This thesis explores the discussions and perspectives of Christchurch secondary school students in regards to their particular experiences and engagement with Anzac. In this thesis I seek to rigorously and robustly examine these viewpoints through semi-structured focus group interviews and thematic analysis. I seek to situate these youth perspectives within wider debates around Anzac mythology and Anzac resurgence in New Zealand which often do not represent the youth outlook. These debates are seen, on the one hand, to present a resurgence of youth engagement with Anzac and, on the other hand, to present the idea that Anzac has become an exclusionary myth which distorts Australians’ and New Zealanders’ understanding of wider Anzac experiences and educates them in a narrow, militarised way. Youth engagement with Anzac was not something which could be solely situated under either of these debates and, instead, it was seen to be multifaceted and made up of unique ideas and elements. The youth in my study acknowledged that their Anzac education did have mythic elements which made it hard for them to engage with Anzac despite the fact that they were actually interested in learning and understanding it. These mythic elements were the idea that Anzac is taught as a ‘simple narrative’ which does not allow room for critique, that it emphasises a link between Anzac and national identity, that it disregards many alternative Anzac experiences and that it presents a particular New Zealand identity to internalise. These students responded to their mythic Anzac education in a very active way, and instead of accepting it as truth, they were able to have constructive and critical conversations about their education and push against parts of it which they found to be too narrow or skewed in particular directions based on gender, ethnicity and national identity. The students were not passive vessels which internalised their Anzac education as fact; instead, they were able to acknowledge the mythic elements of their education and its negative influence in the classroom. This thesis went further in exploring what factors were seen to enhance this active process of critique and provide students with alternative knowledge and perspectives about Anzac. These factors were ancestral ties to Anzac, research into personal Anzac stories and experiences, unassessed educational units, centenary discussions, an understanding of hardship through the earthquakes and alternative perspectives of the Anzac experience through access to the internet. These factors presented a broader understanding of Anzac perspectives and experiences and students believed that if the mythic elements of their education could be revised and these elements encouraged then their engagement with Anzac would continue long into the future.
Background: We are in a period of history where natural disasters are increasing in both frequency and severity. They are having widespread impacts on communities, especially on vulnerable communities, those most affected who have the least ability to prepare or respond to a disaster. The ability to assemble and effectively manage Interagency Emergency Response Teams (IERTs) is critical to navigating the complexity and chaos found immediately following disasters. These teams play a crucial role in the multi-sectoral, multi-agency, multi-disciplinary, and inter-organisational response and are vital to ensuring the safety and well-being of vulnerable populations such as the young, aged, and socially and medically disadvantaged in disasters. Communication is key to the smooth operation of these teams. Most studies of the communication in IERTs during a disaster have been focussed at a macro-level of examining larger scale patterns and trends within organisations. Rarely found are micro-level analyses of interpersonal communication at the critical interfaces between collaborating agencies. This study set out to understand the experiences of those working at the interagency interfaces in an IERT set up by the Canterbury District Health Board to respond to the needs of the vulnerable people in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury, New Zealand, in 2010-11. The aim of the study was to gain insights about the complexities of interpersonal communication (micro-level) involved in interagency response coordination and to generate an improved understanding into what stabilises the interagency communication interfaces between those agencies responding to a major disaster. Methods: A qualitative case study research design was employed to investigate how interagency communication interfaces were stabilised at the micro-level (“the case”) in the aftermath of the destructive earthquakes that hit Canterbury in 2010-11 (“the context”). Participant recruitment was undertaken by mapping which agencies were involved within the IERT and approaching representatives from each of these agencies. Data was collected via individual interviews using a semi-structured interview guide and was based on the “Critical Incident Technique”. Subsequently, data was transcribed verbatim and subjected to inductive analysis. This was underpinned theoretically by Weick’s “Interpretive Approach” and supported by Nvivo qualitative data analysis software. Results: 19 participants were interviewed in this study. Out of the inductive analysis emerged two primary themes, each with several sub-factors. The first major theme was destabilising/disruptive factors of interagency communication with five sub-factors, a) conflicting role mandates, b) rigid command structures, c) disruption of established communication structures, d) lack of shared language and understanding, and e) situational awareness disruption. The second major theme stabilising/steadying factors in interagency communication had four sub-factors, a) the establishment of the IERT, b) emergent novel communication strategies, c) establishment of a liaison role and d) pre-existing networks and relationships. Finally, there was a third sub-level identified during inductive analysis, where sub-factors from both primary themes were noted to be uniquely interconnected by emergent “consequences” arising out of the disaster context. Finally, findings were synthesised into a conceptual “Model of Interagency Communication at the Micro-level” based on this case study of the Canterbury earthquake disaster response. Discussion: The three key dimensions of The People, The Connections and The Improvisations served as a framework for the discussion of what stabilises interagency communication interfaces in a major disaster. The People were key to stabilising the interagency interfaces through functioning as a flexible conduit, guiding and navigating communication at the interagency interfaces and improving situational awareness. The Connections provided the collective competence, shared decision-making and prior established relationships that stabilised the micro-level communication at interagency interfaces. And finally, The Improvisations i.e., novel ideas and inventiveness that emerge out of rapidly changing post-disaster environments, also contributed to stabilisation of micro-level communication flows across interagency interfaces in the disaster response. “Command and control” hierarchical structures do provide clear processes and structures for teams working in disasters to follow. However, improvisations and novel solutions are also needed and often emerge from first responders (who are best placed to assess the evolving needs in a disaster where there is a high degree of uncertainty). Conclusion: This study highlights the value of incorporating an interface perspective into any study that seeks to understand the processes of IERTs during disaster responses. It also strengthens the requirement for disaster management frameworks to formally plan for and to allow for the adaptive responsiveness of local teams on the ground, and legitimise and recognise the improvisations of those in the role of emergent boundary spanners in a disaster response. This needs to be in addition to existing formal disaster response mechanisms. This study provides a new conceptual model that can be used to guide future case studies exploring stability at the interfaces of other IERTs and highlights the centrality of communication in the experiences of members of teams in the aftermath of a disaster. Utilising these new perspectives on stabilising communication at the interagency interfaces in disaster responses will have practical implications in the future to better serve the needs of vulnerable people who are at greatest risk of adverse outcomes in a disaster.
