In March 2025, a law professor at Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia assigned a final oral examination that required students to give an “acknowledgment of country”. And not just any acknowledgment of country. It had to be a “thoughtful, exceptionally well-written, culturally respectful acknowledgement of country”.
For anyone who has missed the boat on this one, an acknowledgment of country is the practice of opening a ceremony, a meeting, or even a Zoom call by acknowledging the historical indigenous inhabitants of the land on which the speaker is talking, usually accompanied by a sanctimonious assertion that the land still belongs to its traditional “owners”.
The Macquarie law students weren’t allowed to just mumble through their acknowledgments. Instead, they were reportedly graded on how “heartfelt” their acknowledgments seemed. And the acknowledgment had to be done. Skipping it was an automatic fail.
Law students are a famously litigious bunch. But before going to court, this group went to the press, and the university quickly folded. The acknowledgment was made voluntary, and (for what it’s worth) the university assured students that their grades would not be “adversely affected” if they opted out.
Even as it withdrew the requirement, however, Macquarie University insisted that “an acknowledgment of country is an authentic, professional skill relevant to contemporary legal practice” that is “relevant both to this specific task and to the overall learning outcomes of the unit”. But if that was true, why was the assignment withdrawn?
