as objects of study rather than knowledge holders (Moreton-Robinson, 2015; Smith, 2012). For Aboriginal women, knowledge is not abstracted from lived experience but embedded in relationships to Country, community, and responsibility. Research that ignores these relational dimensions risks reproducing colonial logics that privilege distance, objectivity, and authority over accountability and care (Martin, 2008).
Centering Aboriginal women’s knowledge, authority, and cultural responsibility in research is grounded by the Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku research framework (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). Produced by the NPY Women’s Council, it positions Aboriginal people as knowledge holders and decision-makers, emphasising relational accountability to Country, kin, community, and requires people to address the racism impacting Aboriginal women. By providing gender-sensitive protocols, Kunga Tjukurpa also guides research practice with women’s lived experiences, challenges historically male-dominated and colonial approaches, and affirms the legitimacy of Aboriginal women’s ways of knowing. Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku is a research guide rather than a conceptual framework, but its principles can inform a culturally grounded methodological approach (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). By integrating these guidelines, researchers can develop methods that are ethically accountable, culturally responsive, and aligned with women’s ways of knowing, without imposing external or colonial frameworks. This also provides practical protocols and relational principles for working with Anangu communities, and other Aboriginal women in community to centering Aboriginal women’s knowledge, authority, and responsibilities.
When researching through the lens of Kunga Tjukurpa, it must be understood that Tjukurpa is also women’s law and authority, shaping not only what knowledge may be shared but also how research relationships are formed and maintained (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). This then treats research as a relational practice governed by Aboriginal women’s cultural, legal, and ethical systems, rather than as a neutral or extractive activity. Research as led by Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku begins by (NPY Women’s Council, 2026):
Recognising Aboriginal women as the primary authorities over knowledge, Country, and decision-making. Senior women and relevant kinship groups to determine the focus, scope, and limits of the project. Consent is ongoing and collective, revisited throughout the research process rather than secured once at the outset.
Acknowledging that Country guides where and how research occurs. Engagement takes place on the understanding that Country is living and relational, and that certain places carry specific obligations and restrictions. The researcher follows women’s direction regarding appropriate locations, timing, and activities, including what may or may not be recorded or shared beyond the immediate context.
Affirming that knowledge shared by Aboriginal women is treated as collectively held and culturally governed. The researcher does not assume that all knowledge offered can be documented, analysed, or published. Silence, redirection, and refusal are respected as culturally appropriate responses and are not interpreted as gaps or limitations in the research. Methods prioritise listening, observation, informal conversation, and repeated engagement over structured interviews or one-off data collection.
Is always inclusive of kinship structures, which shape participation and communication throughout the research. The researcher pays attention to who has the authority to speak, who must be consulted, and how relationships between women influence the research process. Participation is understood as relational rather than individual, and research activities are adjusted to align with community decision-making practices and social responsibilities.
Being fully accountable and ensuring that accountability is central. Research must actively work to disrupt systemic racism and structures that marginalise Aboriginal women’s knowledge systems. The researcher is accountable not only to institutional ethics requirements but also to Aboriginal women, their communities, and future generations. Information is not free and research findings are shared back with participants in accessible and culturally appropriate forms. Decisions about interpretation, representation, and authorship are discussed with women involved in the project to ensure accuracy and cultural safety.
This recognises that knowledge is shared according to life stage and seniority. Senior women determine what can be shared and by whom, and younger women’s involvement occurs in accordance with cultural protocols. The researcher must accept that some knowledge is not intended for research purposes and that learning often occurs gradually through presence and relationship rather than explicit explanation. Rather than following a linear sequence of methods, the researcher remains responsive to women’s law, Country, and relationships. This approach supports ethical, respectful, and culturally grounded research with Aboriginal women and aligns with the AIATSIS principles of self-determination, respect, responsibility, reciprocity, and benefit.
Aboriginal methodology
Purposefully utilising qualitative methods without subscribing to a singular philosophical tradition, the research was shaped by Aboriginal methodological thinking and guided with the lens of Kunga Tjukurpa (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). This enabled the integration of culturally appropriate methods such as yarning and semi-structured interviews, fostering relational accountability and creating spaces of trust and reciprocity. The case study focused on capturing nuanced, individualised experiences of Aboriginal HDR women, particularly in relation to institutional diversity policies and their practical implications. Through this approach, the study sought to illuminate how meaning is constructed, how policy is enacted, and how Aboriginal women navigate the opportunities and challenges of higher education.
The following research questions also guided the study:
What are the discourses of diversity in university policies and in what ways are they given effect?
Do these policies impact on Aboriginal women in HDR and if so, in what ways?
How do diversity policies impact on how Aboriginal women in HDR balance the opportunities and struggles of their higher education?
This study also subscribed to Aboriginal methodological thinking in that it does not attach itself rigorously to any particular study sequence; instead, it looked to combine Kunga Tjukurpa and other methods such as yarning and semi-structured interviews to discover experiences and perspectives of Aboriginal women undertaking HDR in a majority non-Aboriginal institution. This is important as the combination of methods was specifically chosen to enable participation of Aboriginal women and to encourage a greater level of participation (Walker et al., 2014). Furthermore, the exploration of these experiences when using non-statistical methods enabled a classification drawing on theoretical perspectives and Aboriginal methodology. Kunga Tjukurpa guided approaches to be much more authentic, creating spaces of trust and reciprocity, resulting in incredibly genuine responses.
Feminist methodology
Employing feminist methodologies include and promote the experiences of Aboriginal HDR women in challenging existing structures for the promotion of social justice. Positionality, through standpoint, acknowledges the context as exposed through social and professional interactions alongside participants (da Silva & Webster, 2018). This interconnectedness as an Aboriginal woman in engaging with the participants is important to ensure the significance of the research, understand the dynamic challenges that may occur in the research phases, and as an enactment of relationality within Aboriginal ways of knowing (Beach et al., 2018).
Qualitative research
Qualitative research enables a focus on specific phenomena and is generally beneficial for small sample sizes as it enables a focus on the individualised content through observations to capture detailed narratives to inform or understand (Lavrakas, 2008). It is descriptive and exploratory and places context at the forefront of importance and lends itself well to seeking understanding of how we construct meanings (Burns & Grove, 2010; Picciano, 2004). Ideologically, this approach enables a deeper understanding of the experiences of the participants as data is captured and located to a particular point and place in time. Overall, it provides a holistic and natural way of looking at and understanding the dimensions of social beings and their interactions within the institutional environment, letting the voices be heard through respectful, open, flexible, and trusted interactions (Fairbrother, 2014).
Methods
The overarching study that informed this article centred the voices and experiences of Aboriginal women engaged in HDR within a non-Aboriginal academic institution. Grounded in Kunga Tjukurpa, the research prioritised relational accountability, cultural safety, and the integrity of Indigenous ways of knowing. Using qualitative methods such as yarning, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis, the study explored how institutional diversity policies are created, interpreted, and experienced. The approach honoured the participants’ stories as knowledge, allowing space for deep reflection, reciprocity, and truth-telling. Through this lens, the study examined how Aboriginal HDR women navigate the tensions and possibilities within higher education, guided by community, culture, and connection.
Semi-structured interviews align with an Aboriginal methodological way of yarning and yarning circles. The reason that both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal methods were used was to allow the connection of the experiences of the participants to the structured format of the policy analysis. This ensures that participants are interviewed in a culturally safe way where their experiences of engaging in a non-Aboriginal environment were captured as well. Semi-structured interviews also enabled an in-depth interview where participants can choose what they want to answer or feel comfortable answering. However, using pre-set open-ended questions can also allow conversation to be guided and move into deeper and more meaningful discussions. In-depth semi-structured interviews, when aligned with Aboriginal contexts, not only keep the discussion on focus but also enable deeper sharing of experiences.
Yarning was also used as a traditional, respectful, and culturally safe way of knowledge sharing for Aboriginal people as it is also a traditional way for Aboriginal Elders to impart knowledge. As such, is also a type of relational methodology for the transfer of that knowledge; however, it is also one that has varying applications in different cultural forms of conversation (Barlo et al., 2020). However, the Aboriginal woman’s perspective can be much more enabled, given that previous and continuing research still favours Western methodologies (Walker et al., 2014). Yarning with Aboriginal women enables a process that is both sharing and developmental, in that knowledge is given and shared, which in turn helps to develop the participants’ responses. It enables a conversational process that prioritises Aboriginal methodologies, which have always been based on communicating in respectful, cooperative, and formative ways. In terms of Aboriginal women, this approach is beneficial because it enables a safe and respectful sharing between participants through familiarity of experience and culture.
Vignettes were also employed for this research. While researchers often interpret meaning through their own lens, vignettes offer an alternative that prioritises participant narratives. As Blodgett et al. (2011) and Bartlett et al. (2007) note, vignettes align with traditional storytelling practices, supporting culturally safe knowledge sharing. Vignettes allow participants’ experiences to be presented in a consistent and engaging format, highlighting diverse perspectives without imposing researcher interpretation. Used appropriately, vignettes can deepen understanding, support multi-method approaches, and reflect the relational and narrative foundations of Aboriginal methodologies. The vignette chosen for the interviews were from the researcher’s own experience. One was given at the start of the interview and the second was given prior to conversations on support.
My experience was that it was really hard. I had decided years ago I wanted to be a lecturer because I love teaching. But then I was told to be a lecturer I needed to have a PhD. But to get into a PhD I needed to prove I could research. So, that is what I did. I kept enrolling in different courses until I had proven I could do it . . . After this I then had to find someone who believed I could do it. Author 1, personal reflection (September 22, 2022).
The second vignette was provided to open the discussion around supports and navigational challenges.
I remember that the challenges got worse after I got accepted and enrolled. I really hadn’t thought about that part. All of a sudden, I was a single mother of three kids and expected to survive on a scholarship. I had rent, bills, school expenses for my kids as well as food and car costs. It was impossible. Author 1, personal reflection (September 22, 2022)
Complementary methods comprised systematic document analysis and qualitative data analysis, alongside the audio recording and verbatim transcription of research conversations to support rigorous interpretation and transparency in the analytic process. Twelve Aboriginal HDR women students at different stages of their HDR journey were individually interviewed. These data collected provided a broader overview of the student journey, as follows: students who applied but chose not to accept, were not accepted or unable to enrol, students who are currently active or on leave of absence, students who withdrew, and students who have completed.
Interview procedure
Interview questions were drawn from factors and issues identified in the literature review chapter and were tailored to the interviewee categories identified. Participants were asked the following questions: What stage are you at in your HDR? (not relevant for ‘unsuccessful’ applicant so will not be asked). Why did you want to study HDR? How did you find the process of applying? Did you get any assistance in the application process? If yes, who helped you and do you know why and what does it mean to you to have assistance in that process? Do you think universities at the HDR level are accessible for Aboriginal women? If not, why and if yes, what do you think makes them accessible? How do you think the university can make HDR more accessible for Aboriginal women? What does diversity mean to you? How does your understanding of diversity relate to your experience of applying and or being an HDR student? Do you think that the university understands diversity in the same way as you? And finally, do you think ‘diversity’ provides a good representation of Aboriginal students in the university?
Each interview began with introductions in the Aboriginal way, identifying through mob and Country. The participants then introduced themselves and immediately acknowledged their own Aboriginal Australian ancestral connection and tribal nation. This enabled everyone to connect to Country and culture, a connection that has existed prior to colonisation of Australia and continues to exist and only gets stronger in our future (Australian Law Reform Commission, 2010). It ensured an Aboriginal women’s way of being through distinct cultural practices and supportive and trustful environments facilitating in-depth conversations (Marriott et al., 2019). The research aims were revisited with the participants, and an Aboriginal Australian Research methodology was placed at the forefront of the study to identify racially biased dominant cultural ideologies, because the participants are Aboriginal people in a Eurocentric institution. Tjukurpa was also embedded as it provided a way in which to approach both the women as participants but also as a way for the participants to engage with me, especially given I am both ‘researcher’ and an Aboriginal woman.
Discussion and results
The integration of Kungka Tjukurpa into Indigenous research methodologies represents a critical shift in how knowledge is produced, validated, and shared within academic contexts. The Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku research framework through the lens of Kunga Tjukurpa, grounded in Anangu women’s cultural and legal knowledge, offered a relational and ethical approach to research that prioritised Indigenous voices and lived experiences (James, 2015; NPY Women’s Council, 2026). It challenges the dominance of Western epistemologies and reframes research as a process of cultural engagement, reciprocity, and accountability. In the case study, Kungka Tjukurpa guided the methodological choices, ensuring that the research remained culturally safe and responsive to the needs of Aboriginal women. The use of yarning, semi-structured interviews, and vignettes created space for participants to share their stories in ways that honoured their agency and cultural identity. These methods are not simply tools for data collection; they are expressions of Indigenous ways of knowing that resist objectification and promote relationality. By embedding these practices, the research moved beyond extractive models and towards a more inclusive and transformative approach.
The findings also underscored the limitations of conventional feminist methodologies when applied to the experiences of Aboriginal women. Feminist research often grapples with the challenge of representing diverse identities across intersections of race, gender, class, and culture. However, without grounding in Indigenous epistemologies, such approaches risk reproducing colonial dynamics. Kungka Tjukurpa offers a culturally specific feminist lens that centres Aboriginal women’s sovereignty, law, and knowledge. It enables researchers to engage with the complexity of Indigenous womanhood in ways that are respectful, nuanced, and grounded in community.
One woman articulated her experience as relational continuity grounded in women’s Law rather than individual experience.
I feel like as Aboriginal women regardless of our diversity, where we are from in the country . . . we always connect up with Aboriginal people. Doesn’t matter our journey we always come back to the same story and the same experiences, so regardless of that diversity of where we come from, we have the same experiences and often have the same outcomes. (Participant)
She signalled that collectively held knowledge carried across Country, kinship networks, and generations, where diversity of origin does not disrupt shared belonging or responsibility. The recognition that Aboriginal women ‘come back to the same story and the same experiences’ reflects an Aboriginal women’s standpoint that identifies patterned, structural realities while maintaining relational cohesion and cultural grounding. In this sense, her expression of Kunga Tjukurpa affirmed enduring connection, shared governance of knowledge, and intergenerational continuity.
Another woman spoke about the centrality of relationality in women’s knowledge systems where the value of the experience is located not in the activity itself, but in shared participation and collective presence.
The best thing about the experience was doing it with other Aboriginal people. (Participant)
This reflects an epistemological position in which meaning is produced through connection, kinship, and mutual recognition rather than individual achievement. The statement affirmed that knowledge making and action are strengthened when undertaken alongside other Aboriginal people, reinforcing principles of relational accountability, collective governance, and cultural safety. In this sense, it expresses a core element of Kunga Tjukurpa: that well-being, authority, and strength are generated through doing things together.
Then there was the consistent thread of Eldership and guidance by other Aboriginal women, with one woman clearly articulating the importance of knowing who our elders are.
Our older people and elders are traditionally our knowledge keepers. (Participant)
This woman affirmed the intergenerational governance of women’s knowledge and authority as situated, not as individually owned or freely accessible, but as relationally held, culturally protected, and transmitted through established lines of responsibility. Elders are recognised not only as repositories of information, but also as custodians of Law, memory, and lived experience, carrying the authority to guide decision-making and determine appropriate sharing. In this sense, the statement reflects the structured continuity of Kunga Tjukurpa, where knowledge is sustained through respect for senior women’s roles and the obligations that bind younger generations to them.
However, another woman clearly articulated the differential of engagement of other women who are not Aboriginal, finding in her gender studies that feminist spaces are not always inclusive of race and well-being.
She arranged an exhibition of our work without any collaboration, and the first we saw it was the evening of the event. The speeches and nature of music were cringeworthy, and we were all embarrassed/shamed and felt completely disempowered. It was all about her and she had internalised the view that she knew ‘what was good for us’. (Participant)
The study highlighted the potential of Indigenous methodologies to inform institutional change. By capturing the lived experiences of Aboriginal women, the research reveals how diversity policies are interpreted, enacted, and experienced within university settings. These insights are vital for the decolonisation of policy and practice, as they expose gaps between institutional rhetoric and the realities of Aboriginal women’s educational journeys. Kungka Tjukurpa, in this context, becomes not only a methodological guide but also a tool for advocacy and transformation.
This research affirms the importance of embedding Kungka Tjukurpa within Indigenous research methodologies to ensure the recognition and prioritisation of Aboriginal women’s voices. These approaches are not emerging innovations but deeply rooted cultural practices that offer powerful alternatives to dominant research paradigms. Their strength lies in their ability to foster genuine engagement, relational accountability, and culturally grounded knowledge production (James, 2015). While feminist methodologies provide valuable frameworks for exploring power and identity, they must be adapted to reflect the lived realities of Aboriginal women. Kungka Tjukurpa offers a pathway for such adaptation, enabling feminist inquiry to be expanded through Indigenous lenses. It challenges researchers to move beyond theoretical abstraction and engage with the relational, legal, and cultural dimensions of Aboriginal womanhood.
The findings also illuminate the limitations of conventional feminist methodologies when applied to Aboriginal women’s experiences. While feminist frameworks aim to address intersectionality, they risk perpetuating colonial dynamics if not grounded in Indigenous epistemologies. Kungka Tjukurpa offers a culturally specific feminist lens that foregrounds Aboriginal women’s sovereignty, law, and knowledge, enabling respectful and nuanced engagement with Indigenous womanhood.
Conclusion
The integration of a lens of Kungka Tjukurpa into Indigenous research methodologies marks a pivotal shift in the production, validation, and dissemination of knowledge within academic contexts. Rooted in Anangu women’s cultural and legal frameworks, Kungka Tjukurpa offers a relational and ethically grounded viewpoint that helps to centre Indigenous voices and lived experiences (James, 2015). By challenging the dominance of Western epistemologies, it reframes research as a process of cultural engagement, reciprocity, and accountability.
The Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku research framework with the lens of Kungka Tjukurpa informs methodological decisions, ensuring cultural safety and responsiveness to the needs of Aboriginal women (NPY Women’s Council, 2026). The use of yarning, semi-structured interviews, and vignettes created culturally appropriate spaces for storytelling, affirming participants’ agency and identity. These methods are not merely data collection tools; they embody Indigenous ways of knowing that resist objectification and promote relationality. Through their integration, the research moved beyond extractive paradigms towards inclusive and transformative practices.
Furthermore, the study demonstrated the potential of Indigenous methodologies to drive institutional change. By capturing the lived realities of Aboriginal women, the research exposes the disjunction between diversity policy rhetoric and practice within university settings. In this context, the lens of Kungka Tjukurpa functions not only as a methodological guide but also as a tool for advocacy and systemic transformation.
Ultimately, embedding Kungka Tjukurpa within Indigenous research methodologies is essential for advancing equity, justice, and decolonisation in academia for Aboriginal women. These approaches are not novel innovations but enduring cultural practices that offer powerful alternatives to dominant paradigms. Their strength lies in fostering genuine engagement, relational accountability, and culturally grounded knowledge production. While feminist methodologies provide valuable insights into power and identity, they must be adapted to reflect the lived realities of Aboriginal women. Kungka Tjukurpa offers a lens for such adaptation, expanding feminist inquiry and challenging researchers to engage with the legal, cultural, and relational dimensions of Aboriginal womanhood.
In centring Aboriginal women in the research process, this approach strengthens the integrity of scholarship and contributes to a more inclusive, culturally responsive academic landscape, with the very important benefit of addressing systemic racism and gender discrimination.
Footnotes
Authors’ note
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by a Research Training Scholarship.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and publication of this article.
Ethical considerations
This study was approved by the Human Research Ethics Committee of The University of Melbourne (Ethics ID: 13304).
Consent to participate
All participants provided written informed consent prior to participating.
Consent for publication
Written informed consent to publish has been obtained, and it is only held and available by the Responsible Researcher.
Data availability statement
The research approach prioritises local Indigenous contributions to the design, implementation and outcomes of the research project and will focus on the interpretation of data for the purposes of informing local priorities. All local Indigenous communities involved in the research will be prioritised in the availability of their data, and will further build long-term research capacity, and local control and capacity to interpret data.
Glossary
Aṉangu (Anangu) People; the term used by Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara speakers to refer to themselves and their community
APY (Aṉangu Pitjantjatjara Yankunytjatjara) the collective name for Aṉangu people of the Pitjantjatjara and Yankunytjatjara language groups, and the region known as the APY Lands in northwest South Australia.
kungka (also known as Kunga) woman or sister; an adult female in Aṉangu society.
Tjukurpa is understood as the central cultural law and knowledge system of Aṉangu that must be respected, protected and upheld when engaging with community and their knowledge
Tjukuritja (ancestors) ancestral beings from the creation period who formed the land, established laws, and continue to hold spiritual significance
Tjukurpa Nganampa Wanantjaku “Looking after our Tjukurpa”; a research framework; the responsibility to protect, maintain, and pass on cultural law, knowledge, and connection to Country