University of Calgary PRISM: University of Calgary's Digital Repository
Graduate Studies The Vault: Electronic Theses and Dissertations
2018-01-26 Sqwélqwel: A Storybasket of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary
Fry, Monique Renee
Fry, M. R. (2018). Sqwélqwel: A Storybasket of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Calgary, Calgary, AB. doi:10.11575/PRISM/5453 http://hdl.handle.net/1880/106372 master thesis
University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission. Downloaded from PRISM: https://prism.ucalgary.ca UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY
Sqwélqwel: A Storybasket of the International Indigenous Studies Program
at the University of Calgary
by
Monique Renée Fry
A THESIS
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
GRADUATE PROGRAM IN CULTURE AND SOCIETY
CALGARY, ALBERTA
JANUARY, 2018
© Monique Renée Fry 2018 Table of Contents Abstract ...... iii Acknowledgments ...... iv Dedication ...... vi List of Tables ...... vii List of Figures ...... viii We always start with Ceremony: The Introduction ...... 1 Ceremony in Indigenous research ...... 3 Offering Sacred Medicine ...... 6 Finding the right tree ...... 9 Story Basket Design ...... 11 Shxwth’a:lhtel – cedar strips for baskets ...... 12 Leq’a:lqel – to go on a long journey ...... 14 Lhí:lt – to weave it ...... 15 Lhí:m – to pick berries ...... 16 Lhít’els – to give, potlatch giving ...... 17 The story of Indigenous studies programs in Canada: The literature review ...... 20 Indigenous studies programs in Canada ...... 24 The future of Indigenous Studies programs ...... 38 Shxwth’a:lhtel - Harvesting The Cedar: Ceremony and Indigenous Theoretical Framework .... 42 Ceremony ...... 45 Ontology ...... 46 Axiology ...... 50 Methodology ...... 54 Conclusion ...... 56 Lhí:lt - Weaving the Basket: Methods ...... 58 My Storywork ...... 63 Lhí:m - Picking Berries: Findings & Analysis ...... 83 The University of Alberta ...... 83 The University of Lethbridge ...... 88 The Creation Story of the International Indigenous Studies Program ...... 90 Framing the Program’s Rationale ...... 92 Operational challenges ...... 110 Personnel ...... 119 Directors ...... 119 Sessional Instructors ...... 123 Students ...... 135 Indigenous Community Support ...... 140 Current Context ...... 142 i Conclusion ...... 146 Lhít:els – Potlach Give Away: Conclusion ...... 147 Locally Developed Indigenous Studies Curriculum ...... 148 Recommendations ...... 151 1. Deeper Indigenous community support ...... 152 2. Priority in the Indigenous Strategy ...... 152 3. Autonomy to use Indigenous ways of teaching and learning ...... 153 4. Creation of a Distinct Department ...... 154 5. Creation of a Graduate Degree Program ...... 155 Bibliography ...... 156 Appendix A ...... 161 Appendix B ...... 163 Appendix C ...... 164 Appendix D ...... 169 Appendix E ...... 170
ii Abstract
This storybasket contains a Creation Story of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the
University of Calgary. Using Indigenous research theories and methods in my own constructed research framework, I have gathered knowledge to determine how the program has endured within a system that has privileged western knowledge and western ways of teaching and learning. As a methodological intervention I have privileged Indigenous ways of knowing, research, and voices to decolonize all entry points of the thesis. Systemic and institutional racism has been the defining barrier that has impacted the growth of the International Indigenous
Studies Program. Through it all, there have been some successes due in part to the passionate sessional instructors, courageous students, and relationships that put the holistic needs of learners at the center. In my Give Away (Conclusion) I have offered recommendations that would support the program’s development in the short and long terms. Above all, the need for deeper
Indigenous community relationships to support the program at all levels fits into the larger
Indigenous Strategy of the University of Calgary, and hopefully creates a space where the holistic, reflexive, and relational needs of all its learners can thrive.
iii Acknowledgments
First and foremost, I would like to acknowledge the Creator and my ancestors for not only surviving, but thriving, so that I can have the privileges that this education will provide for me, my family, and my communities. I would also like to acknowledge that this thesis was created on the Treaty 7 First Nation territories shared by the Blackfoot Confederacy – Siksika, Piikuni, and
Kainai, the Tsuut’ina Nation, Stoney Nakoda and the peoples of the Métis Nation who also call
Mohkintsis their home.
This thesis would not have been possible without the generous support from my First Nation
Chi:yom, who continued to stand by me financially and personally. To all my family on Chi:yom and beyond, I thank you for your trust in me.
I would also like to acknowledge the support of Indigenous scholarships from the New
Relationship Trust Fund, Indspire Awards, and the Indigenous Graduate Scholarship from
Advanced Education. Thank you to my faculty, administration, and department for your support over the years it took me to finish. The encouragement and financial support have been most appreciated.
I am grateful for the support of my loving husband Chris Fry, and my two children Jakob and
Sage, who were often left to fend for themselves near the end. I hope that you are proud of me, and see that anything is possible if you put in the hard work! To all my sisters in spirit, thank you for your wisdom, your guidance and cheerleading.
iv A special thank you to my work colleagues, who missed me during summer writing breaks and shorter office hours that were needed in order to complete this thesis.
To all my storytellers, I acknowledge your generosity of time and memories. Thank you so very much for sharing with us. In particular, to Aruna Srivistava and Alicia Clifford for support and help at the beginning of this journey, I say a big Thank you!
In closing, thank you to my supervisor, Tamara Shepherd, who came in to the circle with me at a difficult juncture with hope, encouragement, an open mind, and an open heart.
v Dedication
I dedicate this thesis and its hopeful vision to the memory of mama Sharron Proulx-Turner,
Nokomis to many, who, over a breakfast meeting at Cora’s restaurant, led me to the decision of my thesis topic and started me on the path. There was always time for coffee and breakfast meetings to catch up, talk about our writing and be grateful for our relationship. I miss you, I love you and hope that I have made you proud.
vi List of Tables
Table 1. Parallel Methods ...... 15 Table 2. Review of Native Studies Programs in Canada (Taner, 1999) ...... 36 Table 3. University of Alberta Data ...... 87
vii List of Figures
Figure 1. Theoretical framework for M. Fry’s Indigenous Research, inspired by Wilson (2008) and Kovach (2009) ...... 45 Figure 2. Ceremony in Research (1) Figure 3. Ceremony in Research (2) ...... 50 Figure 4. Course History Overview in IIS from Fall 2004-2016 ...... 117 Figure 5. First Peoples Principles of Learning Poster ...... 150
viii We always start with Ceremony: The Introduction
My name is Monique Renee Fry. I am a member of the Chi:yom Band of the Stó:lō Tribal
Nations in the Fraser River Valley of what is known as British Columbia. I have ancestors in the
Pilalt Tribe of the region as well as with the Musqueam Nation of what is now known as
Vancouver. I am married into the Crow clan of the Kwanlin Dün First Nation, and my husband and I have two beautiful Crow children that will follow my line.
I have been reminded of many things on this journey of transformation from student to an
Indigenous graduate scholar. I have learned to look back at the knowledge of our ancestors and their ways of viewing and navigating in the world to shape my present thought, inquiry and assessment of knowledge gathering. I have learned that Indigenous research can be an intervention; that it is resistance, resurgence and it is reconciliation. All of these things begin with ceremony.
Indigenous scholar Shawn Wilson (2008) is clear that research itself is ceremony, and
Cree scholar Margaret Kovach (2009) describes how culture, which is centered on ceremony, nourishes a researcher’s spirit during the entire research process. The truth is that ceremony takes time, preparation and guidance. This process for me has been long, difficult and complex. I have changed my mind multiple times, changed topics, changed direction and even changed supervisors. I know that I am not alone in this journey, that this is a common occurrence with all graduate students. What has been unique for me is to ensure that I start with ceremony, that the work that I embark on is relevant, reciprocal and done in a good way.
This will not be a thesis like any other. It may not be linear; it may not have headings that you recognize. This thesis will not have the usual buzzwords that western academia provides.
This storybasket is an intervention. Peter Cole would have us do away completely with the
1 western framework of paragraphs, chapters, and punctuation as he believes that the English language limits Indigenous people’s ability to mobilize “Indigenous concepts of space, time, and speech patterns” in creating meaning (quoted in Absolon & Willet, 2005, p. 114). While my thesis still relies on western conventions in writing and argumentation, like a good story there will be a beginning, middle and end; there will be points of interest, conflict, and hopefully resolution. It is my hope that you feel like we have had a collective conversation and that you do indeed feel the thesis. This storywork will be told in a way that reflects Stó:lō ways of knowing and doing, grounded in culture, ceremony and self. It will be relevant and reciprocal, and it will be open and accessible for all – this is my giveaway.
In summary, my storybasket will include the gathering of stories (berries) that constitute a
Creation Story of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary.
Using an Indigenous research method designed by Stó:lō Scholar Joanne Archibald (2008) called storywork, along with an Indigenous research framework influenced by Cree Scholars Shawn
Wilson and Margaret Kovach, I have gathered knowledge to determine how the program has endured within a system that has privileged western knowledge and western ways of teaching and learning. This work in and of itself is a methodological intervention, as I privilege
Indigenous ways of conducting research, marked by an aim to decolonize through all entry points to the thesis. Therefore, my Theory and Methods Chapters make up a significant portion of this thesis to bolster the validity and acceptability of Indigenous perspectives in research. As the stories I gathered are integral to the research question, the Findings and Analysis Chapter points to the systemic barriers that have not made the path easy for this program to thrive. Yet, there are also some successes due in part to the passionate sessional instructors, courageous students, and relationships that put the holistic needs of learners at the center of it all. In my Give
2 Away (Conclusion), I offer recommendations to help support the program as it finds a new home within the Political Science Department, fits into the larger Indigenous Strategy of the University of Calgary, and hopefully creates a space where the holistic, reflexive, and relational needs of all its learners can thrive.
Ceremony in Indigenous research
Ceremony occurs in many parts of our lives. There is ceremony in the everyday things that we do, and in the sacred things that we do. People may do ceremony as acts of prayer, healing, forgiveness, thanksgiving and future hopes. In some cases, the ceremonial acts that are performed are requests for change or transformation. In my cultural knowledge, transformers play an important and vital role in our history and our creation stories. The mountain that bears the English name of my reserve community Cheam is a sacred transformer site. Lhilheqey (Mt.
Cheam) was shaped by the transformer Xa:ls who brought balance to the world and appointed
Lhilheqey with the role of looking after all in the valley, the river, the people of the river (Stó:lō) and all living things. It is believed that the Pilalt people, my direct ancestors, in fact were themselves transformed from mountain goats into human beings.
Transformation, transforming, and change are all a result of ceremony. Wilson (2008) says
“If research hasn’t changed you as a person, then you haven’t done it right” (p. 135). While this may sound contradictory to usual social science research that asks the researcher to be objective, there is an increased use of reflexivity in post-structural, race-based and critical research (Pillow,
2003, p. 176), which makes space for including ceremony and personal change. For Indigenous research, we are saying to choose a topic that is close to you, get caught up in it, and locate yourself in that research:
3 Indigenous research frameworks require a purpose statement about one’s own self-location
and worldview… honouring the kôkums and mosôms by remembering them. Knowing
why we are carrying out research – our motive – has the potential to take us to places that
involve both the head and heart. We need to know our own research story to be
accountable to self and community. (Kovach, 2009, p. 120)
In his book Research is Ceremony, Wilson (2008) describes four components of an
Indigenous research paradigm to include ontology, epistemology, methodology, and axiology. I elaborate further on these theoretical concepts in the Theory Chapter (pg. 42), connecting them to Indigenous worldviews and the imperatives of decolonization. While, as Michael Hart (2010) notes, these components are not rooted in Indigenous worldviews alone (p. 6), for Indigenous scholars like Kovach (2009), these components should be framed through a tribal lens rooted in land and in ceremony. I am taking the opportunity to write my protocol and ceremony into this thesis, as it is part of my research methodology. The concept of research as being sacred is something that is not easily explained. As there are a limited number of Indigenous scholars currently in the academy, the reality is that you are lucky if you have someone on your committee that understands where you are coming from when you speak or write about these things that are not easily recorded. Kovach (2009) notes that much of the meaning making of
Indigenous research happens internally, in dreams, or via experiences that “cannot be written, only felt, remembered, and at best spoken” (p. 140) – to me, this is ceremony.
As research is ceremony and relational (Wilson, 2008), it was important that the relationship with my supervisor was rooted in ceremony to ensure cultural protocols were followed. My Indigenous research design has ceremony at the center of the entire framework. As we embarked on this journey together I offered her traditional tobacco that signifies the contract
4 between us and it also a “gift that signifies respect and reciprocity” (Kovach, 2009, p. 127). In her acceptance of this, she agreed to support me in this work to the best of her ability and to acknowledge my Indigenous research paradigm. We met in the Native Centre at the University of Calgary, in the Ceremonial Room so that we could engage in a smudging ceremony. This allowed us to cleanse our minds and spirits and prepare us for the journey: “The purpose of any ceremony is to build stronger relationships or bridge the distance between aspects of our cosmos and ourselves” (Wilson, 2008, p. 11). When we are smudging together we are co-creating the ceremonial space. My Elder, Reg Crowshoe, describes the lighting of the smudge to be parallel to a calling to order, or the school bell ringing to begin the learning. He also attributes it to
“truthing” that when the smudge is lit, and we are in ceremony together, we are bound to truth.
I make a conscious choice to privilege oral knowledge from my Elders in this thesis, like the example above. This privileges tribal epistemology with an holistic orientation (Kovach,
2009, p. 58), and is another way that my Indigenous research design provides a benefit to my thesis as a whole: “Indigenous researchers are grappling with ways to explain how holistic epistemologies inform their research design in ways understood by Western academic minds”
(Kovach, 2009, p. 58), which is why it was important for that my supervisor was able to experience ceremony and receive Indigenous protocol first hand.
How do we do a better job of bringing that sense of ceremony with us into the “defense”?
Maybe to start I will request that my oral “defense” be a call to witness. Witnesses are often called to be the record keepers of important historical information or events. The Truth and
Reconciliation Commission recently used Honorary Witnesses such as the Right Honorable
Michaëlle Jean in their national community events. They describe that witnessing an event means:
5 the event or work that is undertaken is validated and provided legitimacy. The work
could not take place without honoured and respected guests to witness it. Witnesses are
asked to store and care for the history they witness and most importantly, to share it with
their own people when they return home. (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada, 2016)
In this way, I invite the committee to bear witness to what I have learned, to acknowledge, ask questions and listen to the storywork so that they can tell others in the future about it when asked. The “pass” of the oral witnessing then, becomes my validation in both the western and the
Indigenous communities that I have the rites and privileges of my degree.
Offering Sacred Medicine
There is protocol or traditional law that states you can’t take anything without giving something in return – this is about reciprocity and keeping everything in our world in balance. This applies to work, to hunting, to fishing, and even to research. Indigenous people in Canada are diverse,1 and it is difficult to make generalized statements about what an entire group of peoples believe or live by; however, there are some commonalties and universal truths that speak to our interconnectedness to one another and to every living thing on this planet. Depending on where you are from, there are various traditional and sacred medicines that exist in your ecosystem.
Four that are widely recognized across the nation as sacred include sage, sweetgrass, cedar, and tobacco. The traditional and cultural analogy that I have chosen to represent my thesis is a cedar storybasket, since cedar is a sacred medicine for my people, as well as a strong and beautiful resource that we still use today.
1 Indigenous refers collectively to First Nations, Métis and Inuit people of Canada. It can also refer to first peoples of the world in an international context. Whenever possible, reference will be made to actual place-based names of Indigenous peoples.
6 With regard to cedar, an important resource for my work is a small, wire-bound booklet that was created by the Stó:lō Sitel Advisory Committee when they worked with Elders to build our traditional curriculum for use in the school systems. It does not list a publisher, nor does it have a date, although I can guess it was created around the same time as some of the small traditional booklets I have that were produced between the years 1979 and 1986 that contain stories like the Hunter and the Sasquatch, The Mosquito Story and my community’s creation story, The Mountain Goat People of Cheam. This particular booklet is called Upper Stó:lō
Interaction: Teachings from Our Elders. It is so precious to me, and it is so simple compared to the many Indigenous scholarly books that I have in my personal library. There are small biographies and photos of Elders that worked on the curriculum and some of their stories or words of wisdom to share. All of the booklets have the same dedication at the beginning: “This book is dedicated to the Stó:lō Nation in the hope that our traditions and culture will not be forgotten and that a better understanding between the Indian and non-Indian people will grow,” since the curriculum was made for all learners, not just those of us from the Stó:lō territory.
There is a story in this booklet by Bertha Peeters who was born on the Sqwah reserve on
December 1, 1917. A residential school survivor, at the time of this publication she had 28 grandchildren and 12 great grandchildren; she was truly blessed. Here is an excerpt from this small yet mighty booklet that speaks about the importance of cedar:
The Cedar was a great helper of the Stó:lō people. The cedar provided wood for shelter and
canoes, bark for clothing and roots for containers. The cedar also gave in spiritual ways to
the Stó:lō people. This story tells of a special way in which the cedar is si:le (grandparent).
Cedar was once a human being.
7 Long ago, before there were cedar trees,
there was a real good man
who was always helping others.
Whenever they needed, he gave.
When they wanted, he gave them food and clothing.
When the Great Spirit saw this,
He said, ‘That man has done his work.
When he dies and where he is buried, a Cedar Tree will grow
and be useful to the people –
the roots for baskets
the bark for clothing
the wood for shelter.’ (Peeters, n.d.)
In line with this story, and according to scholar Jo-ann Archibald (2008), Stó:lō women are known for their cedar baskets, and they are often identified by the designs that they use in their basketry (p. 2). I hope that in the end you will be able recognize my markers throughout this thesis storybasket.
Before I can begin to harvest the cedar there is protocol that requires me first to make an offering of medicine to ask permission from the tree and from Creator so that I can gather the cedar that I need to make my basket. In most cases the offering that goes back to the land is tobacco, and in prayer I place the tobacco at the base of the tree. I thank the tree for its continued life and promise that I will use the cedar in a good way and I will not take it for granted. Offering
8 tobacco is part of the preparation that is needed to ground my work culturally and provide the good intentions for my thesis.
Finding the right tree
The current Acting Director of the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of
Calgary, Aruna Srivastava, approached me with an opportunity to look at the history of the program in preparation for it to move under the guidance of the Political Science Department.
Traditionally the program has been very transient, and while there have been many faculty members who have lent their time and support to it, the program has been largely neglected. As an undergraduate student my minor was Indigenous Studies, and I devoted much of my time to taking as many classes as I could within the program. I knew that things were not always rosy, and I knew that our sessional instructors worked very hard to share important knowledge that would not only make us better students, but better human beings. Later, as a graduate student, I was able to co-instruct a class in Indigenous Law and experienced some of the flaws and some of the joys in teaching for the program. When I was asked if I wanted to help, I was honoured and inspired. This was the topic that I was waiting for, and it would become my final choice for my
Master’s thesis.
Beyond my personal connection to the program’s history, the future of Indigenous education within Canadian universities has become more and more important. Currently, the
Faculty of Arts – home to the program and the Department of Political Science – is undergoing a transformation of its own as it looks to indigenize itself. The Werklund School of Education has done quite a bit of work in this area already, and Jacquie Ottmann (2013) recently discussed the indigenization process in the academy, considering why it is important and how might we do it.
9 Ottmann suggests that we look at Indigenous philosophy, ontology, and epistemology and ask if they are informing the policy, curriculum, and guiding actions within the institution (p. 12). An indigenized academy understands the value of Indigenous knowledges, understands the process of decolonization for students and teachers, and creates space for Indigenous peoples (scholars, teachers, leaders, elders) to be a core part of policy making, programs, curriculum, and courses
(pp. 14-17). As a member of the Indigenous Strategy Committee for the Faculty of Arts, I have supported initial community conversations with faculty, staff, and administrators and there is great hope for the work ahead.
The work ahead is happening within multiple faculties in The University of Calgary and in other universities across the country, as we all look at ways that we can act on the Truth and
Reconciliation Calls to Action2 in response to the years of colonization, residential schools, and assimilation policies. In the past, institutions have not done an adequate job of making post- secondary education accessible, safe or relevant for Indigenous students. One particular touchstone for these problems in approaches to Indigenous education is the 1876 amendment to the Indian Act that required all First Nations who obtained a university degree to be enfranchised, meaning that if they were educated they were no longer considered “Indians” under the law, and would bear no benefits or protections as such (Castellano, Davis, & Lahache,
2000, p. 171). Another crucial policy initiative was the federal support for residential schools.
For those that would like to work with and for Indigenous communities, in particular for Alberta, it is crucial that degree programs confront this colonial history by focusing on past, current, and future concerns for Indigenous people, as a majority of resource projects within our province are near or in First Nations and Métis communities. This is true in fact for almost all of the resource
2 http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf
10 projects within Canada, with a total of 650 billion dollars in projects (Webb, 2014).
Unfortunately, it is unclear how well the inclusion of Indigenous studies is promoted to students in degree programs.
We know from the 2011 census data that 54.7% of Indigenous people now live in cities for school and work (Statistics Canada, 2011), and the migration of people that transition from reserves or settlements continues to rise (Environics Institute, 2010, p. 24). There are more
Indigenous people trying to access post-secondary school as they move into the urban centers and see the growing value of obtaining an education. With this in mind, what role has the
International Indigenous Studies program played in the past, and how could this program best support Indigenous and non-Indigenous students to address some of the current barriers that
Indigenous people and communities face? Some of these barriers include: access to economic development; legal claims; concerns of sovereignty; equal access to appropriate housing, water, education, and food; and Murdered and Missing Indigenous Women. How, in general, are we educating all learners at our institution to understand the history of our country and Indigenous peoples for a better society? With recommendations for the program, the department that will house it, and the university itself, this basket of work will be filled to nourish us all.
Story Basket Design
“Start where you are, it will take you to where you need to go.” – Kovach (2009, p. 10)
The book Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations, and Contexts (Kovach,
2009) is a key source for the framework of my storybasket. Kovach has laid out many possible avenues for the burgeoning Indigenous scholar to engage with Indigenous methods. If we believe
11 that Indigenous research is resistance, then the choice to utilize a research method that is grounded in culture, spirit, and self-location is the intervention.
Locating self is used in many different methodologies including feminist, anti-oppressive and auto-ethnographic methods, for example, and provides a form of reflexivity for the researcher to share in the creation of knowledge. Kathy Absolon and Cam Willet (2005) remind us that locating ourselves “anchors knowledge within experiences, and these experiences greatly influence interpretations (and)…sharing stories and finding commonalities assists in making sense of particular phenomenon” (Kovach, 2009, p. 111). It is because of this underlying theory of locating self, which is tied to my Indigenous methodology, that I will weave my story in with the past characters of the story of the International Indigenous Studies Program.
I have conceptualized the organization of my thesis around my Indigenous framework of a storywork basket. Here is how it makes sense to me as a Stó:lō Indigenous scholar which weaves together ceremony, process, knowledge shared and gained, Halq’eméylem language, theory and methods.
Shxwth’a:lhtel – cedar strips for baskets
Harvesting the Cedar – methods – gathering the knowledge, storywork methodology.
Preparing the materials for your basket is an important part of the finished product. The intended uses of your basket will determine the type of material that you will use, how much you will need, and then what pattern you would like the strips arranged in to create its aesthetic appeal.
Even in a basket designed for the most mundane task, such as picking berries, there is beauty – this shows pride for your work and respect for the work of harvesting berries. The preparation and process for my thesis is about gathering the knowledge and storywork methodology.
12 My choice of using an Indigenous method, storywork, versus using a western method with an Indigenous lens has a lot to do with power and validation in the academy. While other
Indigenous scholars have used western or mixed methodologies, I have chosen a different path that has more in common with the development of uniquely Indigenous methods. These are methods and theories of our own, but as Wilson (2008) notes, there is a close relationship between Indigenous and other critical, post-positivist methodologies and theories, such as feminist theory, relational psychology, and participatory action research (p. 5). The goal in devising a particularly Indigenous approach is to try and aim for something that will be more conducive to an Indigenous worldview.
Kovach’s (2009) work has been particularly informative in this sense. She introduces the creation of an Indigenous research framework after having first tried to use a western method for her research with phenomenology – a route that I could have taken for my thesis too. She found that phenomenology alone did not get to the heart of what she wanted to do, as it “did not fully encompass the political dimension of a question requiring a decolonizing perspective” (p. 39).
She then tried a mixed-methods approach, including critical theory, but had trouble fitting all the pieces together, and it did not seem to feel appropriate for the research she was doing on
Indigenous knowledges as methodologies (2009, p. 39). The action of creating an Indigenous research framework furnishes the researcher with “a tool to show how their methods are being aligned with a particular way of knowing” (Kovach, 2009, p. 43). For me personally, it first became about finding the parallels that may exist between western methodologies and the
Indigenous methodologies that I wanted to use. This wasn’t about the binaries that may exist; I discovered in my process that it was more about power, the naming and controlling of knowledge systems, and the validation of other knowledge systems.
13
Leq’a:lqel – to go on a long journey
Multiple times over the past year, I have presented at various graduate conferences to feel out and orally reflect upon the methodology and journey of my thesis with different audiences before
I even had written much of anything. With more presentations, confidence, and advice, I slowly developed and prepared my cedar strips for my storybasket. A big boost of confidence for me came from one of my new professors, Tamara Shepherd, who I had not had the pleasure to take any courses with, but who has taken an interest in my thesis and ultimately became my supervisor. After hearing me lament on some of the inner reflexive demons I was battling with western methods – the framework within which I thought I had to describe and translate the work that I wanted to do – she told me to just stop translating for people. She is the one who told me that this work is an intervention, and to take liberties in the way that I want to describe how it feels, how it should sound, how it should breathe.
Here is an example of where my process brought me. Originally my thesis statement read like this:
This thesis will be an ethnographic case study to examine the evolution of the International
Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary and determine if the program has
been responsive/supportive to the needs of learners and to the Indigenous community.
This thesis statement never sat well with me; it felt distanced and cold, and I could not connect with it. After prayers, ceremony and working through the Indigenous framework process, here is what I came up with that felt better:
A “storybasket” will be woven that holds the memories, histories, and stories of the
International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary. How does the
14 program reflect the First Peoples Principles of Learning to be holistic, reflexive,
experiential and relational to meet the needs of learners and the Indigenous community?
By working through this process, and examining western and Indigenous methodologies, I made this simple chart to visualize the parallels when I spoke about the research I was conducting.
This enabled the people that I reflected with to see that the validation of what I was doing is present in the work. The rationale for me in choosing to name it one thing over the other is there, and at the heart of that is Indigenous culture, perspective, and ways of doing that make it more than just a contrasted version of the other. Kovach (2009) states that, “In traversing cultural knowledge paradigms, the first level of complexity arises with language” (p. 24), and in the case of using English to describe Indigenous methodologies, this becomes about the business of naming in some cases.
Western Methodologies Indigenous Methodologies ¡ Ethnography (auto) ¡ Storywork ¡ Phenomenology ¡ Storytelling ¡ Case study ¡ Knowledge gathering ¡ Archives ¡ Memory; unconscious knowing ¡ Interviews and focus groups ¡ Sharing circles ¡ Postcolonial theory ¡ Decolonization ¡ Thematic analysis ¡ Tribal interpretations ¡ Knowing, then doing ¡ Knowing and doing are the same
Table 1. Parallel Methods
Lhí:lt – to weave it
Weaving the Basket – Indigenous theories of decolonization, indigenization, reconciliation.
In the same way that I have chosen to use Indigenous methods and methodology for my thesis, I also have chosen to use Indigenous theories to underpin the work and provide a holistic and cultural foundation for the analysis. According to Kovach (2009), although “critical theory and
15 postmodern analysis have created space within western science for representation, voice and multiplicity of truths, the essentialism of western thought pervading research has not been fully challenged in the academy” (p. 28). In challenging the academy by my refusal to use western concepts and theories per se, I am challenging myself as well. I am also challenging my thesis committee to be open with their hearts and their minds to this work. The reality is, my academic department does not have any Indigenous professors in it and therefore it is integral that they come with a foundational understanding that Kovach speaks to, and be open to participating in an oral examination that they need to experience in order to make the connections between the key conceptual axes of the theoretical framework. In order to make the oral defense a safer and ethical space for myself, we are hosting it outside of a regular classroom on campus, in a student co-created Indigenous space. I will have a smudging ceremony beforehand in the Native Centre to come grounded and spiritually supported by all. I have invited Indigenous community members, Elders, friends, and family to bear witness to the knowledge ceremony of my oral examination. This process of ceremony is at the centre of my theoretical orientation.
Lhí:m – to pick berries
Filling your Basket with Berries – Sharing of stories from my participants, Sharing Circles, collecting the history of the program via the knowledge gathering.
In this section I will be sharing the space of my thesis with the stories of those who humbly agreed to support my thesis work. As I struggled with the thought of sitting in solitude to write this thesis, I was reminded that I will really be sharing what I learned from them, so in a way I am not really doing all the work on my own. As I will later describe, it was interesting to go through the process of planning to pick berries from a certain berry bush, and realizing that there
16 was only time to collect so many berries, and only space for particular berries in the basket – the rest of the berries need to stay on the bush for someone else to collect, or maybe for the bears.
Lhít’els – to give, potlatch giving
The Give-Away, Recommendations for the program and recommendations to support indigenization of the academy at the University of Calgary.
Archibald (2008) speaks about the nature of reciprocity, teaching and learning that provide the foundation of the storywork methodology here and tie into the concept of the potlach give-away:
Some teachings from my nation, the Stó:lō, are about cultural respect, responsibility, and
reciprocity. According to these teachings, important knowledge and wisdom contain
power. If one comes to understand and appreciate the power of a particular knowledge,
then one must be ready to share and teach it respectfully and responsibly to others in
order for this knowledge, and its power, to continue. One cannot be said to have wisdom
until others acknowledge an individual’s respectful and responsible use and teaching of
knowledge to others. (p. 3)
There is a tradition in my community and many others called the potlatch. While there has been much written about this practice by old anthropologists of the past it was not exactly like what those old men observed. Boas (1887) wrote extensively about First Nations of British Columbia:
The so-called Potlach is a feast celebrated by all these tribes… festivals of this kind are
celebrated very frequently. An Indian who has been unsuccessful in hunting, and feels
ashamed on this account or for any other reason, gives such a festival to restore his honor.
(p. 427)
Having participated in two modern potlatches in my husband’s community of Kwanlin Dun,
Yukon, I can speak from experience about what at least one type of potlatch represents. It has
17 been told to me that the potlatch can occur for a number of reasons: a memorial, a wedding, or a celebration. No matter what the initial occasion is, the potlatch is always a part of the reciprocal relationship to community and giving thanks.
Both of the potlatches that I participated in were memorial potlatches that occurred after the mourning period by the family was complete. In my husband’s community, there are two organizing clan systems: the wolf and the crow. In order to maintain things, you always marry outside of your own clan and the children follow the matrilineal line in the system. For example, my husband is a part of the wolf clan, and as I am marrying into the family from outside of the community, I become a crow in the community and our two children are now also a part of the crow clan. These clan lines help assist in many of the cultural activities that occur in the community and this is very important for protocols that follow when someone passes away.
When a wolf clan member passes away, the crow clan family members step in and support and do all the work for the mourning family. There are many rules and protocols about who can do what and when to follow. After the mourning period is over, the mourning family clan members host a huge community potlatch dinner and invite the whole village and others from afar if possible to celebrate the life of their loved one that passed on, and to give thanks to the crow clan members for taking care of them while they were in mourning. It had been one of the greatest experiences of my life to share in this process with my husband’s family.
The potlatch feast serves many purposes besides a feast of thanksgiving, there are often naming ceremonies that occur at this time when everyone is together, and there are traditional hunting and gathering practices that support the feast. At the very end of the feast and celebration, the big give-away happens. In preparation for the potlatch, sometimes a year in advance, the family collects gifts that they will distribute to the community who often brought
18 food, cleaned their houses, took care of their elders and took care of their spirits. All these gifts, along with anything that was brought in to the potlatch house, are then evenly distributed to the community with special attention given to the other clan family members. Balance is then restored in the community, in our hearts and in our spirits.
My potlatch will be a reciprocal thanksgiving to all those that helped me with this thesis – my storytellers, the students, the professors that have kept the program going, the future holders of the Indigenous Studies program, my team of scholarly supporters, my Elders who prayed with me and encouraged me, and those future Indigenous scholars whom I hope have an easier journey ahead of them.
19
The story of Indigenous studies programs in Canada: The literature review
There is often a disconnect between how people perceive history and story, as if the story itself was not a part of the record. By calling something a story we are sometimes assuming that it is not true, unless we use the term “true” in front of “story”. There is a tradition in critical ethnography that understands that fiction is not necessarily false:
In short, anthropological writings are themselves interpretations; and second and third
order ones to boot. (By definition, only a “native” makes first order ones: it’s his culture.)
They are, thus, fictions; fictions, in the sense that they are “something made,” “something
fashioned” – the original meaning of fictio – not that they are false, un factual, or merely
“as if” thought experiments. (Geertz, 1973, p. 15)
Lee Maracle (2015) believes that fiction/myth or story is real as “it is historic and reflects life: it is conditioned by the desire to mirror a character’s relationship with the world” (p. 231). In his book The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious Account of Native People in North America, Thomas
King (2012) discusses the realities of history and storytelling and what we believe to be true about history in the western paradigm:
Most of us think that history is the past. It’s not. History is the stories that we tell about the
past. That’s all it is. Stories. Such a definition might make the enterprise of history seem
neutral. Benign.
Which of course it isn’t.
History may well be a series of stories that we tell about the past, but the stories are not just
any stories. They’re not chosen by chance. By and large, the stories are about famous men
and celebrated events. We throw in a couple of exceptional women every now and then,
not out of any need to recognize female eminence, but out of embarrassment. (p. 3)
20 It is not a secret that most of history is written by and for men, and in most cases by ‘white men’.3 Sara Ahmed (2007) reflects on whiteness in institutions as an example of public comfort to keep those that look like alike: “it is not just that there is a desire for whiteness that leads to white bodies getting in. Rather whiteness is what the institution is oriented ‘around’, so that even bodies that might not appear white still have to inhabit whiteness, if they are to get ‘in’” (p. 158).
The exceptional women that King speaks about are also probably white women. This patriarchal paradigm has inserted itself into our lives via colonization, and the recording and telling of history has also been a form of colonization. There is evidence of patriarchy in many modern systems today that were not here before colonization, such as in the elected Indian Act
Chief and Council system. Prior to colonization, decision making was often in the hands of the women, the clan leaders, the caretakers of the family. An interesting anecdotal fact from my experience at university is the majority of Indigenous students that I knew were in fact women.
Most were considered mature students (over 21), and many had young families to take care of, like I did. Seeing yourself in the education system, in the text books, in your teachers, and in your research was often impossible. The importance for me to be a role model to my children and other young women to obtain my Master’s degree, to use an Indigenous research storywork method, designed by an Indigenous woman scholar, is an important start to providing other kinds of frameworks for the production of knowledge.
What Indigenous people call stories are complex, with teachings, historical facts, facts of origins, genealogy, geography and so much more; yet, in the academy and within many institutions, stories are not always validated as being truthful, factual or accurate. Indigenous oral
3 Zoë Todd defines ‘white men’ not just as physical beings, but also as an institution: “‘White men’ refers also to conduct; it is not simply who is there, who is here, who is given a place at the table, but how bodies are occupied once they have arrived” (Todd, 2016, pp. 12-13)
21 history has typically been devalued among western concepts of history, yet Indigenous knowledge “is transmitted primarily through symbolic and oral traditions” (Battiste &
Youngblood, 2000, p. 48).
Oral history itself has been a discipline and practice that has often worked in the margins of academia since the 1940s (Abrams, 2016, p. 4). According to Lynn Abrams (2016), by the
1980s oral history was used to recover the histories of those people that were previously left in the margins of traditional history as well – women, LGBTQ, visible minorities – however, there was much infighting amongst social scientists and historians to the validity and reliability of oral history (pp. 4-6). Linda Tuhiwai Smith (2012) notes that “writing has been viewed as the mark of a superior civilization and other societies have been judged, by thus view, to be incapable of thinking critically… writing is a part of theorizing and writing is a part of history” (p. 30).
There are currently over 3000 languages being spoken in the world, but there are only 78 that have a writing system, and in some cases no one has ever worked out a writing system for these languages as “orality of language is permanent” and “the spoken word still resides and lives” (Ong, 1982, 2002, pp. 7-8). While Walter Ong finds roots in oral literature, he is quick to dismiss it on its own merit stating: “without writing, human consciousness cannot achieve its fuller potentials, cannot produce other beautiful and powerful creations. In this sense, orality needs to produce and is destined to produce writing” (Ong, 1982, 2002, p. 14). Jo-Ann Archibald respects Ong’s position, however, she acknowledges that many Western scholars are viewing the relationship between orality and literacy from examining Greek orality or work that is studied about Indigenous oral cultures, by non-Indigenous scholars (Archibald, 2008, p. 15). As
Archibald (2008) argues, “The insistence on reading Native American literature by way of
Western literary theory clearly violates its integrity and performs a new act of colonization and
22 conquest” (p. 16, referencing Kimberly Blaeser). This is also true of Indigenous orality and
Indigenous storywork; it must be given the respect to stand on its own rather than be filtered through a western lens that does not even believe that it can survive without writing it down.
Couple the contested validity of oral histories with the contested value of Indigenous knowledge/Indigenous people and it seems as though the odds are stacked against oral history and storytelling in academia. While Indigenous oral history and testimony has been proven to be on “equal footing with the types of historical evidence that courts are familiar within” by the
Supreme Court of Canada (Delgamuukw v. British Columbia, 1997), academic conventions encourage the use of empirical data to support all claims. My Elder Reg Crowshoe often points to the western instruments that are there at our disposal to highlight the “acceptance” or
“allowance” of our traditional ways. He says that we should take advantage of those instruments to argue that the western systems accept it in those cases, so it should extend to other areas as well. The fact that these “allowances” are written down in western systems should provide us leverage. Indigenous stories have been “written” for as long as we have existed on this planet; we have recorded them in stone, in songs, on buffalo robes, in totem poles, in masks, and we have passed them down from generation to generation since time immemorial.
When I use the term story, I want you to think differently than you have before about that word. I want you to imagine that you know that it is more than just a tale. I want you to imagine that you trust the teller of the story as much as you do an author of a history book who you have never met before. I want you to imagine, just for a moment (or for as long as it takes you to read my thesis), that my knowledge is equal and valid to yours, because Indigenous knowledge comes from story.
23 The “literature review” is a way to assess what has already been written about your chosen topic. It is also a way that you can prove that you have done your homework and that you know what has been written before. If we are to look at this from a traditional and Indigenous perspective, a “literature review” would be likened to spending a week in your community, sitting with all the Elders and knowledge keepers, and asking them what they know about a particular story, who transferred the right to tell that story to them and the different versions that one aunty has versus another aunty. Then, when you have heard all there is to hear at this present moment of the story, you tell your version of the story, as it was told to you, embellished with your own personal interpretations, humour, and perspective.
Indigenous studies programs in Canada
A clear context for this thesis was not easy to find or readily available. There has not been a lot of scholarly work to date that specifically focuses on Indigenous or Native Studies programs in
Canada, and in particular in Alberta. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies proved to be a helpful source for the few articles that exist in this area. In her article in the journal, Shona Taner
(1999) compared four schools in Canada with Native Studies programs and tracked their evolution from the 1960s to the 1990s to determine which, if any, of the schools had been more inclusive to the needs of students and changing political times. One of the schools that she looked at was the University of Alberta. Her article is now somewhat out of date and new programs such as the program at the University of Calgary have formed. At the time, there was an optimism in her report of the change she saw within the institutions to be more inclusive. In her examination of the evolution of Native Studies programs in Canada, she found that over time there was an increase in responsiveness to First Nations’ needs by the Canadian universities. She
24 was looking at this in the context of First Nations people that live on reserves or in communities and the political rise for more control over Education programming for First Nations. Some of the things that support the transition of rural/reserve students to the urban academic environment included support from Elders to avoid culture shock, hiring more Indigenous professors, and having representation from Indigenous communities on all internal governance boards4 of institutions (Taner, 1999, p. 312). These are components that still need to be improved upon today, 30 years later.
In the same journal, Winona Wheeler’s (2001) article discusses the responsibilities that
Indigenous programs have to the Indigenous community and to the institutions, which is very near to my thesis questions. According to Wheeler, Native Studies was born out of the civil rights movement and is the intellectual space for the larger movement of Aboriginal and Treaty
Rights (2001, p. 97). Wheeler, like myself, believes that Indigenous studies is about decolonization: “It is simultaneously a revolt against colonialist representations of Indigenous life and history, a rejection of colonialist relations and treatments” (p. 98). Her article provides examples for what the ideal Indigenous Studies program should look like to ensure that the program is meeting the treaty rights to education that our ancestors negotiated for our future success in a bi-cultural world (2001, p. 98). Differentiating Native Studies from other disciplines is crucial, as it is not only a rejection of “conventional academic treatments”, but it has also emerged out of Indigenous experiences, environment (land), and languages (2001, p. 99). By acknowledging previous Indigenous scholars (Vine Deloria (Lakota), Ward Churchill
(Cherokee), Harold Cardinal (Cree), Marie Campbell (Cree Metis), Alfonso Martiz (Tewa)),
Wheeler confirms that a major distinction of Indigenous studies is the interconnectedness of all
4 Board of Governors, Senates, Councils and Committees
25 things/beings with a focus on spirituality: “When the Old People teach they do not separate laws from politics, economics, social relations or religion… it is impossible to arrive at a coherent
Indian understanding of law, political science without a firm grasp of the spiritual principles governing Indian life” (Vine Deloria and Ward Churchill cited in Wheeler, 2001, p. 99). In this understanding, the governing and guiding principle of Indigenous studies, methods, research, teaching, and learning is rooted in a holistic perspective with spirit (and ceremony) at the center.
This does not fit neatly into any Western discipline and requires a special and distinct home of its own. Wheeler argues then if this is what is necessary for Indigenous studies, what is required of universities? “It means that our students should be able to expect the highest caliber of academic scholarship in addition to a firm grounding in and respect for Cree, Anishnabe, Dene, Nakoda,
Lakota or other Indigenous intellectual traditions from their professors” (2001, p. 101). This would not only require significant learning from non-Indigenous professors, that would take time and patience, and support from the local Indigenous community, but also more Indigenous professors from diverse Indigenous communities.
Keith James (2001) takes a more quantitative approach to the question of responsibility. He offers data on the different approaches that 27 colleges and universities utilize to determine what, if any, improvements in delivery are needed to be made in order to meet the needs of Indigenous students and assess the effectiveness of programs. James notes that there is limited information on the effectiveness of post-secondary education available for Indigenous people of Canada in comparison to the data that is available in the U.S. (p. 25). While there is less data on students available in Canada, there is a considerable amount of information on Native teacher education programs and their impact on Native education. The focus on special Native teacher education has been around since the 1970s and has always been a site of hope for institutional change,
26 however, the reality is that these programs have not been enough (Grant, 1995, p. 208). Once teachers find themselves out in the field, they have faced systemic barriers that prohibit profound change, including lack of appropriate methods, curriculum, and representation from Indigenous teachers and staff in schools. A common impact on the Indigenous teachers is to burn out as a result of being on the “front line of educational issues; they see successes and failures daily and often the failures overshadow the successes” (Grant, 1995, p. 208). In her research on teacher education programming, Agnes Grant concluded that “finding ways to bring the wisdom of
Elders and the wisdom of the university together is, indeed, the challenge” (1995, p. 223). While the perspective on teacher training is important, my thesis does not focus on teacher education or the Education Department. Nonetheless, Grant’s point about the wisdom of Elder involvement is a concurrent theme across much of the literature and belief of many Indigenous scholars and community members.
Historical precedents
Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s (2012) characterization of academic research as a contentious topic in
Indigenous communities stems from a long history of encounters with western, colonial researchers. We even write poetry about it. Undoubtedly, the research that has most bothered us has tended to be that of anthropology. This untitled poem by Lenore Tobias (1980, quoted in
(Taner, 1999) provides personal insight on what the institution can feel like for Indigenous people as subjects of an anthropological gaze:
Those anthropologists
sociologists and
historians who
27 poke at our bones,
our social systems
and past events
try to tell us
who we are.
When we don’t read
their books
they think we are
rejecting our heritage.
So, they feel
sorry for us
and write
more books
for themselves.
The poem was featured in the article “The Evolution of Native Studies in Canada: Descending from the Ivory Tower” in the Canadian Journal of Native Studies (Taner, 1999, p. 290), and was used to highlight the assumed superiority of non-Indigenous scholarship. I believe that the poem also is pointing to the greater need to have Indigenous people themselves conducting and recording research – that is what we want to see and read as Indigenous people.
In this article, Taner (1999) briefly describes the history of Indigenous people gaining post- secondary education in Canada and some of the barriers to attainment. Some of those barriers
28 included the forced enfranchisement for Status Indians who obtained a post-secondary degree and various other education policies that would continue to have a lingering intergenerational impact on Indigenous people for years to come (p. 290). James and Taner both speak of the long- term impacts on legislation that existed in the Indian Act and the policies that contributed to the creation of the Indian Residential School systems that lasted well into the late 1990s. I have personally heard from many Elders in the community who have gone to residential school that they were not permitted to attend school past Grade 3, and those that did go past Grade 3 were often put through without much academic rigor, skill, or the foundation of knowledge that would make them prepared for post-secondary education. Moreover, the residential school system was an institution premised on genocide:
It is painful to realize that the First Nations of Canada have been prisoners of peace for
generations. When we look at the record of residential schools it is relatively easy to see
how they functioned as instruments of captivity. All of them had as their goal the
destruction of the identities, languages, and cultures of First Nations children. The United
Nations Convention on Genocide defines genocide as the attempt to destroy a people as a
people. It attempts to replace the language, culture, values, worldview, institutions, and
economics of First Nations with those of another people. (Hampton, 2000, p. 210)
In terms of their role as educational institutions, residential schools have been deemed a failure, most of them received minimum standards of learning, and a majority of their time was spent working generating income for the schools that were chronically underfunded (Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015, p. 71). A school on the Blood Reserve5 in 1915 reported on the basic learning of the students: “The Children’s work was merely memory work
5 One of the Blackfoot Confederacy Nations of Treaty 7 of Alberta
29 and did not appear to be developing any deductive power, altogether too parrot like and lacking expression” (2015, p. 72). According to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission Summary report, the focus of residential schooling was on religion and working, with overcrowded classrooms, high teacher to student ratios,6 massive hunger, high death rates, and all forms of
(un)imaginable abuse (2015, pp. 73-110).
In the spirit of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, the exploitative and colonial imperatives behind the state’s education policies concerning Indigenous students have been subject to extensive criticism (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015; Hampton,
2000). According to Marlene Castellano, Lynne Davis and Louise Lahache (2000),
Aboriginal people are now asserting that the pursuit of higher education should not mean a
forced choice between Aboriginal identity and educational attainment. In contemporary
post-secondary education, the challenge is to negotiate conditions within which Aboriginal
values, culture, and identity can thrive. (p. 171)
For many Indigenous people, not unlike our non-Indigenous schoolmates, the pursuit of higher education has been intended to better our lives and escape from the cycle of poverty (Hampton,
2000, p. 171). More often in the case of Indigenous students, the goals of higher education are not only about personal betterment, but the betterment of your whole family, entire community, and future generations. When the stakes are so high, you should not be forced to choose between an education and your identity.
The 1960s can be described as a time when post-secondary institutions were going through radical transformations – people previously viewed a university degree as something that only elite people were able to achieve (Taner, 1999, p. 291). In this time, as a result of political civil
6 2 teachers to 120 students reported in the Coqualeetza school in my Stó:lō territory.
30 rights protests in both the United States and Canada, we saw the growth of ethnic studies that included Black, Chicano, and Native Studies (p. 291). Wheeler also credits the civil rights movement with the emergence of Native American Studies (2001, p. 97). Institutions were motivated to do something about the “Indian Problem” and so created such programs under the aegis of established disciplines such as anthropology or sociology, where mostly non-Indigenous students were taught by non-Indigenous teachers (Taner, 1999, p. 292). The teacher issue is important since, as Wheeler (2001) argues, the discipline exists to promote and develop
Indigenous methodologies and theory, and therefore the faculty of these programs should have a solid understanding and practical experience working with Indigenous-based research (p. 99).
This may not have always been followed in the past when hiring qualified faculty for programs, which was an objective secondary to the priority goal of increasing the number of First Nation students attending post-secondary. As the focus on increasing enrollment was at the forefront,
Wheeler (2001) contends that more still needed to be done to balance the responsibilities that the academy has beyond higher enrollment numbers. Her article emphasizes the responsibility that scholars have in not only bridging the divide between the Indigenous community and the academy, but also acting as mediators and translators between two different worldviews and perspectives (Wheeler, 2001, p. 97).
The other political imperative that Native Studies supports is one of decolonization: “it is simultaneously a revolt against colonialist representations of Indigenous life and history, a rejection of colonialist relations and treatments, and the means by which new intellectual pursuits are free to develop” (Wheeler, 2001, p. 98). This claim is more than just a call for postcolonial thinking, and instead gestures towards the creation of uniquely Indigenous methods, research, and theory. While Wheeler seems to promote a rejection of all things western, Smith (2012)
31 offers an alternate perspective on the implications of decolonization: “[Decolonization] does not mean and has not meant a total rejection of all theory or research or Western knowledge. Rather, it is about centering our concerns and world views and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes” (p. 41). This would be more in line with the belief that the academy must be responsible for both the creation of new scholarship and the needs of the Indigenous community.
As human rights frameworks and global attention to Indigenous rights became more prominent, university programs began to put more effort into including language, identity, and the arts. Reviewing the development of four programs in four different provinces between the late 1960s and 1999, housed at Trent University, University of Regina, the University of Alberta and the University of Northern British Columbia, Taner (1999) suggests that over time, these programs have tried to increase their responsiveness to First Nations’ needs: “Assisting in the maintenance and dissemination of First Nations culture became the objective of these new
Native Studies programs” (p. 297). Yet these programs were eventually seen as not being practical in terms of competing in the job market, which spurred the creation of more technical, trades, and vocational training programs.
James (2001) addresses the majority of programs specifically targeting Native Students for vocational training (p. 26). While James’ study is only focused on schools in British Columbia and Ontario, the information that he collected in terms of assessing effectiveness in educating
Native students offers important context. James asked about ten characteristics in his study:
1. Did the schools actively recruit Native students?
2. Did they provide support services specifically for Natives?
32 3. Did they have a dedicated position for the coordination of Native student recruitment and
support?
4. Was that position full or part time?
5. Was the Native-student service coordinator, if any, a Native person?
6. What was the percentage of Native students to total student body size?
7. Was there a Native (aboriginal) studies program?
8. Were there aboriginal emphasis areas available in other (i.e., non-Native studies) degree
programs?
9. How many Native faculty did the school have?
10. Was there an advisory council on Native education made up of members of the Native
community (ies) in the area? (2001, pp. 27-28)
With the data that he collected, he was able to predict which characteristics were most indicative of an effective program for Native students. While my research does not necessarily focus on the effectiveness of the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary, there is value in making some comparison to the characteristics that James outlines. While James’ study is empirical in nature, framed through a western academic variable of “effectiveness”, my research is focused on an Indigenous perspective that examines the holistic, reflexive, and relational value of the program to all students, which in some regards is not altogether different from the characteristics that James discovers.
According to James, the most powerful factor for determining the quality of education was the number of Indigenous faculty members at the institutions. The second factor was the presence of an Indigenous community advisory board, and the third factor was a student support network (James, 2001, p. 30). Some of the most frequent issues that were prevalent included a
33 lack of funding for both programs and students, insufficient staff, and no tracking or assessment systems of Native students (James, 2001, p. 33). His results were corroborated in Archibald’s
(1995) case study of the Native Indigenous Teacher Education Program (NITEP) at the
University of British Columbia, where the top three factors of success were found to be an advisory committee, relevant Indigenous studies courses, and Indigenous staff (see also Gardner,
2000). These factors provide the basis for a broad comparison later on in my story of the
International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary.
The need to make programs more practical and to meet the growing demands from First
Nations people to focus on preparing them for self-governance caused a shift in curricula at post- secondary institutions in the 1990s to include more applied courses and community-based research (Taner, 1999, p. 298). While there was an increase in funding to support post-secondary education during this period, there was not a concomitant increase in Native graduation rates, as there had not been a system in place to evaluate the effectiveness of programs or their recruitment and retention of students (James, 2001, p. 27). Wheeler (2001), whose perspective as an Indigenous scholar is clear, asks the question “to whom are we accountable” within the realm of Indigenous studies? To Wheeler, the answer is both to the Indigenous community and to the institution (p. 98).
To address the question of accountability, Taner’s (1999) review of four Native Studies programs in Canada suggests the importance of contextual factors. In the chart below, I have mapped out some of Taner’s findings to emphasize the role of certain factors in the development of these programs in relation to their broader communities, with some of my own comparisons between these programs and the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of
Calgary. Most notably, attention to the political landscapes, the inclusion of Indigenous
34 community involvement and both the challenges and benefits of program implementation paints a broad picture of the routes that each school took in establishing their Native Studies programs.
Trent University of University of University of Comparison to University University Regina Alberta Northern BC of Calgary When 1969- First one 1976 1986- School 1994- Dept. of 2004- International established? in Canada; of Native First Nations Indigenous Studies Program Native Studies Studies Studies is approved; 35 years after Program first program; 18 years behind University of 1972- Became Alberta. Native Studies Dept. Champion? President Tom President Dr. No one No one Multiple admin champions; Symons Lloyd Barber champion champion it was not as high up as the President’s office Who was Faculty and 72 FN in Sask; Sr. Admin, FN leaders, Internal staff, Admin, local involved? administration Federation of faculty Admin First Nations rep and Sask. Indian members, community at outset Nations Advisors of Native Affairs Location? Anthropology; Part of UofR, Own faculty Stand-alone Only as a program; not a as Indian- but financially department; 3 department, or faculty; Eskimos and streams - shuffled from social Studies at first administratively Aboriginal sciences to arts; Never had a independent languages, solid home base cultures and contemporary issues First Not at outset; Yes; heavily Some via Inclusion from At the outset in advising; Nations later on including advisors; all FN groups sporadic relationships over Involved? especially in Elders to advise seems to have in the area the years with FN colleges areas of faculty and support of the equally; as a to cross list courses; Elders language as students; Board community new post- attached to some professors “special of Governors throughout the secondary, had and researches but not a sessional with 10 Chiefs evolution of support from concentrated effort for instructors”; and 2 Senators the program surrounding relationship building on Council of from FSIN including communities in behalf of the university as a Elders was Elders in the planning whole in the past suggested in residence; FN phase 70’s-was not represented at until 1983 they the Board of established the Governors and Trent Senate of Aboriginal UNBC Education Council Significant The late 60s White paper of IAA wrote the Large FN Internationalization was a political there was a lot 1969; Native Red paper in population, phase in the early 2000’s; landscape? of criticism of control of response to the growing the need to not duplicate social education; white paper in recognition of programs that existed structures; political unity 1970 the field of already in Alberta in order AIM, NIB and of SK FN; this native studies, to secure funding; oil and discussions on is the only political clout gas and resource extraction
35 Canada’s Program that is of FN in the businesses high on political colonial past/ wholly under north and economic fronts 1972 it became the control of Native Studies FN Dept. Challenges? Balance Initially under It was a long Balance Similar to other programs between the UofS, it was process from between for hiring and staffing; curricula and not accepted; 1972- 1986 curricula and funding inadequacies; not as the needs of hiring native before classes the needs of large enrollment as other community; faculty; were offered; community; programs; not a consistent Hiring native increase native hiring native hiring native home or support; use of faculty; student faculty; faculty; sessional instructors only increase native enrollment increase native increase native student student student enrollment enrollment enrollment Benefits of Practicums First school to By the time of The At the beginning there was the were added in offer a BA in UofA, there community smaller classes for more program? 1975 to meet FN languages was not as was there not intimate and cultural career goals of in Cree and much of a to just support approaches to learning; The students Ojibway binary between the international component has culture and establishment been a draw to students academia, of the program, from various cultural but also of the faculties/departments; courses were entire passionate sessional accepted and university instructors who have gone valid. The above and beyond; program was comradery of student also designed cohorts to combine liberal arts and applied studies FN Quota 1974 they Alternative Aboriginal Transition year While there is an Indigenous or created Native access route Student Policy program at the student admissions policy enrollment? Studies diploma 5%; outset and an early entry program for drop outs Coordinated these are for the university University as a whole and not targeted Transfer for the International Program in Indigenous Studies program 1984 Courses in Not really many Integral part of Maskwacis, Yes, including Multiple partnerships with the opportunities as the program Yellowhead internships and Old Sun, Red Crow, Blue community, the campus with multiple Tribal council, community Quills First Nations on reserves, itself is in and campus Blue Quills based research; community colleges over partnering around several locations in courses the years- some sporadically FN? FN communities delivered in communities home communities Kitimat, Prince Rupert, Nisga’a Table 2. Review of Native Studies Programs in Canada (Taner, 1999)
Although the table indicates that a number of factors are important for the development of these programs, the availability of funding exerts a particular kind of pressure. According to Taner
(1999), “Achieving the necessary elements of a successful Native Studies program in terms of
36 accessibility, accountability, and excellence is deterred mainly by the problem of funding” (p.
310). This is in line with the findings of James (2001), who notes that one of the major issues of programs was insufficient and funding and faculty, which often go hand-in-hand. In my story gathering, a common theme in terms of support for the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary was the lack of dedicated and earmarked funding, which impacted the program’s ability to hire full-time faculty, secure a consistent coordinator for the program, and provide a marketing budget to attract new students to the program.
Other key challenges that universities have faced include attracting Indigenous students to their schools and dealing with criticism from local First Nations for hiring non-Indigenous professors to teach classes. The late Alberta Cree politician Harold Cardinal viewed this as
“White Studies of Indians” (quoted in Taner, 1999, p. 311). In the case of the University of
Calgary, most of the named Indigenous Studies classes have been taught primarily by sessional instructors, and have been a mixture of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous instructors. The program has never had an Indigenous coordinator. The use of non-Indigenous faculty in Native
Studies programs contravenes long-standing policy recommendations from Indigenous groups.
For example, as far back as 1972, the Native Indian Brotherhood, which developed into the
Assembly of First Nations, put out an educational policy paper that called for the establishment of Native studies programs that included Indigenous languages, Indigenous staff and professors, flexible entrance requirements, and representation of local Indigenous communities on the governing boards of post-secondary institutions (Taner, 1999, p. 312). It seems that by and large, most Canadian Universities have instead been striving to meet the needs of Indigenous communities in the confines of their western systems. As we will see from the history of the
Indigenous Studies program, there were plans to have a steering committee for the program, but
37 it is unclear how long this committee met.
The future of Indigenous Studies programs
According to Grant, some major questions that demand further research are “the way in which institutions validate knowledge, recognize socialization within divergent cultures, regard first language influences and accept different spiritual beliefs and worldviews” (Grant, 1995, p. 212).
Some researchers have focused on the need to decolonize education (Battiste, Bell, & Findlay,
2002), which does not mean a total rejection of all Western theory or research: “Rather, it is about centering our concerns and worldviews and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes” (Smith, 2012, p. 39).
Accordingly, many institutions have begun the process of indigenizing their academies7 either at the faculty level or at the University wide level (in Calgary, Mount Royal University8 and St.
Mary’s University9 have Indigenous strategies).
At the University of Calgary, the faculties of Education and Arts have begun this process recently and there is a strategy in place at the university wide level as well. It is unclear at this point if any of the strategies that are being worked on will involve the evaluation that Grant is suggesting, however the University just launched their plan November 2017.10 This is their statement of purpose:
The Indigenous Strategy will guide the University of Calgary on its path of
transformation and communicate its commitment and responsibility for truth and
7 https://www.universityaffairs.ca/features/feature-article/indigenizing-the-academy/ 8https://www.mtroyal.ca/IndigenousMountRoyal/IndigenousStrategy/ABST_CONTENT201508 19113657 9 https://www.stmu.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/ACCUC-Indigenous-Initiatives-2017.pdf 10 https://www.ucalgary.ca/indigenous-strategy/files/indigenous-strategy/17-unv-001- indigenous-strategy_publication_final_nov17_digital.pdf
38 reconciliation. The Strategy will remain a living document within the institution, whereby
progress will be monitored and content and direction will be renewed through a process
of evaluation and evolution (University of Calgary, 2017, p. 5).
They have encapsulated their focus into four areas: 1) Ways of Knowing: Teaching, Learning, and Research; 2) Ways of Doing: Policies, Procedures, and Practices; 3) Ways of Connecting:
Relationships, Partnerships, Connections to Land, and Place; and 4) Ways of Being: Campus
Identity, Inclusivity, Leadership, and Engagement (2017, p. 6). While they acknowledge the
International Indigenous Studies Program11 as a current initiative under the heading of
Transforming Ways of Knowing, none of the recommendations for this strategic point speak directly to the enhancement, support or further development of the program itself (University of
Calgary, 2017, p. 17). To be fair, this may come at a later date once they have time to drill into more specifics as to how they plan to address all of the recommendations12 in the strategy, on what timeline, and with what resources.
It is important to note here that historically the system of school curricula in general has been to teach Eurocentric thought. In their book, Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and
Heritage, Marie Battiste and James Youngblood (2000) describe Eurocentric thought as detrimental to education as it “ignores the inner consciousness of humans, and students learning from curricula based on the Eurocentric way of viewing the world are never given a chance to explore this domain”, furthermore, “Eurocentric curricula isolate the known self; instead of creating communities, they reinforce specialized interests among students” (p. 87). According to the authors, the best way to decolonize this system is to support a balanced relationship between
Indigenous and Eurocentric knowledge that is sensitive to both ways of knowing (p. 92): “They
11 In fact, they leave out the International part and just call it the “Indigenous Studies Program” 12 There are roughly 35 recommendations in total.
39 must embrace the paradox of subjective and objective ways of knowing that do not collapse into either inward or outward illusions, but brings us all into a living dialogical relationship with the world that our knowledge gives us” (p. 94). The value that this position is that it offers a more holistic way of learning, and thus enables a framework that all learners would benefit from and should be the foundation of an Indigenous studies program, regardless of whether or not all the learners are Indigenous.
In terms of understanding the role that Indigenous Studies programs should play within the post-secondary system for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous learners alike, my story- gathering literature review revealed that they can “represent the recognition by the dominant society of the value of educating both Natives and non-Natives about First Nations' experience, perspective, culture and language” (Taner, 1999, p. 311). Indigenous Studies should offer a space that leads the way for the rest of the university in its acknowledgment or purpose for existing.
The expectation that such a program will support both academic needs and the needs of
Indigenous learning is also integral to its role: “It means that our students should be able to expect the highest caliber of academic scholarship in addition to a firm grounding in and respect for Cree, Anishnabe, Dene, Nakoda, Lakota or other Indigenous intellectual traditions from their professors” (Wheeler, 2001, p. 101). Whether or not the expectations are met to this high standard is not clear; as indicated, there has not been a thorough scholarly investigation into the assessment of all Indigenous studies programs in Canada to this level.
In my opinion, some of the foundational philosophical and pedagogical pieces that should be a part of an Indigenous Studies program would highlight the unique nature of having a separate discipline. Indigenous perspectives, worldviews, theories, and methods would be at the heart of it all. Wheeler (2001) explains how an Indigenous studies program or department is thus
40 fundamentally different from others in post-secondary institutions: “Ideally, Indian/Native
Studies differentiates itself from conventional academic disciplines in two important ways: it emerges from within Indigenous communities, geographies, languages and experience, and it rejects conventional academic treatments” (p. 99). This rejection of conventional academic treatments is part of the decolonization process, which allows space for Indigenous thought, theory, and ways of knowing to develop. Wheeler goes on to speak more specifically about how the foundational core of Indigenous studies is about culture and spirituality, concepts that are not usually present in mainstream programs or courses:
Religion serves as the backbone of most societies – it dictates how people should relate to
each other, their neighbors, the land, and the universe around them. To strip our intellectual
knowledge of its spirituality is colonialist. Thus, one of the decolonizing tasks in Indian
Studies is to find ways to approach, understand, and present significant issues within
Indigenous conceptual modes, without compromising our traditional or scholarly integrity.
This is the paradigm Indian Studies needs to develop more thoroughly in order to go
beyond conventional academic approaches and methods. (2001, p. 100)
In my story-gathering to weave the storybasket for the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary, I will be gauging my findings against these remarks by Wheeler; this paradigm is the standard that all Indigenous studies programs in Canada should be operating under.
41
Shxwth’a:lhtel - Harvesting The Cedar: Ceremony and Indigenous Theoretical Framework
Ceremony occurs in many parts of our lives. There is ceremony in the everyday things that we do, and in the sacred things that we do. People may do ceremony as acts of prayer, healing, forgiveness, thanksgiving and for future hopes. In some cases, the ceremonial acts that are performed are requests for change or transformation. In my cultural knowledge, transformers play an important and vital role in our history and our creation stories. The mountain that bears the English name of my reserve community Cheam is a sacred transformer site. Lhilheqey (Mt.
Cheam) was shaped by the transformer Xa:ls who brought balance to the world and appointed
Lhilheqey with the role of looking after all in the valley, the river, the people of the river (Stó:lō) and all living things. It is believed that the Pilalt13 people in fact were themselves transformed from mountain goats to human beings and are my direct ancestors. Transformative, transforming, change – all a result of ceremony.
Cree scholar Shawn Wilson (2008), in his book Research is Ceremony, describes four components of an Indigenous research paradigm to include ontology, epistemology, methodology and axiology:
Ontology or a belief in the nature of reality. Your way of being, what you believe is real in
the world... Second is epistemology, which is how you think about that reality. Next, when
we talk about research methodology, we are talking about how you are going to use your
way of thinking (your epistemology) to gain more knowledge about your reality. Finally, a
paradigm includes axiology, which is a set of morals or a set of ethics. (p. 175)
13 My ancestral tribe of the Chi: yom (Cheam) people.
42 On their own, these components are not necessarily rooted in Indigenous worldviews (Hart,
2010, p. 6). According to Margaret Kovach (2009), what is needed is to view these components through a tribal lens rooted in land and in ceremony:
The offering of tobacco or pipe ceremonies may not be written as a formal part of
research methodology, but these protocols are fundamental to Indigenous research
frameworks. The sacredness of Indigenous research is bound in ceremony, spirit, land,
place, nature, relationships, language, dream, humour, purpose, and stories in an
inexplicable, holistic, non-fragmented way, and it is the sacredness that defies the
conventional (p. 140).
Ceremony may not be explicit within Indigenous research to the non-Indigenous reader, so I am taking the opportunity to intentionally address ceremony in this thesis, for example, in the tobacco offering and smudge ceremonies that have been central to my Indigenous research process. These types of protocol and ceremony were shared with my storytellers and my supervisor, but it is still difficult to explain and understand without an Indigenous framework.
There are a limited number of Indigenous scholars currently in the academy and a limited understanding of Indigenous theory within communication studies even though it has postcolonial roots.
Raka Shome and Radha Hegde (2002) believe that postcolonial theory and communication studies are in fact connected and may provide a new way for us to view communication scholarship by understanding the postcolonial politics of communication (p.
249). Postcolonial studies examines the “problematics of colonization and decolonization” and takes the stance of transformation:
43 Postcolonial scholarship, because of the politics of its emergence and the nature of the
problems it is concerned with, exists in tension with established institutionalized
knowledge. It attempts to undo (and redo) the historical structure of knowledge
production that are rooted in various histories and geographies of modernity (Shome &
Hegde, 2002, p. 250).
In the case of my research on the International Indigenous Studies Program, the tension between institutionalized knowledge and Indigenous knowledge production as a result are more easily unpacked with the support of Indigenous theory. Furthermore, Shome and Hegde (2002) agree that postcolonial theory is both interdisciplinary and reflexive methodologically (pp. 258-259), which fits into my Indigenous research framework. But what is unique about an Indigenous framework specifically are its physical and metaphysical components (Kovach, 2009). I have put together a visual conceptualization of my Indigenous research framework so that I can see where the complex postcolonial and Indigenous components overlap and are synergized (see
Figure 1). It is my intention that this will also help others to understand how these components contribute to my decision making, my actions, my research as well as my analysis.
44 •Stó:lō worldview • Holistic •Cedar basket perspective: •Berry picking Mind, body, •People of the River spirit, emotions •Halq'emeylem • Self-location: metaphysical Ontology: Indigenous Epistemology knowledge
ceremony
• Learning is holistic, Methodology: reflexive, reflective, Axiology • 1.Respect experiential, and Storywork relational (focused 2. Responsibility on connectedness, 3. Reciprocity on reciprocal 4. Reverence relationships, and a 5. Holism sense of place). 6. Inter-relatedness • Indigenization 7. Synergy • Decolonization
Figure 1. Theoretical framework for M. Fry’s Indigenous Research, inspired by Wilson (2008) and Kovach (2009)
The creation of my theoretical framework is primarily built upon the work of Wilson (2008) and
Kovach (2009). In Kovach’s work, tribal knowledge of her Cree identity is at the center of her research framework and her creation of a theoretical framework is the template for mine.
Ceremony
At the center of my Indigenous theory is ceremony. In the past 12 years of working in the
Indigenous community, I have learned that ceremony is what keeps us humble, authentic and honest. The physical action of participating in ceremony for research demonstrates how
Indigenous theory builds on postcolonial theory. According to Henry Schwarz (2000), “it is not
45 merely a theory of knowledge but a ‘theoretical practice’, a transformation of knowledge from static disciplinary competence to activist intervention” (p. 4). In this way, my Indigenous theory becomes real when it is grounded in ceremony and is also a part of my methodology.
Ontology
Métis scholar Zoë Todd (2016) critically unpacks the usage of ontology in Eurocentric institutions that deny and exclude Indigenous scholars and voices, which she equates to continued colonization: “Indigenous thinking must be seen as not just a well of ideas to draw from but a body of thinking that is living and practiced by peoples with whom we all share reciprocal duties as citizens of shared territories (be they physical or the ephemeral)” (p. 17).
There is a responsibility when using Indigenous ontology to not let it be a token thought, or something that is hidden behind a theory or understanding that is cited by another ‘white man’ who does not engage with current Indigenous scholars (Todd, 2016, pp. 12-13). In the way Todd uses the term “white man”, she does not only refer to individuals, but to an institution where
“white men” signifies a sort of conduct, predicated on the legitimacy and legibility of certain bodies in spaces of power.
According to Michael Hart (2010), Indigenous ontology has two major elements that are key to an Indigenous research paradigm: spirituality and reciprocity (p. 8). Both of these elements are intrinsically intertwined. Understanding the role that reciprocity plays in an
Indigenous relational worldview allows for a deeper understanding of the importance of spirituality in meaning making. In his book Native Science: Natural Laws of Interdependence
(2000), Gregory Cajete frames tribal processes as Native Science, a metaphor for the processes of “perceiving, thinking, acting and ‘coming to know’ that have evolved through human
46 experience with the natural world” (p. 2). A traditional Indigenous education is thus a life-long journey to understand what it means to be a human interconnected in a “relational universe”
(Cajete, 2000, p. 262). Here, Cajete describes how meaning making is a distinct philosophy of
Native science:
The story of Native relationships to the natural world is more than can be told in one
story and more than a footnote to environmentalism. Rather, it is a story of complex
human relationships in complex interaction with nature… Native science as the outward
expression of Native relationship to the natural world is a philosophical ideal. It is an
ideal conveyed through Native cosmologies, community, relationships to plants, animals,
landscape, and the cosmos. It is an ideal that must be sought. It is an ideal that must be
remembered and re-remembered through art, ceremony, story, ways of community and
personal experience. (2000, p. 82)
In my understanding of Cajete’s work, Native science as a philosophical ideal is grounded in spirituality and reciprocity as ontological qualities of knowledge. It is practiced via ceremony, story and community. Incorporating these ideals into research theory and methods can be difficult for western scholars because of the foregrounding of personal experience and the compartmentalization of the mind, body, and spirit: “most Native American people experience their being in the world as a totality of personality and not as separate systems within the person”
(Duran & Duran, 1995, p. 15). From a holistic perspective, the mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual14 components of Indigenous peoples are not separated from everyday life, work, or research.
14 Sometimes classified as Medicine Wheel Teachings, the four components of a human being; energy and effort must be equally centered amongst the four quadrants to live in balance with yourself, others and the world.
47 Stó:lō author Lee Maracle uses Stó:lō oratory practices to discuss “Coming to Theory” in her book Memory Serves: Oratories (2015), which describes oratory as “place of prayer; to persuade” (p. 161). She talks about theory as a “proposition, proven by demonstrable argument,” and how English definitions of the words argument, evidence and proof do not exist outside of each other: “Argument is defined as evidence; proof or evidence is defined by demonstration or proof; and theory as a proposition proven by demonstrable evidence” (p. 161). Using Stó:lō understandings of storytelling and oratory practices to support our belief that the proof lies in the doing offers an alternative theoretical framework, one that again is tied to my understanding of how spirituality and my Stó:lō worldview are embedded in ontology.
Epistemology
Kovach (2009) distinguishes epistemology from ontology in that “epistemology captures the
‘self-in-relation’ quality of Indigenous knowledge systems” (pp. 55-56). Kovach believes that the epistemological foundation is what distinguishes Indigenous research from western methodologies because they are “in relation to place and person… and largely researcher dependent” (p. 56). Self-location privileges my Stó:lō epistemology, shows respect for the idea of holism, and is a “legitimate inward understanding imbued by spirit” (p. 58). Holism is also framed within my Stó:lō methodology of Indigenous Storywork as described by Jo-ann
Archibald (2008):
An Indigenous philosophical concept of holism refers to the interrelatedness between the
intellectual, spiritual (metaphysical values and beliefs in the Creator), emotional, and
physical (body and behavior/action) realms to form a whole healthy person. The
48 development of holism extends to and is mutually influenced by one’s family,
community, band and nation. (p. 11)
Self-location by way of reflexivity in the research process is “a focus on how does who I am, who I have been, who I think I am, and how I feel affect data collection and analysis” (Pillow,
2003, p. 176). There are some criticisms as to whether or not self-reflexivity makes the research
“better,” as some believe it be narcissistic and self-indulgent (Kemmis, 1985); (Patai, 1994).
Wanda S. Pillow (2003) contends that reflexivity is not just about the researcher more explicitly acknowledging their own role in the research methods, but rather about confronting research work that is hard and uncomfortable: “The qualitative research arena would benefit from more
‘messy’ examples, examples that may not always be successful, examples that do not seek a comfortable, transcendent end point but leave us in the uncomfortable realties of doing engaged qualitative research” (p. 193). In this context, of messy yet engaged research, I find common ground. I have learned over the many years of listening to Indigenous Elders and Knowledge
Keepers to be humble, allow for mistakes, and understand that nothing is perfect, but also to be active, engaged, and present and to do what you can for the betterment of the whole.
As I mentioned before, ceremony is at the center of everything that I do. This is active and engaged research. It is a part of the process and I, along with many other Indigenous scholars that I have cited in my work, believe it to be valid and authentic to the work. It is research as praxis, also described by Patti Lather (1986) as reciprocity. When I sit down to my computer and prepare myself for the writing I do ceremony. I prepare my abalone shell smudge bowl with sweetgrass and sage and I pray. I ask Creator to help me focus, to bring together the words and knowledge that are in my head, in my heart and in the pages of the scholars before me. I smudge myself, my computer, books and my Medicine Cards. I use Medicine Cards, kind of like Tarot,
49 as another way to center myself and my thoughts, to provide me with some extra little guidance to ensure that I remain focused on the task at hand. When I sat down today to finish off the theory chapter, for example, I pulled two cards from my deck: contrary dragonfly and beaver.
The cards (via an interpretive guide book) pointed me to visualize the goal I want to accomplish
(beaver) and to “Look within and feel the sense-of-self energy” (dragonfly) (Sams & Carson,
1988, 1999, p. 146). Reflexivity is firmly embedded in my research framework and I follow the use of reflexivity as described by Pillow to be a recognition of self, recognition of other and reflexivity as truth.
Figure 2. Ceremony in Research (1) Figure 3. Ceremony in Research (2)
Axiology
The search for knowledge is guided by ethics and morals – this is axiology. Our ethics and morals also determine what information and knowledge is worth searching for. Axiology asks,
“What part of this reality is worth finding out more about?” and “What is it ethical to do in order to gain this knowledge, and “What will this knowledge be used for?” (Wilson, 2008, p. 34). In the case of my research framework, understanding the role that colonization has played in relation to research and academia must come before we talk about decolonization,
50 Indigenization, and situating Indigenous knowledge in the learning. These components inform the basis of what knowledge this thesis is implicated in searching for and producing, as well as both how it will be used and who it will benefit.
In Decolonizing Methodologies (1999), Linda Tuiwai Smith (Ngati Awa and Ngati
Pouro) is the premier Elder Scholar and Knowledge Keeper in promoting Indigenous methodologies and was my first introduction to decolonization during my undergraduate degree.
As an undergraduate, I had an intense burst of pride and reverence for this Maori scholar.
Looking back (I first encountered this work in 2004), it has taken me many years of lived
Indigenous community work, academic, and career experiences to begin to understand the real significance of this pivotal work on the broad implications of decolonization: “Decolonization, once viewed as the formal process of handing over the instruments of government, is now recognized as a long-term process involving the bureaucratic, cultural, linguistic and psychological divesting of colonial power” (Smith, 1999, p. 98). This long-term process requires many actors, stakeholders, and individuals to both speak up and to listen. The psychological divestiture of power may be the hardest component of decolonization, and probably the catalyst for it all.
According to Smith (1999), “The globalization of knowledge and western culture constantly reaffirms the West’s view of itself as the centre of legitimate knowledge, the arbiter of what counts as knowledge and the source of ‘civilized’ knowledge” (p. 63). The worldviews of
Indigenous and non-Indigenous thinkers again clash when discussing the scientific foundations of Western research, as they usually exclude Indigenous contributions:
To have acknowledged their contribution would, in terms of the rules of research
practice, be as legitimate as acknowledging the contribution of a variety of plant, a shard
51 of pottery, or as a ‘preserved head of a native’ to research… The objects of research do
not have a voice and do not contribute to research or science (Smith, 1999, p. 61).
In understanding the way that an interconnected, holistic worldview may respect research
‘contributors’, the axiology of this lies in the ‘what for?’ and the ‘who for?’. Smith (1999) argues that “Western knowledge and science are ‘beneficiaries’ of the colonization of Indigenous peoples,” and in turn that knowledge has worked to colonize our minds (p. 59). Challenging the psychological divestiture of power becomes vital to an Indigenous scholar. The role of
Indigenous scholars has been relegated in relation to postcolonial intellect, which does allow them to move across many boundaries both in academia, politics, and community (Smith, 1999, p. 71). This does not however guarantee safety, and according to Gayatri Spivak, read here by
Smith, it raises the problem of being taken seriously:
For me, the question ‘Who should speak?’ is less crucial than ‘Who will listen?’ ‘I will
speak for myself as a Third World person’ is an important position for political
mobilization today. But the real demand is that, when I speak from that position, I should
be listened to seriously; not with that kind of benevolent imperialism. (Smith, 1999, p.
71).
This fear of being taken seriously is real. As a ‘baby’ Indigenous scholar, that fear has been both put on to me by others and internalized. Fear is like a heavy cloak, a weight that you cannot remove, because even if you don’t like it, you need it too. The fear becomes a motivating factor to seek out the knowledge in the way that I believe to be honest, valid, and done in the way that is most ethical and moral according to my ontological and epistemological beliefs.
While the positioning of decolonization is important, there is some disagreement around the notion of postcolonial thought. Some scholars (e.g., Smith, 1999; Kovach, 2009) believe that
52 we are not currently in postcolonial times as if “colonialism is a finished business” (Kovach,
2009, p. 75). Clearly it is not finished, and therefore using a decolonizing lens is a “context- specific analytical tool for making visible contradictions and bringing Indigenous approaches out from the margins” (Kovach, 2009, p. 82). The Indigenous approaches in my theory are thus framed inside Indigenization rather than the broader notion of decolonization.
Indigenization has been used in many contexts lately in response to the Truth and
Reconciliation 94 Calls to Action,15 and in particular for this thesis, the idea of ‘Indigenizing the academy’ is a key touchstone. A basic definition of ‘to Indigenize’ is to “bring something under the control, dominance, or influence of the people native to an area” (Oxford Dictionary, n.d.).
The importance of Indigenization at the University of Calgary should thus be localized, from a
Treaty 7 perspective.16 This complicates the fact that the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary is an International program by design. It is also problematic for the program as it has never been under the control of any Indigenous person, never mind someone local from the Treaty 7 region.
Eber Hampton (2000) notes that “Most, but not all, university education in Canada today is education for assimilation” (p. 210), and this is really just an extension of a longer historical and systemic assimilation as described by Marie Battiste (1995):
Through ill-conceived government policies and plans, Aboriginal youths were subject to
a combination of powerful but profoundly distracting forces of cognitive imperialism and
15 The Calls to Action (available at http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf) were devised in response to the legacy of the Canadian Indian Residential School system 16 Southern Alberta, and Calgary specifically fall under the legal boundaries of Treaty number 7, signed between the Government of Canada (on behalf of all Canadians) and members of the Blackfoot Confederacy (Siksika, Piikani, and Peigan First Nations), the Tsuut’ina First Nation, and the Stoney Nakoda Nations in 1877.
53 colonization. Various boarding schools, industrial schools, day schools and Eurocentric
educational practices ignored or rejected the world-views, languages, and values of
Aboriginal parents in the education of their children. The outcome was the gradual loss of
these world-views, languages and cultures and the creation of widespread social and
psychological upheaval in Aboriginal communities (p. viii).
In my theory, the imperative of Indigenization as a specific form of decolonization is to remove this cognitive imperialism and attempt to repair the psychological upheaval by focusing on
Indigenizing the content, delivery, curriculum, systems, and the foundation of the International
Indigenous Studies program. It is also important to note that this also impacts the non-Indigenous students who are not told or taught truthfully about Indigenous history, education or concerns.
This assimilation also extends to their learning and understanding. The Indigenization of the academy is not just about the special case of the Indigenous students, but for the betterment of all learners who choose to learn about Indigenous Studies.
Methodology
The final piece of my theoretical lens, intimately connected to ontology, epistemology, and axiology, and practiced through ceremony, is methodology. I turn to Wilson’s (2008) definition of methodology to suggest how it is connected to the other elements of the framework:
“Methodology refers to the theory of how knowledge is gained, or in other words the science of finding things out… If the ontology is that there is one ultimate reality, then there should be one way of examining this reality (methodology) that will help to see it best (epistemology)” (p. 34).
My chosen methodology is storywork as designed by Stó:lō scholar Jo-Ann Archibald, Q’um
Q’um Kiiem. This methodology contributes to my research framework in a number of ways.
54 Having a methodology that is designed by a member of my tribal belief system Indigenizes the framework for my use, as it is in direct alignment with the epistemological and ontological perspectives that Archibald and I share. Given that Archibald’s field of work is centered on
Indigenous education, the storywork method was designed for the Indigenization and transformation of Indigenous educational systems. Using this lens for my methodology highlights the “inseparable relationship between story and knowing,” as we consider “story as both method and meaning” (Kovach, 2009, p. 94). Kovach (2009) questions if we can really bring oral traditions of storytelling into the academy that hold on to the integrity of this inseparable relationship when we have to write about it or try and relay it in writing:
Sitting in the now of story can never be captured through the research transcription. The
knowledges that we gather in the ephemeral moment of oral story, as told by a teller, as
we sit in a specific spiritual, physical, and emotional place, are of a different sort. The
immediacy of the relational stands outside the research, and at best we can only reflect
upon it. To make visible the holistic, relational meaning requires a reflexive narrative by
the researcher. (p. 102)
It is these messy and negotiated paths that Indigenous scholars walk down to provide the opportunity for Indigenous methods to be used. The use of reflexive narrative, coupled with the knowledge keepers and Indigenous scholars before me, is steeped in Indigenous storywork, tribal epistemology, ontology, and axiology. Everything is interconnected, everything depends on the other components to remain balanced and to provide validation to the knowledge creation and meaning making.
There are the seven principles of storywork that connect back to the broader theoretical framework: Respect, Responsibility, Reciprocity, Reverence, Holism, Interrelatedness, and
55 Synergy (Archibald, 2008, p. ix). These seven principles have been designed by Archibald with direction from Elders in relation to storytelling for educational purposes. I also follow the principles in my own research design and practices, as detailed in the methods chapter.
Conclusion
Many of the storywork principles are also already reflected in my theoretical framework and again indicate the importance of the interconnectedness of all four of my framework areas
(ontology, epistemology, axiology, and methodology) within ceremony. This research framework is, as Smith (1999) describes, “about centering our concerns and world views and then coming to know and understand theory and research from our own perspectives and for our own purposes” (p. 39). There is power in the ability to design Indigenous tools and frameworks and we do not need anyone else to develop them for us (Irwin, 1992):
Indigenous peoples have been, in many ways, oppressed by theory. Any consideration for
the ways our origins have been examined, our histories recounted, our arts analyzed, our
cultures dissected, measured, torn apart and distorted back to us will suggest that theories
have not looked sympathetically or ethically at us. (Smith, 1999, p. 38)
By creating a theoretical research framework, I am furthering the research of my predecessors to not only discuss the Indigenization of the research topic, but also the research process. I am intentionally examining both the content to be analyzed and how I will analyze it from my Stó:lō worldview perspective.
56 There is no one Indigenous research framework, theory or method. This work does not contain the potential to be replicated in terms of a western understanding of valid research. In this way, it is not about the contribution that it will make for others to follow, but it is about the replication of the process that can be used to create the Indigenous framework that works best for the specific Indigenous scholar. My framework is not a framework that anyone can use, because of its reflexive nature, the tribal and ceremonial centering; it is specific to my reality.
According to Kovach (2009), Indigenous frameworks enable “tribal epistemologies to enter the tightly guarded academic research community and have great potential to serve
Indigenous worldviews in the academy as well as the academy itself” (p. 163). Going through the process of designing and understanding how my Indigenous framework informs my research, analysis, and meaning making allows me to critically reflect on the role that the International
Indigenous Studies program has played and should play at the University of Calgary. I will be able to address how the program was conceived (The Creation Story) and its evolution, as well as determine lessons learned for the future of the program. My theoretical research framework allows me to respond to my research questions in an ethical way.
57
Lhí:lt - Weaving the Basket: Methods
My thesis topic has changed multiple times, and it has taken me years from when I finished my coursework to get to the thesis in front of you. A lot of the deliberation depended on the work that I was doing in the community, either as a volunteer or as an employee. I wanted to find the perfect topic, which I am sure no one finds. It was important that I stuck on something that was reflective of the needs of the Indigenous community in some part and of the needs of my academic growth as an Indigenous scholar. No matter what the topic was, the thing that was never up for debate was the methodology. I knew that I was going to use an Indigenous methodology that was grounded in Indigenous theories and thought. Very early on, even before I started grad school, I came across the book Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics,
Conversations and Contexts by Cree/Saulteaux scholar Margaret Kovach and I was hooked. I knew that the methodology portion would be the hardest part of my thesis and the part that I would spend the most time on. Using Indigenous methodologies in academia is a political activity, “negotiating and transforming institutional practices and research frameworks is as significant as the carrying out of actual research programmes” (Smith, 2012, p. 140). From the beginning, I knew that this was both a political act and ethical stance that I was taking. The process of understanding what Indigenous methodologies are and how I want to use them has
58 been a solitary and lonely place. Here is the story of my thesis process – that is what the methodology is to me – the story of how this thesis came to be at all.
I did my undergraduate degree at the University of Calgary between 2004-2007, right at the peak beginning of the International Indigenous Studies program. At the time, I was not able to get into the program directly as I did not have Math 30 (and I failed to try and upgrade), which was a pre-requisite at the start. I often wonder often how many other Indigenous students that did not have Math 30 were not able to take the Bachelor of International Indigenous studies. The first Coordinator of the program, Sarah Carter, also wondered about this pre-requisite when I spoke with her (Carter, 2015). After the first year of university and figuring out more about the kind of degree that I wanted, I settled on a Bachelor of Arts in Communication and Culture with
Indigenous Studies as my major/minor. In this way I was able to take most of the Indigenous
Studies named courses and pick Indigenous focused classes from other faculties as well. The courses for me were life changing. As an urban Indigenous person, the self-re-discovery that occurred along with developing critical thinking skills was the perfect balance to fuel my mind and my soul. I will talk more about my undergraduate experience later.
When I decided it was time to go back to university for my graduate degree, I knew that I wanted to use Indigenous methods after reading Kovach’s inspiring book, which reads like a how-to for new Indigenous scholars and grad students. One of the barriers at the beginning was that the University of Calgary does not offer a graduate degree in Indigenous Studies. I did not want an education degree (though I do love teaching adults, I do not have the patience for little ones); I did not want a social work degree, since I am not a sociologist, and it seemed like the
Master of Arts via the Interdisciplinary degree route was complex and unwieldy (the university no longer offers the MA Interdisciplinary). Now, I am from BC originally, and there are great
59 programs at the University of British Columbia or Simon Fraser University, even at the
University of the Fraser Valley – which would make me so close to my home reserve of Cheam
– but my children, my husband and I live and work in Calgary and we were not prepared to move at that time. So, the reality was that University of Calgary was the best option for us, and I settled on an MA in Communication and Culture because of my undergrad degree. The stream I chose that I thought would best fit the type of research that I wanted to do was in Culture and Society.
As things do, the Department has now changed its name to Communications, Media and Film, and I am the last of the dying breed who is still under the old name, with the old stream.
It was a struggle for me to connect with the material in the classroom at times. We had a small cohort of MA and PhD students, and I was the only Indigenous person in the class. I did my best to bring Indigenous perspectives in to the classroom and into the papers that I wrote, but
I was doing it all on my own. My teachers did not have much, if any, experience with Indigenous methodologies and I was trying to figure it all out independently.
There are some parallels that can be drawn between postcolonial, feminist and critical race theory in the cultural side of communication and culture; however, those methods and theories do not go far enough. Kovach cites the “fundamental epistemological difference between
Western and Indigenous thought” (2009, p. 29). Indigenous knowledge and methodologies are centered on language and tribal epistemologies and they are not Western knowledges, so therefore should not simply be a subcategory of a Western paradigm (Kovach, 2009, p. 30):
Most research methodologies assume that the researcher is an outsider able to observe
without being implicated in the scene. This is related to positivism and notions of
objectivity and neutrality. Feminist research and other more critical approaches have made
the insider methodology much more acceptable in qualitative research. Indigenous research
60 approaches problematize the insider model in different ways because there are multiple
ways of being both an insider and outsider in Indigenous contexts. The critical issue with
insider research is the constant need for reflexivity (Smith, 2012, p. 137).
Reflexivity is often used in reference to the relational, and it is described as the researcher using self-reflection in the meaning making process (Kovach, 2009, p. 32). Indigenous methodologies centered on tribal worldview must be further legitimized as knowledge systems that are a distinctive methodology, even given the reflexivity implicated in related approaches, such as postcolonial studies (Kovach, 2009, p. 37): “Many indigenous intellectuals actively resist participating in any discussion with the discourses of post-coloniality. This is because post- colonialism is viewed as the convenient invention of Western intellectuals which reinscribes their power to define the world” (Smith, 2012, p. 14). Furthermore, some Indigenous scholars question the terminology itself, where “post” colonialism would assume that the colonizers had left, as many non-Indigenous academics enter the field of ‘post-colonial’ discourse in ways that
“still leave out Indigenous peoples, our ways of knowing and our current concerns” (Smith,
2012, p. 24). While critical theory has provided tools that allows for the uncovering of power dynamics and furthering social justice research, “it is not enough to stop there; there must be
Indigenous methodological tools as well” (Kovach, 2009, pp. 92-93).
Shawn Wilson (2008) provides a brief history on the development of an Indigenous research paradigm in four stages. The first stage saw the majority of Indigenous scholars still aligned within Western research frameworks and they had not begun to challenge the dominant systems yet (2008, p. 52). The second stage sees Indigenous scholars and their paradigm shifts struggling to be accepted and in order to avoid marginalization, maintain influences with
Western paradigms through binary comparisons of ‘other’ and ‘exotic’ (2008, p. 53). The third
61 stage is ushered in by Maori scholar Linda Tuhiwai Smith in Decolonizing Methodologies
(1999), which finally challenges western models to focus in on what Indigenous methods are with a decolonizing lens (Wilson, 2008, p. 53). Her work would pave the way for a new wave of
Indigenous scholars (many of whom I cite in this thesis) after her and with her that form the current stage of Indigenous research paradigms. The recent and fourth stage has seen the growth in number of Indigenous researchers who are honouring their worldviews with Indigenous paradigms centered on their tribal systems, that define their own approaches, data collection and analysis (Wilson, 2008, p. 54). This is coined the “Indigenist Research Phase” (Wilson, 2008, p.
54), and I for one am most grateful for the progression up until now. I am also grateful to stand on the shoulders of these Indigenous scholars before me, who have done their jobs well to share and reciprocate their knowledge and processes with us all, so that scholars-in-the-making such as myself have a frame of reference to guide us.
Much of this thesis process for me has been about those moments deep in reflexive thought, in prayer and in ceremony. Whether it’s singing and praying in the sweat lodge, offering of tobacco and a smudge or going to bed each night hoping for inspirational answers in my dreams, the process is all very personal, subjective, holistic, and Indigenous. These are some of the portions of the work that I think the reader may not know what to do with. This is not a typical thesis, but I warned you about that.
Finding the space in my life, in my house and in my mind to sit in solitude to write the thesis has been difficult. I live and work in an Indigenous community that does everything as a group. Decisions are made, plans are drawn and things happen in community – with others – not on your own, in solitude. The solitude of academic work stands in direct contrast to the way I live my life normally as an Indigenous person.
62
My Storywork
Indigenous research focuses and situates the broader Indigenous agenda in the research
domain… the spaces within the research domain through which indigenous research can
operate are small spaces on a shifting ground. Negotiating and transforming institutional
practices and research frameworks is as significant as the carrying out of actual research
programmes. (Smith, 1999, p. 141)
Smith (1999) speaks about the complex work that Indigenous scholars must do in often unfriendly environments. Similarly, I feel that the core responsibilities of my research are to push at the boundaries of what counts as “research” and to make choices as de-colonial interventions.
Smith (2012) also describes how Indigenous research is an intensely political activity that must overcome systemic dismissals by dominant research communities along with internal assessments of authenticity: “Research can be judged as ‘not rigorous’, ‘not robust’, ‘not real’,
‘not theorized’, ‘not valid’, ‘not reliable’” and on the other hand from Indigenous criteria can be judged as “’not useful’, ‘not Indigenous’, ‘not friendly’, ‘not just’” (p. 142). It is a challenge for
Indigenous scholars to exist in this realm and to balance between the two critiques. Luckily for me, I am an urban Indigenous woman, and I have experience balancing on this log. I have often worked with both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people in Calgary, with not-for-profit groups, educational institutions, and large, for-profit companies. I have often been forced to appear not too “Indian” as to alienate non-Indigenous people and not too “white” as to offend Indigenous community members. In either case, each judgment has expectations of you, your knowledge, your experience and your voice. This sounds very much like the role of Indigenous scholars as described by Smith.
63 Jo-ann Archibald, Q’um Q’um Xiiem, is a Stó:lō scholar who has worked in the field of education in the Coast Salish territories for a number of years. And, like me, she lives in an urban city, and participates in both worlds of culture and western academia. When I was developing my Indigenous research methodology, her book found its way to my hands and my heart. While I had learned about the importance of using and conceptualizing an Indigenous research framework from a tribal epistemology from Kovach’s work, as a new Indigenous
Master’s scholar I was not prepared to develop an entire methodology on my own. That in and of itself would be a whole project and considering that I am just trying to complete a thesis and not something larger, I am fortunate to have an incredible Indigenous and Stó:lō scholar guiding my way. In her writing, Archibald has a tenderness that makes for a comfortable space to engage in the difficult and sometimes uncomfortable work of research. I had the pleasure of meeting her in person when I presented at the SAGE (Supporting Aboriginal Graduate Enhancement) Graduate
Research Conference at the University of British Columbia in 2016. The goal of SAGE is to increase the number of graduate students and “aims to develop a critical mass of highly credentialed Indigenous scholars who are committed to their communities’ cultural, educational, social and economic advancement” (Kovach, 2009, p. 87). I was the only student from Alberta who applied to present, as this conference usually supports the graduate students of the
University of British Columbia, Simon Fraser University and the University of Victoria. To be present in home territory, in the long house, and share and discuss my graduate work with others like me was an uplifting experience on one hand, and sad on the other, knowing that I would return home to my university where the support of Indigenous graduate students is non-existent.
One of the things that I loved right away about the methodology that Archibald has conceptualized is encompassed in the following statement about storywork: “Coming to know
64 and use Indigenous stories through storywork requires an intimate knowing that brings together heart, mind, body, and spirit” (Archibald, 2008, p. 140). This concept of holism is reflected in the acknowledgement of heart, mind, body and spirit – all the things that must remain in balance.
This foundational understanding ensures that the unique qualities of Indigenous research are able to shine through the plethora of western methods that have blocked the light in the past. Winona
Wheeler (2001) speaks to supporting the use of Indigenous methods versus borrowing from other western disciplines:
While we borrow research methodologies and theory from other disciplines, they cannot
rigidly adhere to the strictures of their academic disciplinary homes – they have to be
used critically, keeping in mind the holism of Indigenous knowledge and the unique
intellectual concerns we face in Indian country. (p. 100)
The framing of Indigenous research that has borrowed from other disciplines, or been categorized as an interdisciplinary approach is that it does not allow for the unique nature of
Indigenous epistemology. This is a disregard for the holistic nature of Indigenous knowledge that has not merely evolved from other theories, ways of thinking or knowing, but has always been there. The centrality of our ancestors, the knowledge in memory, in epigenetics, has always been there.
The question is not whether or not Indigenous research and knowledge systems should be part of its own discipline or methodology, but that it always has been and now is the time to showcase that to non-Indigenous academia. Such an imperative would advance a decolonizing perspective where, as Smith (2012) contends, colonizing the Other proceeds through discipline, not just in the way that we organize knowledge, but in the organization of people as well. Stuart
Hall spoke to the differentiation of Indigenous peoples during colonization by Europeans, who
65 “persisted in describing them all as ‘Indians’, lumping all distinctions together and suppressing difference in one, inaccurate stereotype” (Hall, 1992, p. 212). During this time, which was also the birth of the Enlightenment period, there was much discussion among philosophers (for example, Hobbes and Locke) about the progress of ‘savagery’ to ‘civilization’, where the
Indigenous people of the Americas were positioned very low on their fabricated spectrum (Hall,
1992, p. 219). In the same way, Smith argues that “the most obvious forms of discipline were through exclusion, marginalization and denial. Indigenous ways of knowing were excluded and marginalized” (Smith, 2012, p. 71). It is not a new phenomenon to use Indigenous methods and ways of knowing, it is a resurgence to what has been denied. This resurgence in the case of my research and the unique position that the International Indigenous Studies program should play in the academy requires a unique Indigenous methodology like storywork.
Archibald (2008) describes seven core principles that shape storywork: “The principles of respect, responsibility, reciprocity, reverence, holism, interrelatedness, and synergy… These principles are a beginning theory of Stó:lō and Coast Salish storywork” (p. 140). Telling stories as a way of interviewing was an important part of my methodology and I tried to get to the point in storywork that Archibald describes as “research as storytelling”. According to Archibald
(2008), there are a few levels between “research as conversation”, “research as chat” and
“research as storytelling”:
Research as conversation is characterized as an open-ended interview with opportunity
for both sides to engage in talk rather than only one party doing most of the talking.
Research as chat occurs when the researcher is very familiar with the participant(s) and
they interact on a frequent basis. (p. 47)
66 In my knowledge gathering phase, I met with past and current students, past administrators of the program, and past and current sessional instructors. I would agree that I maintained the level of research as conversation with almost all of them, and in the case where I knew my storyteller very well, we achieved a level of research as chat. I think that in the end, it is up to the reader to let me know if they believe that I was able to get to the level of research as storytelling when this thesis is complete.
While I knew ahead of time that I wanted the story gathering to feel as natural as possible,
I did create three separate sets of conversation questions to: a) keep on track; b) have some consistency of the conversations and stories; and c) comply with the rigors of the ethics application process. One set of questions was designed for students, one set was for administration, and one set was for teachers (see Appendix A). There was crossover in some cases of those that were both administrators and teachers, but by and large there were only minor tweaks to the questions in terms of their role in the International Indigenous Studies program. All of my storytellers received a copy of the draft questions ahead of time with the ethics and permission forms, as well as my Indigenous protocol statement. Three of my storytellers provided me with written formal answers to the questions that either they felt they missed during our conversation, or were sent ahead of the meeting so that they did not miss anything while swept up in the conversation. One storyteller in particular, Jennifer Kelly, felt so strongly and passionately about her answers, and in some regards given her passion feared that she may not be able to verbalize her thoughts in the heat of the moment and wanted to provide me with coherent and thoughtful responses prepared in advance. Regardless of how my storytellers chose to share their stories with me, I am grateful for their contributions and their support of this storybasket.
67 All of the sessions began with ceremony. With the exception of the sharing circle or discussions over the phone or Skype, I offered tobacco to my storytellers to bind our cultural agreement. I either smudged on my own prior to the conversation or together with them, acknowledging Creator and prayers for our conversation. Indigenous scholar Laara Fitznor speaks to Kovach about how she included ceremony and protocol in her research when she used sharing circles:
Sharing circles are not written up in any research methodology, in a methods book. I saw
focus groups, so I wrote a long rationale in the initial part of my research explaining the
importance for sharing circles… it is more of a ceremonial, sacred space where I am
building in the cultural pieces of it, as opening and closing with an acknowledgment or a
prayer, and opening with a smudge. I used tobacco offerings (Kovach, 2009, p. 136).
This is the goal of using an Indigenous research framework like the one that I created; with ceremony at the center you are creating the safe, ethical and cultural space for research to occur.
I learned by making mistakes in one instance where I forgot the tobacco offering. I had invited sessional instructor and the first graduate of the International Indigenous Studies program, Line
Laplante, to my house for our conversation. When I mentioned that I forgot the tobacco, she asked that we re-book the session and she would return when all the protocols where in their proper place so that she could share with me her story in a good way. This was a humbling experience for me; I was so busy just trying to get all the story gathering done that I forgot to incorporate the piece that makes this work an Indigenous method. This taught me to take the time that it needs, do it right, and don’t be ashamed when you make mistakes. In the end she returned the next week and I had corrected what I needed to and we had a great conversation and sharing.
68 All of my storytellers, with the exception of two students, agreed to be named in my thesis, and I believe that this is big piece to Indigenous methods: the ability for people to have their words and stories accurately linked to their identities. There is power in words, good or bad, and they are not mine. I am just borrowing them from my storytellers. In order to honour the
Indigenous processes and protocol, along with my Letter of Introduction (see Appendix B) and
Consent Form (see Appendix C), I also sent an Indigenous Protocol Statement (see Appendix D) that speaks to traditional land acknowledgment of where the research is taking place, self- location of my Stó:lō roots that will inform my Indigenous research framework, and commitment to share the final thesis and report with the Indigenous community of Calgary and the
International Indigenous Studies program.
All of my one-on-one conversations were held between November 2015 and January 2016.
On average I spent one hour with each individual, though there were a few conversations that lasted closer to two hours. I used a recording app on my iPad for the conversations and all but two conversations were recorded, one by choice of the storyteller and the other because the conversation occurred over phone and I was not able to record it. One phone call with a past
Director, Sarah Carter, was made via the Skype app and that call was recorded. Both of the
Skype calls with Rick Ponting and past sessional Jennifer Kelly were recorded via an app on
Skype with video and sound.
Talking around the circle occurred when I was trying to reach as many past International
Indigenous Studies students as I could. I advertised two weeks in advance (November 26, 2015) for the December 10, 2015 Circle through my various community networks (sent via email), hung posters in the Native Centre on campus, and had the poster included in the distribution of the Native Centre newsletter (see Appendix E). The poster was also shared on social media sites,
69 both personal (Twitter) and organizational sites (Linkedin and Aboriginal Lynx). In the end, I had only five past students and two current students attend the circle. Although the current students were Indigenous, they were a part of the Aboriginal Student Access Program (ASAP) early access and open studies program.17 They had taken an intro to Indigenous Studies course
(INDG 201) in a small class with only other Indigenous students, and not the broader
International Indigenous Studies classes with students from other faculties and backgrounds. As they are in a separate program, they are not aware of the program’s history, or have much experience in other classes, they were only able to contribute to the sharing circle in the context of what they had experienced.
I can speculate that I did not leave enough time to recruit more students, and I did not make an effort to offer more dates and flexible times to meet with them in a sharing circle. I had set a definite time for when I wanted all my knowledge gathering and stories to be collected, in part due to the school advising me that I needed to be done in the required 4-year period (though I did ask for a year extension in the end), and the other self-imposed timeline to try and have my thesis defended before my 40th birthday.18
In terms of the personal one-on-one sessions that I held with my storytellers, I began at the beginning with the administrators who had initialized the creation of the International Indigenous
Studies program and then went on to past coordinators/directors of the program. All of the past administrators are now retired and they graciously met with me in person on campus and over
Skype between November 10 and November 30, 2015. These included the author of the BA
17 The ASAP is designed for students as a transition year who require academic upgrading before enrolling in a degree program. The program is designed for small classes, with first year university level credit courses, as well as additional cultural and academic support. The classes are closed to other students enrolling in them and the students are all Indigenous. 18 Unfortunately, I did not make that deadline, and at the time of this I am now 41.
70 program proposal, Rick Ponting, the past Provost, Ron Bond, and I had an informal conversation off the record with the past Dean at the time the program was launched.
I had conversations with past Directors between November 19, 2015 and December 3,
2015, including Sarah Carter, who went on to work at the University of Alberta after her short stint with the University of Calgary. I then spoke with Jim Frideres, who was the longest standing Director over the years, and finally with Aruna Srivastava, who stepped in to the role of
Director when Frideres retired. None of the past Directors have been Indigenous, though
Srivastava is a visible minority.
The Indigenous students that spoke with me were all students that I had the pleasure of taking courses with during my undergraduate degree, and so we were on the level of “research as chat” if not at “research as storytelling”. One student from the Penticton Indian Band, who did not want to use her real name, has her BSc and like me used the minor to fill out the scope of
Indigenous content courses. Barb Horsefall also had Indigenous studies as a minor with her BA in Communication Studies. My third conversation partner, who wishes to remain anonymous, was one of the first initial cohort to graduate with the Bachelor of International Indigenous
Studies.
To round out my stories, I spoke to two sessional instructors: Jennifer Kelly of non-
Indigenous descent, Kelly and her family have been living in the Netherlands for the last five years, and I had to arrange our conversation via Skype. Given how passionate Kelly is on the subject, she insisted on taking time with the questions ahead of time, and preferred to write the answers down first so that she would not forget anything and provide her best responses to me.
This allowed for us to have a more relaxed conversational meeting over Skype and provided me with in-depth responses in writing.
71 I also spoke with Line Laplante who is Métis/Cree from the Ottawa Valley, a past undergraduate of the program and a longstanding sessional instructor in the program. I had hoped to reach more current sessional instructors, and had emailed them numerous times, however Laplante and Kelly were the only ones that emailed me back wishing to support my thesis work. I must also note that Srivastava and Frideres have also taught Indigenous Studies classes, and we did talk about the multiple roles that we all have played in the history of the program.
It was my intention to have conversations with external Indigenous community members on the history of the program, their role in the creation of it, and how they may or may not be connected to the program now. This did not occur as I had hoped, and it is a disappointment to be missing that voice in this story given the recurrent exclusion of Indigenous perspectives in official histories. In looking at the history of the International Indigenous Studies Program, I wanted to have the community voice included. As there are limited records of who all the
Indigenous community members were, I was going off a very short list. I sent emails out at the beginning of November 2015 along with my personal introduction and cultural protocol document. I can only speculate as to why I did not get a response from those that I reached out to. From my conversations and research, I could discern that there were partnerships made at the beginning of the program’s launch that have since broken down in some cases. For example, many partnerships between the University of Calgary and local tribal Colleges have changed over time. While some partnerships have remained with other faculties between tribal colleges and the University of Calgary, such as in the Faculty of Social Work, formal partnerships with the International Indigenous Studies Program have been sporadic. Perhaps this is reflected in the lack of response. I know that there are some key community Elders that have since passed on
72 who had an integral role at the consultation phase of the program, including respected Elder
Narcisse Blood.
Given that there are a number of trust issues in the Indigenous community on research as and appropriation of knowledge and stories, they could have chosen not to respond as they do not know me. The relational accountability and opportunity to build “reciprocal an respectful relationships” (Wilson, 2008, p. 40) with that particular community did not occur in the time frame that I had. I did not take the proper time to go to them, introduce myself properly, have tea and share with them first. This impacted the methodology since, as Smith (2012) notes, research can be the dirtiest word to Indigenous people and, “When mentioned in many Indigenous contexts, it stirs up silence, it conjures up bad memories, it raises a smile that is knowing and distrustful. It is so powerful that Indigenous people even write poetry about research” (p. 1). A few examples of research grievances that have occurred in the past by predominantly non-
Indigenous researchers include:
• Lack of regard for cultural taboos and confidentiality by publicizing sensitive
cultural information;
• Research that is not consistent with priorities of the community;
• Asking for approval from First Nations communities after the research is already
completed;
• No input or approval from First Nations;
• Disrespect of the basic human dignity of participants, their spiritual or cultural
beliefs;
• Lack of clarity on what the benefits to the community are.
(The Alberta First Nations Information Governance Centre, 2014)
73 In order to mitigate the mistakes of the past in research, there are policies that have been designed by both Indigenous and Western institutions. The First Nations Information
Governance Centre created the “OCAP”19 principles in order to standardize and protect how research is conducted with First Nations. OCAP stands for: Ownership, Control, Access and
Possession (First Nations Information Governance Committee, n.d.). Ownership covers cultural knowledge, data and information that a community or group owns collectively; control affirms that First Nations control all stages of research processes; access refers to the ability of First
Nations to retain access to all the information and data as a result of research in their communities; and possession is about stewardship and the physical control of their data (First
Nations Information Governance Committee, n.d.). It is important to note that OCAP is designed specifically to be used with First Nations communities and governments, however these principles can be adapted to support other Indigenous communities as well. Having a policy system that is designed by First Nations, for use in First Nations communities is a great benefit for researchers as they enter into a relationship with them.
Western institutions have created a guide with the Tri-Council Policy Statement on
Research Involving the First Nations, Inuit and Metis Peoples of Canada (TCPS, Chapter 9),20 where the application of OCAP is also referenced. The chapter is designed to support ethical research, however, “it is not intended to override or replace ethical guidance offered by
Aboriginal peoples themselves” (Tri Council Policy Statement, 2015). In order to assist understanding the complex work of doing research with Indigenous peoples, there is a TCPS
19 OCAP® is a registered trademark of the First Nations Information Governance Centre (FNIGC) 20 http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/chapter9-chapitre9/
74 Core 2 tutorial21 that researchers must complete for their ethics review process. These are positive steps to engage in ethical research with Indigenous peoples, and these guiding principles should be a part of Indigenous research paradigms.
In addition to speaking with people, I collected some archival and background material on the International Indigenous Studies program. I was given whatever files Rick Ponting had in his possession, which included the initial proposal, the first draft and proposed budget, as well as the plan for course offerings. From the initial years, Sarah Carter provided me with some of her year-end reports that documented the work that she was doing and some of the initiatives that she was trying to implement. I had support from a recent undergraduate student, Alicia Clifford, in mapping out some of the course changes that occurred from year to year, as well as mapping out the path that the program undertook gleaned from the past calendar information. Finally, I received data from the University on the number of students that were registered as majors and minors per year, how many people were enrolled in classes per year, and how many degrees were granted per year.
I then took a broad look at the history and statistics of three major institutions in Alberta that have Indigenous or Native studies programs. These include the University of Alberta, the
University of Lethbridge, and the University of Calgary. The main information that I was looking for included the number of students that were enrolled in named Indigenous or Native studies classes and the number of degrees granted per year. I was also able to get supplementary information from the University of Alberta that included the number of faculty they had, to compare with the staffing resources that have been available at the University of Calgary.
21 http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/education/Module9_en.pdf
75 Information that was made available to me from the University of Calgary included a breakdown of the number of enrolled students that were student majors of the International
Indigenous Studies Bachelor of Arts degree versus those that were classified as having
Indigenous Studies as a minor in their degree stream each year. I also collected the number of named Indigenous Studies classes that were offered per semester/year. All of the information that
I collected from all three schools was produced between the dates of 2004 and 2016, as this was the timeframe when the full Bachelor of Arts had been offered at the University of Calgary in the
International Indigenous Studies program. This rounds out the majority of the limited quantitative data that I collected to support my storybasket.
The benefits of using an Indigenous research framework in the case of my thesis creates ethical spaces for tribal paradigms, as Betty Bastien advocates for here:
As an educator and researcher, I believe that the time has come to break the cycle of
dependency, and to begin research from within the tribal paradigms of Indigenous
cultures. Research must be designed to explore solutions to problems from within the
tribal interpretation (Bastien, quoted in Kovach, 2009, p. 129).
In terms of interpretation, a western model such as conventional thematic analysis can be reductive, which is in direct conflict with a holistic Indigenous epistemology, whereas an interpretative approach connects with tribal values as interpretive and subjective knowledge systems (Kovach, 2009, pp. 130-131). Another point of contention is that conventional scholarship requires that findings are presented in written form, where the power resides with the writer and therefore the reciprocal nature of Indigenous paradigms that include orality are left out in that form (Kovach, 2009, p. 132). The opportunity for the oral defense to allow the oral culture of Indigenous knowledge systems to permeate is significant, though I choose to center
76 my Stó:lō framework to acknowledge this as a witnessing and sharing of storywork with my committee as witnesses, versus a defense of my knowledge gathering. In this way, I am completing the requirements of the western system, but also incorporating the tribal systems into the process via my research framework.
One drawback to using decolonization in an Indigenous research framework is that the
Indigenous research community is small, and validation of these frameworks should be carried out by Indigenous researchers who hold this knowledge (Kovach, 2009, p. 133). There is still a significant amount of work that needs to be done in this area to bring credibility to Indigenous research practices and values. For non-Indigenous people who will interface with Indigenous research and look to support the work there are a number of things that they will need to do and know: “The relationship begins with decolonizing one’s mind and heart” (Kovach, 2009, p. 169).
This is about examining power, exploring your own values about knowledge creation, and examining whiteness, this is self-decolonization (Kovach, 2009, p. 169). Non-Indigenous scholars ought to know the history of Indigenous scholarship in the academy, the lack of representation until recently and be able to move past the thought of the “Indigenous exotic”:
“The spiritual, holistic nature of Indigenous knowledges can be problematic for the more traditional, empiricist approach to knowledge” (Kovach, 2009, p. 170). Ongoing critical reflection and self-decolonization again will help with this. Non-Indigenous scholars can also offer support by mentoring Indigenous graduate students and researchers through the operational requirements in academia so that they can attend to the western requirements and cultural ethics and protocols.
Another drawback related to a majority of non-Indigenous scholars in the academy is that they have to come to the meaning-making process of understanding Indigenous research
77 paradigms and frameworks in entirely new ways: “Meaning making with Indigenous inquiry involve(s) observation, sensory experience, contextual knowledge, and recognition of patterns”
(Kovach, 2009, p. 140). This is a challenge for the Indigenous scholar to provide opportunities in the written thesis and the oral defense that would make ethical space for the non-Indigenous committee to experience the holistic nature of their Indigenous research design. In order to try and mitigate this drawback I will request that my oral component of the thesis be delivered in the
Spo’Pi22 house on campus. I will invite my Elders, Indigenous community members and those who have been associated with the International Indigenous Studies program to witness the oral component. I will offer tobacco to my Elder, request that he pray for me and the work, and light the smudge to bond us all in ceremony. This is also decolonization in praxis.
As Smith contends, “In a decolonizing framework, deconstruction is part of a much larger intent” (Smith, 2012, p. 3). There are three ways that a decolonizing lens can be integrated into an Indigenous research framework: 1) centering of tribal epistemologies, where the focus is mainly on tribal knowledge and has minimal integration of a decolonizing approach; 2) centering a decolonizing theory under an umbrella of an Indigenous method (most aligned with Western critical methodologies); and 3) decolonization within a tribal centered methodology, which “goes beyond identifying the colonial impact and seeks change” (Kovach, 2009, p. 80). The first option on this list would be the most desirable, as there is no need to compare or explain how the
Indigenous paradigm is contesting any other knowledge system, it just exists. This would require more scholars with a strong understanding of the validity of Indigenous methods. The second
22 This is a special place to me on campus as I participated in the 2011 Solar Decathlon with over 100 UofC students, and the Indigenous Community Advisory where we competed in Washington DC. Our entry was a net zero solar home designed for Treaty 7 First Nations and region. The home currently sits on campus and was rebuilt with all the original interior pieces that include Indigenous cultural items. I would consider it a safe and ethical space, as well as a good example of how the external Indigenous community can support academic projects.
78 choice is probably where many new Indigenous scholars land, in particular because we are often taught predominantly western ways of knowing and doing and have to decolonize our own practices to prepare us for decolonizing research. The third choice is what I was aiming for in my research design, practice, and analysis, and hope to achieve in the final oral component.
There are a number of different types of stories that are told for a variety of reasons
(Archibald, 2008, p. 84), and I chose this particular Stó:lō method for the creation story of the
International Indigenous Studies Program:
The Stó:lō categorize oral narratives into sxwoxwiyam and sqwélqwel. Swoxwiyam are
“myth-like stories set in distant past”. They usually explain how things came to be and
how to “make things right for the present generation”. Sqwélqwel are “true stories or
news” describing “experiences in people’s lives”. In Stó:lō and Coast Salish cultures the
power of storywork to make meaning derives from a synergy between the story, the
context in which the story is used, the way the story is told, and how one listens to the
story (Archibald, 2008, p. 84, with reference to (Carlson, 1997).
The storywork that I am doing is sqwélqwel, to capture the experiences of the International
Indigenous Studies program and the storytellers that shared their voices with me. Stories are always rooted in environment and place where they are “simultaneously evolutionary, ecological, spiritual, psychological, and creative” (Cajete, 2000, p. 13). In creating my thesis with storywork, my Indigenous research design allows me to locate my Stó:lō self in the research even though I am in Calgary. It also allows me to be aware of the holistic nature of the program’s creation and to provide recommendations for its future. As Kovach (2009) says, “The interrelationship between story and knowing cannot be traced back to any specific starting time
79 within tribal societies, for they have been tightly bound since time immemorial as a legitimate form of understanding” (p. 94).
In her use of storywork, Archibald cites the Stó:lō Elders for leading her to the principles that allow her to use the stories that she has gathered. As previously indicated, these principles include respect, responsibility, reciprocity, reverence, holism, interrelatedness and synergy
(Archibald, 2008, p. ix). Between the time that I gathered the stories, and the time that I transcribed and re-listened, and re-listened again, much time had passed for the stories to stew and resonate within me. According to the seven principles of storywork, I let the components of my framework lead me to the bits that would best fit into my storybasket. Archibald explains that in order to get the best use out of storywork you have to know how to bring together “heart, mind, body and spirit” (2008, p. 140).
Bringing together heart, mind, body and spirit wraps up the seven principles of storywork into a nice bundle. In order to achieve that balance, one must practice the principles through an interpretive approach that makes space for subjectivity and self-in relation. I used such an interpretative approach to the stories gathered, which included: physical components of listening and believing the truths of my storytellers; the spiritual acts of dreaming, taking the work into the sweatlodge and other ceremonies; the mental acts of referencing the stories against the seven principles of storywork and my larger framework and Stó:lō centered perspective; and finally the emotional response that had me acknowledging and respecting the stories, which led me to the holistic findings.
In his work, Wilson (2008) tries to describe the process of “analyzing the data” as non- linear, and this also defines my own process of analysis:
80 We have some non-linear forms of logic. What it involves is our whole lifelong learning
leading to an intuitive logic and way of analysis… It just can’t be thought of in a linear or
one-step-leads-to-another way. All of the pieces go in, until eventually the new idea
comes out. You build relationships with the idea in various multiple ways, until you reach
a new understanding of higher state of awareness regarding whatever it is that you are
studying. I don’t really know how to explain it better. (pp. 116-117)
I have used much of the Indigenous scholarly knowledge that I have gained over the four years that it has taken me to complete this thesis, as well as the lived and experiential knowledge that I have gained from working in the Indigenous community with Elders and Knowledge Keepers to analyze these stories, and then represent them as findings in a written document as part of the academic requirements for my Master’s degree. It has not been easy to write the parts that are non-linear, that are about my interpretation through these Stó:lō lenses.
Some of my analysis happened the more that I spoke to and about my work along the way, in classrooms, presentations, dinner tables and coffee dates. Wilson also describes a similar experience of listening to others, sharing and learning from each other (2008, p. 131). As I did not have a cohort of students to talk with, my community, and my Elders (both scholarly and spiritually) became the sounding boards through my analysis. The ability to practice out loud, orally, the thoughts and feelings that I had towards the stories, led me to interpret them holistically first from within, and then eventually externally.
I hoped that my storytellers would be truthful and forthcoming, which they were, and allowed them to tell me what they wanted to. Although I did have my draft questions, I wanted them to neither give me only the good, or the bad, just their stories about their experiences.
When choosing what to highlight in the thesis, I tried to group the stories by who the storytellers
81 were, versus what they said. What they had to share was what I would try to re-tell as the means to analyze what their interconnected stories and experiences have to tell us about the
International Indigenous Studies Program.
In closing, I would like to share a quote from Shawn Wilson’s father, Stan Wilson, who ties up the metaphysical understanding of research analysis here:
That’s the spiritual part of it. If you talk about research as ceremony, that’s the climax of
the ceremony, when it all comes together and all those connections are made. Cause
that’s what ceremony is about, strengthening those connections. So maybe when research
as ceremony comes together, when the ceremony is reaching its climax, is when those
ideas all come together, those connections made. (Wilson, 2008, p. 122).
82 Lhí:m - Picking Berries: Findings & Analysis
This chapter situates my investigation of how the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary came to be in relation to similar programs at the University of
Alberta and the University of Lethbridge. While I am not focused on providing a comparison between existing programs, I did want to see what others had done in the past, particularly in
Alberta. A straight across comparison in many cases is not achievable as all the programs significantly differ: they are surrounded by different Indigenous communities; they have different political landscapes; and their programs were all set up with unique goals. After providing a brief overview of these other programs, this chapter offers an analysis of the creation story of the University of Calgary’s International Indigenous Studies program. By compiling the accounts of various storytellers, I have recreated a roughly chronological narrative that demonstrates the process of the program’s attempt to institutionalize Indigenous ways of knowing within the university. My main finding was that systemic racism and colonialism has obstructed the International Indigenous Studies program from reaching its potential. I argue that this impacted both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students’ learning, the faculty’s ability to teach from an Indigenous holistic perspective, and administrators who ran the program to the best of their ability without adequate support. Each of my storytellers could point to positive experiences in relation to the program, but they also shared disappointing and sometimes preventable experiences that one would not expect from an Indigenous program.
The University of Alberta
According to the University of Alberta website, discussions for the creation of a Native Studies program began as far back as 1972, though it was not established and offering classes until 1988.
83 The process to establish the program was led by a task force that made twenty recommendations in total to the University Senate. Initially called the School of Native Studies, in June of 2006 the name was changed and the program was designated as a Faculty of Native Studies (University of
Alberta, n.d.). The name itself suggests a distinct understanding of what type of program it will be, contrasted against the University of Calgary program: Native Studies versus International
Indigenous Studies. There is more of a focus on local Indigenous communities; however, the
University of Alberta does mention the pursuit of Indigenous ways of knowing from local, national, and international communities. The faculty website describes the Native Studies program as “an emerging area of study that seeks to understand the experiences and the lives of
Aboriginal people and communities, past, present and future” (University of Alberta, n.d.).
In terms of marketing and telling the story of their program and faculty, the University of
Alberta’s efforts are concentrated on their public website. The incorporation of their vision, mission, and values communicates primarily to researchers and prospective students:
Vision:
To produce a better society by educating Indigenous and non-Indigenous students to
be responsible citizens through excellent community engagement, teaching and
research focused on the complexity of Indigenous issues and thought.
Mission:
To produce graduates across the university who have respect for Indigenous
knowledges, who are educated about Indigenous histories and contemporary issues,
and who can work collaboratively with Indigenous communities and peoples.
Values:
• our autonomy as a Faculty within the academy
84 • interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches
• the relevance of Native perspectives and Indigenous knowledge
• the contribution of Elders to teaching, research and sense of direction
• our interactions and connections with Native communities
• the promotion of Indigenous languages
• the scholarly standards of the academy for the creation and
dissemination of knowledge (University of Alberta, n.d.)
This program’s values are a good example of finding the parallels between institutional values and incorporating an Indigenous perspective on cultural morals and principles that are also rooted in epistemology. These values are supported by the literature on Indigenous epistemologies that speak directly to a holistic (Ermine, 1995, p. 110) perspective
(inter/multidisciplinary), relevance of Indigenous knowledge and the promotion of Indigenous languages. In order to utilize cultural knowledge paradigms, it is often necessary to also understand the Indigenous language where that knowledge is centered (Kovach, 2009, p. 24). In
Cree for example, a fluid speaker would most often use subjunctive language (“ing” mode) that honours the present, with focus on the process rather than the product (p. 66). Language influences the worldview, the meaning making, and the research.
These values, as they relate to Indigenous principles and epistemologies, make this program stand out to prospective students and faculty. There is an acknowledgement of complex issues and Indigenous perspectives, the needs of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous learners, and the inclusion of Elders at many levels of the Faculty. In fact, they claim that Elders are involved in the Faculty all year round. The inclusion extends from inside the classroom as guest
85 lecturers, at campus wide events, and they sit on the Faculty Council (University of Alberta, n.d.).
In terms of what the Faculty offers, they have both undergraduate (BA) and graduate degree options (MA) in Native Studies and a combination of various joint degrees. At this point the University of Calgary does not offer a graduate degree option. Other unique offerings that the
University of Alberta has are opportunities for scholars with the Rupert’s Land Centre for Métis
Research and publishing opportunities with the faculty’s Aboriginal Policy Studies journal
(University of Alberta, n.d.). The collaborative nature of these built in opportunities assist to build up the scholarly knowledge base of Indigenous studies, but they also support the capacity building of an Indigenous knowledge network of people:
What is more important that what alternatives Indigenous peoples offer the world is what
alternatives Indigenous peoples offer each other. The strategies that work for one
community may well work for another… The sharing of resources and information may
assist groups and communities to collaborate with each other and to protect each other.
(Smith, 1999, p. 105)
The field of graduate studies for topics of Indigenous studies is an especially important growing area of research and provides this sort of capacity building opportunity. The University of
Alberta offers graduate students options to work within an environment that openly values the complexity of Indigenous issues and studies, supports collaboration, and promotes growth in the knowledge and the network.
The statistical data that I was able to find that could best be compared to the data at
University of Calgary was limited to the number of students that were enrolled each year, and the number of degrees that were granted. I looked specifically at the years between which the
86 University of Calgary had begun offering their BA degree in International Indigenous Studies. I was able to locate this specific data after numerous calls and support online via the University of
Alberta’s data books and statistical reports. This was a very user friendly database that had drop- down menus in which you could isolate certain information, from a specific faculty and specific years. The table below shows the data I collected between the years 2004-2016 (University of
Alberta, n.d.)
Year Enrollment Totals Degrees Granted 2004/2005 170 30 2005/2006 150 25 2006/2007 118 26 2007/2008 116 24 2008/2009 94 26 2009/2010 99 30 2010/2011 108 23 2011/2012 122 9 2012/2013 114 16 2013/2014 119 27 2014/2015 133 24 2015/2016 122 13
Table 3. University of Alberta Data
As the table illustrates, there has been a swing of enrollment over the last twelve years with 170 enrolled in classes at its peak, and 94 at its lowest point. The information provided in the database did not specify how many courses were being offered in each year to see if the classes were attracting a sufficient amount of students in each class. The data also does not indicate if the students that are enrolled are majoring in Native Studies or whether there are students from outside the degree program that are enrolling in the classes as well. In terms of degrees being granted, there is also no breakdown provided between the BA and the MA, and you have to cross
87 list to see if some of these were part of a joint degree such as in Education. There has been a consistent amount of degrees being offered per year with the exception of a few years that had less than twenty degrees granted.
On a side note, I looked at the number of teaching staff that the University of Alberta had over the years and on average they have had between 7-10 staff in three categories: Full
Professor, Associate Professor, and Assistant Professor. For the academic year of 2015/2016 they had four Full Professors, three Associate Professors, and three Assistant Professors. As we will see, the International Indigenous Studies program has never had any full-time faculty of its own; it has run with primarily sessional instructors, and professors from other departments and faculties in cross listed courses only.
Overall, the Faculty of Native Studies at the University of Alberta seems to be a well- rounded program, with support from the institution, the Indigenous community, and the Elders.
This is of course only a snapshot of what the University of Alberta has done in the field of
Indigenous studies.
The University of Lethbridge
Information about the Native American Studies program at the University of Lethbridge was not easy to obtain. The website was not as intuitive or navigable as the University of Alberta’s, and they did not have any links to their database or statistical reports. There was no creation story to tell us how they came to be, nor any indication of how long they have been here for. I attempted numerous times to email and telephone someone on campus that could provide me with more information, however, no one ever returned my requests. Therefore, the information here is basic in its description of the Native American Studies program. The program does offer Bachelor and
88 Masters of Arts degrees, as well as a Bachelor of Arts and Science. Located within the Faculty of
Arts and Sciences, this program seems unique in that its name would denote that it focuses on the
North American Indigenous only. They do boast on their website that the program is highly sought after for the unique perspective that if offers in the following areas: “art, law, philosophy, health, politics, history, gender studies, ecology, business, customs and languages” (University of Lethbridge, n.d.). If they are claiming to view these discipline areas with an Indigenous perspective (the ‘unique perspective’), then this is a good example of indigenized content which
“centres a politics of indigenous identity and indigenous cultural action” (Smith, 1999, p. 146).
Given their location in Treaty 7, to learn in these core disciplines from a niitsitapi23 perspective would make the University of Lethbridge the ideal choice for niitsitapi learners.
One unique factor that they promote is their Oral History and Tradition Centre. Upon further navigation of the website, I was initially excited about this opportunity for research within Indigenous studies. However, when reviewed, there was no content that spoke directly to
Indigenous oral history or tradition at all.24 One of the faculty members, Carol Williams, has experience in some Indigenous research but it is unclear if there are others. It may be that the
University would like to see a collaboration between Indigenous studies and the Oral History and
Tradition Centre, and that is why they make an effort to highlight it. Given the importance of orality and oral history to Indigenous peoples, Lee Maracle (2015) argues that there is not enough being done in universities to support Indigenous literary forms, as there is a lack of support in understanding Indigenous oral traditions:
The opportunity to study and apply scholarly research and analysis to Indigenous oral
cultural foundations at universities and in public schools does not exist. Universities and
23 Blackfoot 24 http://www.uleth.ca/research/centres-institutes/centre-oral-history-and-tradition/meet-members
89 research funders are less than willing to provide the funds necessary to assist us in
moving from oracy to literacy… Our emancipation from our colonial condition, which is
connected to and can accommodate modernization, is dependent on scholarly study and
reclamation of original story (p. 200).
The Oral History and Tradition Centre could assist in the movement that Maracle is suggesting, and the University of Lethbridge seems to insinuate the value of the centre within Indigenous studies, however, there is no significant evidence that a clear connection is in place currently.
Perhaps there are not enough dedicated funds to support it. Perhaps they would benefit from more local Indigenous faculty members. Perhaps their internal systemic vision and values are not aligned with the Native Studies Program.
Overall the program at the University of Lethbridge seems to be more localized to the surrounding land and area than the University of Alberta’s program. While there was not enough data for me to characterize the scope of the University of Lethbridge’s program, it is valuable to note the basic parameters of both their Native American Studies program and the University of
Alberta’s Native Studies program as context for the International Indigenous Studies program at the University of Calgary. For example, in my story gathering with past administrators it became clear that one of the University of Calgary’s central goals was to ensure that their program could be differentiated from those of the University of Lethbridge and the University of Alberta. As the creation story of the University of Calgary program shows, this pivoted on the strategic use of academic buzzwords that centered on interdisciplinarity and internationalization.
The Creation Story of the International Indigenous Studies Program
90 Creation stories or origin stories contain many teaching moments. Between the facts, the fiction, the humor, the mistakes, and the accomplishments, there is much to be learned. Depending on when you hear the story, you may get something different from it than you did before, even if it is the same story; this is what I know about storytelling and learning from story. The story of the
International Indigenous Studies program is a young story, and not many people have told it, and probably not many people know it.
Filling my storybasket first with the creation of the International Indigenous Studies program includes the “Ponting Files”25 and my administration storytellers Rick Ponting, Sarah
Carter, Jim Frideres, Aruna Srivistava, and Ron Bond. Rick Ponting was a professor of sociology, Sarah Carter was the first official Director of the Indigenous Studies program, and
Ron Bond and Jim Frideres both held the positions of Vice Provost Academic for the University of Calgary. Later on in his career, Frideres would also hold the Director position for International
Indigenous Studies for a number of years before his official retirement from teaching. Srivistava, who is rooted in the English department, is the current Interim Coordinator of the International
Indigenous Studies program and has a variety of knowledge to share from the historical past of the program as well as its current iteration.
The process of getting a new degree program implemented within the bureaucracy of a large institution is no easy feat. Discussions on the creation of the program were approved in principle in the Spring of 1999 by the University Planning Committee and Academic Planning
Committee, and was officially proposed by professor Ponting in the Sociology Department in early 2003 (Ponting, 2003, p. 2). The proposal itself represented a notably interdisciplinary action, with financial support for the community consultations from 27 different department
25 These were files that Rick Ponting had saved over the years in relation to the program that were transferred to Aruna Srivstava and then subsequently to me for this research.
91 heads, deans, and other administrative units comprising over $10,000 (p. 2). In addition to the interest internally, there was significant interest and input from the community consultations that occurred with Indigenous Elders, community stakeholders, and with the First Nations operated
Red Crow Community College (p. 2).
Ponting was very keen to sit with me over Skype to discuss the program’s history, and even though we had never met in person, he shared everything that he could remember and the initial files he had kept. Given the distance (he was in BC and I in Alberta) we laughed about
“digital smudging” before our chat and he gave me a brief art tour of the paintings in his home.
He paid particular attention to the art by the late Cree artist Dale Auger, who was an alumnus of the University of Calgary, as a way to make me feel welcome in our Skype chat.
As in any good story, in Ponting’s story about the establishment of the program there were challenges to overcome, angles to determine, and champions that arose. While I wanted to be able to speak with all of the players in the story, given the time frame I had to be realistic about how many people I could reach and speak with. Thus, there are a number of voices that are missed. In particular, I wish that I had more stories from the Indigenous community and Elders of the time, given my methodological approach and lens. I can only speculate that they had certain hopes and expectations for this program that may not have come to fruition.
Framing the Program’s Rationale
As part of Ponting’s story, he shared the original proposal for the International Indigenous
Studies program. The benefit of being able to analyze the original proposal that was submitted for approval is to have access to the forecasted story of what the program was hoping to be.
Having this as a gauge for the direction of the program and then hearing from my initial
92 storytellers on their account of the creation and early history of the program provides some basis for how the program could be evaluated now, in hindsight.
In its own words, the proposal describes International Indigenous Studies as “the examination of the experiences, culture and artistic endeavors, and current status of Indigenous people from around the world” (Ponting, 2003, p. 1). The proposal describes how this program addition will ensure that the University of Calgary will catch up to what other Canadian universities have already been doing and suggest that this will in fact put them at the forefront, because of the focus on the international Indigenous components (p. 1). In our Skype sessions,
Ponting noted that he had done significant research into the existing programs at the University of Alberta and the University of Lethbridge. It was time for the University of Calgary to follow suit.
At this point in time, there was an increase in oil and gas developments in First Nations communities in Alberta, and the program was also positioned as a way to assist those individuals who may work within Indigenous communities. Under the law, the duty to consult with First
Nations on projects that may impact their Aboriginal rights lies with the Crown,26 however, sometimes that duty to consult is passed on to 3rd parties such as an industry company.27 As there was an increase in oil and gas companies consulting, partnering, and hoping to extract resources in and around First Nations communities, the thought was that International
Indigenous Studies program would benefit future labour force needs.
Without knowing the stories of the surrounding communities and Indigenous people who were consulted on the proposal, it is hard to know what the community wanted to see in the program. The literature and stories that we do have access to for this research do not tell their
26 The Government of Canada 27 http://raeandcompany.com/what-does-duty-to-consult-mean/
93 stories. It became clear that the decisions for the program’s proposal and development may not have been balanced with the needs of the community. This ignorant attitude28 is a part of the systemic racism that stems from historical paternal control over Indigenous people. The
University of Calgary made the decisions, based on what they knew to be the best course of action at the time, on behalf of the communities and the future learners that would attend the program.
The political willingness of the Klein government was also positive in the University’s favor. Ponting recounted a funny story about interfacing with Premier Ralph Klein on a couple of occasions to personally inform him about the proposal and persuade him to support the program with provincial funding. He felt that given the political nature of such a proposal, a nod from the
Premier, who was in favour of Indigenous projects and a supporter of oil sands,29 would go a long way in gaining support from the many University approval bodies. Gaining this institutional support was not quite so simple; as Ponting discovered, the University of Calgary has a heavy- handed bureaucratic system compared to other Alberta universities, which made the task of approval a long and often burdensome task.
Combining both Indigenous and western worldviews, the program was designed to target both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students. It was to “meet the needs of students and to coordinate and integrate the disparate scholarship and service currently taking place at the
University of Calgary in this field” (Ponting, 2003, p. 1). Because of current (at the time)
Indigenous issues and the surrounding Indigenous communities in and around Calgary, the
28 I mean this not in an insulting manner, but more matter of factly: ignorance in that they simply did not know any better. 29 “Many blamed Klein's government for allowing development of Alberta's oilsands to grow unchecked.” http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/ralph-klein-s-remarkable-political-life- 1.1330371
94 proposal puts forth the rationale for the program to meet growing demands in the political landscape, close the gaps in scholarship, and consider the global context of Indigenous issues within which this program would work (p. 1). As my research revealed, even to this day, there does not exist another program in Canada similar to the International Indigenous Studies program.
My storytellers speak about the financial rationale to make the program focus on an
International scope in order not to duplicate programs that were already established at the
University of Alberta and the University of Lethbridge, as if there was no room for other programs in Alberta that could support Indigenous content. There is room for all institutions to have English departments, Sciences, and Engineering, but we must limit duplication of
Indigenous Studies in Alberta. This is another red flag to indicate the systemic racism that exits within institutions that control the type of programs and opportunities available.
The university in general at the time was also on an internationalization and globalization kick. Francisco Marmolejo (2010) discusses internationalization of higher education on a global level, which could explain the University of Calgary’s decision to differentiate their program from others and capitalize on funding opportunities:
When asked about the most important benefits of internationalization, the top three reasons
at the global level listed in order of relevance were: increasing international awareness of
students; strengthening research and knowledge production; and fostering international
cooperation and solidarity. (n.p.)
With these factors in mind, it interesting that internationalization and Indigenous studies are paired together in this program. If for example, we take the benefit of ‘strengthening research and knowledge production’ as of great importance to the University of Calgary, one would think
95 the alignment to Indigenous knowledge production would have supported the program better.
Though it later becomes clear that the international components of the program were not fully resourced to support strong research or knowledge production.
The Vice Provost Ron Bond was another player who championed this program within the system. While he did not have any direct involvement in curriculum development, his role enabled him to provide broader institutional support for the program. He spoke in great detail about how the informal system of collegial governance was needed to get programs such as the
International Indigenous Studies program up and running alongside the formal processes. He described how this informal peer support “together, collectively, would provide a kind of intellectual community that would be eager to move this ahead” (Bond, 2015). That appeared to be true in the beginning, and many of my storytellers mentioned the fact that the initial financial support that was required in the research and consultation phase of the proposal was compiled piece-meal from various deans within multiple faculties.
Bond had a particular connection to the internationalization components at the University of Calgary, as he created the first Associate Vice Provost International position and that person reported to him. With the shift in leaders at the top of the University, this focus on internationalization was moved under different umbrellas and in turn there was a lack of consistency in the way that international affairs were administered or governed at the University of Calgary (Bond, 2015). Given that Bond was particularly interested in internationalization could have also accounted for the emphasis on the program being offered as an International
Indigenous Studies program, versus a more localized and regionally embedded program.
A closer look at the defined goals, objectives, and outcomes for the program suggests how the internationalization element was rhetorically wedded to Indigenous Studies:
96 Goals: The program will strive to:
1. Increase understanding, awareness of, and respect for, both Indigenous and non-
Indigenous knowledge, realities, perspectives, experiences, and cultures from
around the world;
2. Engage in mutually beneficial partnerships with Indigenous communities and post-
secondary institutions, including involvement in the program’s governance,
direction, and staffing;
3. Incorporate respectfully Indigenous peoples’ experiential epistemologies, especially
traditional Indigenous spirituality and languages, among diverse ways of knowing;
and
4. Build capacity in Indigenous and non-Indigenous societies, including the
communication skills, intercultural sensitivity, and institutional understanding
needed to forge a more sustainable Canadian society.
The proposed goals of the program are framed to support both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students alike, as well as contributing to greater societal concerns. The first goal is a bit confusing to include an increase in non-Indigenous knowledge, realities, perspectives, experiences, and cultures, as typically that is the mainstream or western norm within Canadian universities already. This provides a glimpse to the value conferred on western knowledges above Indigenous perspectives, and while they are allowing some space for Indigenous worldviews to be explored, it is only accompanied by an emphasis on western systems. It should instead focus on providing alternative, parallel perspectives of Indigenous worldviews as its main goal. The point of learning an Indigenous perspective or tribal centered worldview is to come to a whole new way of thinking and using what we have come to know. How can we do
97 that if we revert back to a western knowledge system that has dominated spaces, classrooms, and minds for long enough? This is product of the institutional racism that still has western knowledge superseding Indigenous knowledge.
Objectives: The learners will be able to:
1. Compare knowledge systems, experiences and cultures of Indigenous and non-
Indigenous peoples, using analytical and experiential inquiry;
2. Think critically using perspectives drawn from a wide range of disciplines and
cultures, including languages and spiritualties;
3. Participate in field-based study at home and abroad so as to ground academic
inquiry and knowledge and to benefit from the wisdom of the Elders and other
members of Indigenous communities;
4. Demonstrate expertise in questioning, critiquing and applying interdisciplinary
methodologies;
5. Develop awareness of Indigenous peoples in a critical, comparative, international
framework;
6. Conduct research with sensitivity to the canons of inquiry of Indigenous and non-
Indigenous partners;
7. Work and communicate with a degree of comfort across cultural boundaries;
8. Demonstrate appreciation for the close interconnectedness of traditional and
contemporary Indigenous societies in their experience with colonialism, post-
colonialism, and the new geo-political order;
9. Advance knowledge in the field of Indigenous Studies through research,
98 scholarship, and other creative activities;
10. Approach public and community service opportunities with awareness of salient
community mores; and
11. Be prepared for graduate work that will lead to the advancement of the field of
Indigenous Studies locally, regionally, and nationally.
Learner objectives should be central to all programming and reflect what the learners will actually accomplish. There is a lot of emphasis on the comparative perspectives in Indigenous studies30 between other Indigenous peoples of the world and with non-Indigenous cultures, as noted in the programs goals. While this may initially contribute to some aspects of global solidarity of Indigenous concerns, this can be seen as a watering-down of the diverse experiences of Indigenous peoples. The continued comparison between Indigenous and non-Indigenous experiences and realties can contribute to a negative binary thinking and not the untethered exploration of Indigenous ways and knowing that truly contribute to new knowledge. This also keeps Indigenous knowledge systems in check, in their place, below, and on the periphery of western knowledges. This is in contrast to the goal of Indigenous perspectives of parallelism and equal validity.
The program outcomes below are more problematic than the objectives and goals.
Outcomes are often harder to track and evaluate especially when they are not learner centered.
Outcomes: The program will:
1. Generate higher levels of interest in pursuing a university education, especially in
International Indigenous Studies;
2. Contribute to an awareness and presence of International Indigenous Studies on
30 One of the capstone courses of the program INDG 407 Comparative International Indigenous Communities is a mandatory course for the major.
99 campus;
3. Demonstrate excellence in scholarship and community service sensitive to
Indigenous ways of knowing;
4. Enhance the ability of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous graduates to acquire
positions of strategic influence and leadership in either Indigenous or non-
Indigenous settings;
5. Attract visiting scholars interested in Indigenous issues around the globe;
6. Develop mutually beneficial partnerships with Indigenous communities and other
institutions of higher education, in face-to-face and virtual interaction;
7. Sponsor lectures, colloquia, symposia, and conferences in the field of International
Indigenous Studies;
8. Collaborate with other units at the University of Calgary (and elsewhere in Alberta)
to carry out teaching and research related to International Indigenous Studies;
9. Provide national leadership in the field of International Indigenous Studies through
participation in relevant scholarly and professional associations. (Ponting, 2003)
Overall the framing and tone of these outcomes are not rooted in Indigenous worldviews, instead they are rooted firmly in western, institutionalized contexts. The desire for the program to
“Enhance the ability of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous graduates to acquire positions of strategic influence and leadership in either Indigenous or non-Indigenous settings” (Outcome #4) is a questionable outcome for this program. The holistic nature of Indigenous perspectives, which include a sense of humbleness and acknowledgement of lifelong learning, stands in contrast with the outcome to prepare for positions of strategic influence. Influence for whom and for what purpose? All of the reading that I have done in the area of Indigenous research and all
100 the Indigenous people that I know who participate in research or in the pursuit of a post- secondary degree do not have these goals in mind when they are deep in the work and learning.
The principle of reciprocity is clearly identified by all of the scholars I cite, and Kovach (2009) explains how there are some general ethical considerations that all Indigenous researchers (and ultimately, I believe, all Indigenous learners) should abide by:
(a) that the research methodology be in line with Indigenous values; (b) that there is
some form of community accountability; (c) that the research gives back to and
benefits the community in some manner; and (d) that the researcher is an ally and will
not do harm. (p. 48)
While I do not have the statistical data to back up my claim, anecdotally and based on the percentage of Indigenous people that are in post-secondary, we can surmise that the majority of learners and students within the program have been non-Indigenous people. Certainly in my years at the university I have been one of only a few in my undergrad, and the only one in my graduate classes.
The goals, objectives, and outcomes, when viewed through the lens of an Indigenous learning principle: “Learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place)”,31 diverge in too many directions. The focus is not on the holistic nature of Indigenous ways of knowing and learning in their own authenticity, but rather on comparison to other knowledge systems. The reciprocal nature of learning is replaced with an emphasis on attracting students and scholars that can contribute to the financial benefit of the program and the training of strategically influential
31 From First Peoples Principles of Learning: http://www.fnesc.ca/wp/wp- content/uploads/2015/09/PUB-LFP-POSTER-Principles-of-Learning-First-Peoples-poster- 11x17.pdf
101 individuals, who may or may not be Indigenous and who may or may not work within the
Indigenous community. This is further proof of deeply embedded systemic designed racism.
Sense of place, location, and environment, a tenet of Indigenous methodology (Archibald, 1995;
Kovach, 2009; Smith, 1999; Wilson 2008), is not given enough support in this program as the focus is stretched across too many borders in an effort to differentiate itself from the other two provincial programs and secure funding.
I think that it is fair in a western way of thinking to assess a program’s outcomes in order to determine whether or not its goals and objectives were in fact met over the years. However, it is unclear if there has ever been a re-visiting of these outcomes using any sort of measurements, as I found no evidence of in-depth evaluations. I am not sure how the program has been assessed by the university in the last few years, but I can guess that without proper evaluation and assessment, this has led to inadequate support on multiple levels for the program. If the success of the program cannot be proven or disproven other than by how many people are enrolled, it becomes difficult if not impossible to meet any of the planned outcomes, objectives, or goals.
The program especially falls short then in having an evaluation that is respectful to an
Indigenous paradigm, an Indigenous way of evaluating the program that speaks to the unique needs of the Indigenous content and learners. There is a section in the proposal that covers the future evaluation of the program, and it does outline some areas that they will use to evaluate from the western perspective. In fairness, they mention that the program should also be evaluated from an Indigenous perspective and that should come from continued consultation with
Indigenous participants, stakeholders, and the Steering Committee. Possibly this is an item that may or may not have appeared on a steering committee agenda.
The program also has a mission statement, which is unique among the other degree
102 programs at the University of Calgary that tend not to have mission statements. Yet, on the current iteration of the International Indigenous Studies website, there is no mention of the program’s mission statement anywhere. Here is how it appears in the proposal:
MISSION STATEMENT
• Become an international centre of excellence for research, teaching, scholarship,
and service;
• Draw on the knowledge, tradition, and culture of Indigenous and non-Indigenous
people to increase understanding and awareness of Indigenous realities and
cultures through comparative, experiential, and interdisciplinary methodologies;
• Engage in mutually beneficial partnerships with Indigenous communities and
promote life-long learning;
• Incorporate Indigenous peoples’ experiential epistemologies, especially
traditional Indigenous spirituality, in a respectful manner;
• Involve Indigenous stakeholders in its governance, direction, and staffing, in a
spirit of mutually respectful partnership.
The mission statement seems to be more aligned with Indigenous values, principles, and ways of knowing, with a few exceptions. Again there is the inclusion of non-Indigenous knowledges, cultures, and perspectives that have already been privileged in western knowledge systems.
Providing space, in this case of Indigenous studies, to have Indigenous voices, knowledges, and perspectives to not just be privileged over the western voices, but equal and valid to the western voices should be the mission of this program.
103 One of my Elders, Reg Crowshoe,32 who is from Treaty 7 territory – the Piikuni First
Nation, has taught me so much over nearly 12 years. As a First Nations woman living in this territory, I have learned to honour, respect, and privilege the knowledge, stories, and natural laws of the Blackfoot people. This knowledge does not take away from what I have learned in the western world, in academia or from my own Stó:lō understandings. I know that they are equal and Reg has taught me to look for the parallels. This is a unique Mokhintsis (Calgary) experience from Elders and knowledge keepers that are living and navigating the world today. This is a praxis point. These are oral teachings, over years of listening and learning. They are not written down (yet), and the Elders may not ever want them written down. I have the privilege of working in the community in a variety of ways that allow for the validation to become truth. This is the mission that should be central to the Indigenous Studies program.
Another thing that I have learned from Reg is that we have the authority and the right as
Indigenous people (and Indigenous learners in the case of the program) to define our own measurements of success from our own Indigenous perspectives and worldviews. That mark of excellence may not be the form of excellence that the mission statement is referring to in its first point. There are some tools that we can use to our advantage to validate these oral directions from Elders and knowledge keepers. One of these tools is the United Nations Declaration on the
Rights of Indigenous Peoples.33 These rights are now affirmed by Canada (2016)34 and the
32 It is important for me to be able to acknowledge and validate the learnings that have been a part of my theory and “oral literature review” in this thesis. This is a part of my research framework. Even though I did not “interview” Reg for this research, his teachings become a lens for my analysis. This is an intentional inclusion. 33 Adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2007. Four states opposed it: Canada, USA, Australia and New Zealand. All of these countries have a sordid colonial past of genocide, forced removal of people and lands, forced assimilation and potentially have much to lose if the “law” is on the side of the Indigenous peoples of their states. Since the new Liberal government in
104 declaration is the framework by which we are told to view the Truth and Reconciliation Calls to
Action, for example. There are a couple of articles in particular that could be used to support the mission, vision, and objectives of the Indigenous Studies program that align with education:
Article 13.1 Indigenous people have the right to revitalize, use, develop and transmit to
future generations their histories, languages, oral traditions, philosophies, writing systems
and literatures, and to designate their own names for communities, places and persons.
Article 14.1 Indigenous people have the right to establish and control their educational
systems and institutions providing education in their own languages, in a manner
appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and learning.
Article 15.1 Indigenous peoples have the right to the dignity and diversity of their
cultures, traditions, histories and aspirations which shall be appropriately reflected in
education and public information.
The program could be more responsive to the needs of the Indigenous community, learners, and even economy if it were rooted in the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples; rooted in land and natural laws of this traditional territory; rooted in Indigenous perspectives, instead of being rooted in internationalization, western scholarly thought, and western measures of success.
To take a broader perspective on the mission statement, the practice itself of articulating goals, objectives, outcomes, and mission statements represents a standardized model of “business
2016, Canada and the other states have all now signed on to adopt it, though there is much discussion as to how much they will follow through on the acceptance of it in real terms. 34 https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/declaration-on-the-rights-of- indigenous-peoples.html
105 thinking” (Bart, 1997)35. The proposal is written in a very standard western format of the business case – “tell us why we should give you this program?” – which includes headings and sub-headings such as “market demand” and “economic demand” and ties the program proposal into the larger University of Calgary strategic goals.
In my conversations with Ponting, he spoke about the intensely bureaucratic processes at the University to have a program like this approved and the complex maneuvering that was also required at the provincial level. In fact, he indicated that the final proposal was a direct result of multiple questions from the province. I am not under-appreciating the value of the business case, even though it evidently undercuts some of the conceptual groundwork needed for Indigenizing higher education. To that end, what I believe is most missing here is the Indigenous parallel perspective to the proposal itself. I would have liked to see included Indigenous values, reflecting the consultations with Indigenous community stakeholders and Elders. There is mention of community consultation and a community workshop taking place, though they do not indicate who the twelve Elders that they consulted with are, nor do they offer a list of the fifty- five individuals that provided input. It is common in the Indigenous community to ask people where their knowledge comes from, not so that they can be judged, but to ensure that the information that they are sharing with you is validated and acknowledged from the right community knowledge holders. Kovach notes that validation of knowledge is different across cultures in the Indigenous world and it is difficult to validate Indigenous knowledges with only the lens of western terms (2009, p. 148). Betty Bastien (2004) describes knowledge transference
35 According to a professor of strategy and governance at McMaster University (Bart, 1997) a commercial mission statement consists of three essential components 1) who is your target client? 2) what will be your contribution to that client and 3) what makes your contribution so unique, so that your client will choose you?
106 as a kinship relationship. “Knowledge itself has spirit that is “transferred” in the relationships between the knower and the known. Through these methods and rules of knowing, knowledge and self become and are one” (p. 102). So this important and integral piece of those knowledge keepers that were involved at the beginning are missing here, and that is very unfortunate. The fact their names were not included reflects the audience of the proposal; it would not add value to the people in power to know who they were, just that they spoke to Indigenous people about it.
Despite these shortcomings, I will note that the proposal was composed over 20 years ago, and research in the community has come a long way since then. Additionally, there is mention of a letter of initial support (it is not included and again, the lack of inclusion performs a silencing) from the late Marie Smallface-Marule, who was the President of Red Crow College at the time, who also represented the interests for the First Nations Adult and Higher Education Consortium
(Ponting, 2003, p. 31). They did appoint Roy Weasel Fat36 (who is now currently the President of
Red Crow Community College) and the late Narcisse Blood to the program’s proposed steering committee.
Given the gestures made to include Indigenous consultation, even if they were not completed to same standards and given equal clout to other voices in the proposal, I do think the program was trying to aim for a more inclusive relationship with the surrounding Indigenous communities in its proposed governance structure:
GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE
36 I had attempted in my knowledge gathering phase to connect with Roy Weasel Fat via email and he asked me to send my letter of introduction and ethics package to him, but then we were not able to connect after that. I ran into him at a community meeting in Calgary for a project that I participated in with my employer and I kindly reminded him who I was. We spoke about connecting on my thesis work in the future, but the time constraints I felt were pressing on me. In the end, I will try and send him a copy of the thesis to share with him and hope that he may provide some perspective that I may bring orally to the “defense” on the stories that I gathered and placed in this storybasket.
107
The program will be administered by a Director, who will be a faculty member from the
Faculty of Social Sciences. In addition, a Steering Committee will be struck. The primary responsibilities of the Steering Committee are:
• to advise the Director on strategic directions for the development of the program
and on such other matters as (s)he may request
• to review course outlines to assess the continuing relevance of courses for the
program
• to review and provide feedback on all proposed revisions of the program as it
appears in the University of Calgary Calendar, prior to submission of those
proposals to the Faculty of Social Sciences Academic Review and Program
Committee
• to liaise with stakeholders
• to nominate one or more members of any committee struck by the Dean of the
Faculty of Social Sciences to advise the Dean on hiring for the program
• to promote the program and facilitate the program’s operation.
• to engage in fund-raising for the program.
The Steering Committee will comprise the following positions:
• 1 Elder Appointed by the First Nations Adult & Higher Education Consortium
(FNAHEC)
• 1 Student Appointed by the First Nation Students’ Association
• Student Appointed by the Student Union
• Representatives of Indigenous Colleges Chosen by FNAHEC
108 • Representative Appointed by the Métis Nation of Alberta (Zone III)
• Members of the Faculty of Social Sciences
• Members from Faculties offering courses which can be credited toward the Major
• 1 Alumnus or Alumna Appointed by the Director
• 1 Director of Information Resources (ex officio)
• 1 Executive Director of the Arctic Institute of North America (ex officio)
• 1 Director of the Latin American Studies Program (ex officio)
• 1 Director of The Native Centre (ex officio)
• 1 Coordinator of the Minor in Indigenous Studies (ex officio)
• 1 Director (ex officio) (Ponting, 2003, p. 25)
The use of a steering committee is a good idea, and the inclusion of Indigenous students, faculty and Indigenous community members is a positive attempt to have a holistic community perspective to the steering committee. In a follow-up email to Jim Frideres, I asked if this steering committee ever met, how often they met, and if there were any records of their meetings as these were not included in the Ponting files. Frideres (2016) informed me that there was not a lot of care in the early days to record minutes of any committee meetings, and there were a lot of different people coming in and out of those committees. This disorganization meant that the steering committee did not take shape as the proposal had envisioned. From my understanding, it was very difficult to manage this as time went on given the lack of leadership. It was too interdisciplinary in nature to get everyone to be there who needed to be and it was not set as high priority. Had the governance structure been implemented and in operation currently, perhaps the direction of the program and support for the program would have been greater. A Steering
Committee that had the clout and validation from a group like this could have put more pressure
109 on the University to live up to their promises and hold the University accountable for the success of the International Indigenous Studies program, and call out the university when it bended to institutional racism.
Operational challenges
As the years went on, the program was overseen by a Director or a Coordinator, who in theory should have been the leader to support this program and the steering committee. However, on their own they managed the staffing, timetable configuration, advising of students, taught their own classes, and tried to promote the program as best as they could (Frideres, 2015; Srivistava,
2015). As a student looking in, it seemed like a lot of work and responsibility for one person to manage, and is not fair to the Director or to the program’s success to use this model.
Returning to the program proposal, another part of assessing the potential feasibility of the program included an examination of the impact of the staffing requirements for the Faculty of
Social Sciences to adequately run the International Indigenous Studies program. The following suggestions for hiring, in rank order, were made as follows:
1. Indigenous languages
2. Specialist in Canadian Indigenous Peoples
3. Specialist in Indigenous Epistemology and Spirituality, if this orientation is not taken
by any of the other hires in this section
4. Development Economist with expertise in Indigenous peoples outside Canada,
preferably Indigenous peoples of Latin America
5. Political Scientist with expertise in Indigenous Peoples of any of the following: U.S.A.,
Australia, New Zealand, Scandinavia
110 6. A Graduate Assistant (Teaching) will be required for the INDG 213 course, which will
have a statistics laboratory component (Ponting, 2003)
It is of particular interest that the suggestions are ranked in order of perceived importance to the success of the program. They did have some vision to include the first area of focus to be on
Indigenous languages. This is in alignment with the UN Declaration, Indigenous methodologies as outlined by many scholars (e.g., Archibald, 2008; Bastien, 2004; Kovach, 2009; Smith, 1999) and is a current priority of the Faculty of Arts in their current strategy.
What is concerning though is the phrasing to hire specialists versus clearly articulating the need to hire Indigenous people. This is a practice that the University of Calgary still uses, as seen in a recent job posting for a Canada Research Chair (Tier II) in Indigenous Heritage37 for the Faculty of Arts. On the one hand they ask for experience and knowledge of Indigenous perspectives and methodologies that are tied to community. On the other hand they require a new
(in last ten years) PhD qualified instructor, that has proven research rooted in qualified journals, with a “track record of publications in high quality journals, securing external research funding, and effectiveness in teaching at the university level” (Faculty of Arts, 2017). There is no stated preference given to Indigenous peoples with lived knowledge. There is a rooted sort of systemic racism that allows for the hiring of someone with Indigenous research experience versus someone who is Indigenous. As a First Nations woman, I would never apply for a role that is rooted in an alternative way of knowing, even if I had some experience with it. You do not see
Indigenous people applying for jobs to be Asian specialists, or an Asian Liaison, yet you see many non-Indigenous people applying for roles in Indigenous research and as Indigenous
Liaisons, and successfully gaining them.
37 http://careers.ucalgary.ca/jobs/8102847-canada-research-chair-tier-ii-in-indigenous-heritage- faculty-of-arts
111 This gap in hiring practices speaks to the need to create partnerships with Indigenous community members in the furthering of research, but that does not seem of the greatest concern.
There is a disconnect between the validity and reality of the use of Indigenous perspectives, worldview, and methodologies and how that is sometimes in conflict with western traditional responsibilities of an academic to publish, do research, and seek funding to support their knowledge gathering. Is there a way to create an ethical space that would allow for the evaluation of Indigenous knowledge, teaching, and learning to be paralleled with western systems so that more “qualified” Indigenous professors could be hired at the University of
Calgary? Generally speaking, addressing the lack of visible Indigenous faculty and staff at post- secondary institutions could also be beneficial in the following ways: 1) providing Indigenous expertise in academic areas; 2) serving as role models and mentors; 3) acting as advisors to students; and 4) reflecting general equity (R.A. Malatest & Associates, 2002, p. 56). Outlining what kind of research expertise (political science and developmental economy) they would like their specialists to have is further limiting for Indigenous scholars and professors who may have knowledge that falls outside these disciplines. It also does not allow for them to define what they feel are needed research areas, rooted in Indigenous perspectives and worldviews. Moreover, the proposal indicates that all of these positions would require external funding sources to support them. By and large, while the program has managed to have sessional instructors that focus on the target areas that these specific hires would cover, the offerings have been sporadic, and not been taught by full-time professors.
The issue of funding support for the program in general was a common theme raised by all of my storytellers, including the administrators. Ron Bond described the program as being run on a “shoe-string budget”, and that all involved in developing the proposal in the first place knew
112 that the funding would probably be inadequate (Bond, 2015). Interim Coordinator Aruna
Srivastava credited the lack of support for the program to a combination of structural systemic issues and racism (Srivistava, 2015). Jim Frideres, who held the position of Director for the longest of all the coordinators of the International Indigenous Studies program, also attributed the lack of support, policy, and strategy to a form of racism:
I’ve always been really disappointed that the university, which for me anyway, having
been here for 35 years, has never been a friendly environment for the Aboriginal
community… there seems to be a lack of vision in terms of the total institution as to how
it wants to address the issue of enhanced learning structures, strategies, whatever you
want to call it for a particular cohort of people, call them Aboriginal students… we are
surrounded [by First Nations’ communities here in Calgary] and yet we’ve taken this
kind of position like, “yeah they don’t really count, it’s irrelevant”. (Frideres, 2015)
Frideres spoke about being challenged by his colleagues who simply did not understand the need for Indigenous studies. That, like many “other” studies – Women’s Studies, Black Studies,
Chicano Studies, Ethnic Studies – people would ask him “what the hell is that (Indigenous studies)?” Because the program was not mainstream, it simply “did not have the legitimacy of chemistry or sociology or religious studies” (Frideres, 2015). There was a lot of pushback internally for the program. Frideres believes that the University of Calgary has not made the
Indigenous Studies program a priority. The fact that it has not been a priority to the University of
Calgary points to the institutional racism which limits their ability to make positive change or a real commitment to Indigenous communities. To him, the University of Alberta and the
University of Lethbridge made stronger commitments to Indigenous studies over 40 years ago
(Frideres, 2015). If we consider the volume of Indigenous research and theses that have come out
113 of institutions as a measure of success and support for Indigenous studies, then a look at data between 2010-2015 shows only 9 theses in the data bases coming from Alberta and all of those were from the University of Alberta (Gordey, 2016, p. 25). While this may not include those theses that were not uploaded into the national database that the researcher used, it is remarkable that of that list, the University of Calgary was not credited with even one.
Like most new post-secondary programs that seek financial support from the provincial government, there is a limited or conditional time frame during which the program receives earmarked funds (Ponting, 2015). This was the case for the International Indigenous Studies program, and it received this type of funding for the first five years. I was not able to secure any budgetary documents that were for the program after the program was already established. All of the previous program directors and coordinators spoke about not having any details on the program budget at all. So the clearest indication of the program funding was only available for its first five years, when funds were earmarked; after this time, once the ongoing funding came, it was directed into the base budget for the faculty.
Yet, even while there are records of the initial five-year period of funding, certain discrepancies became apparent. For example, the initial budget had included money for advertising, though both Ponting and Frideres admitted that they didn’t believe it ever came through. The lack of advertising did impact the ability to recruit students and, according to
Srivistava, knowledge of the program’s existence in the Faculty of Arts and university as a whole
(Srivistava, 2015).
After the initial five-year period, the allocation of funds for the program became even more murky. Frideres spoke about the difficult position that he was in once the initial budget was folded in to the base budget: “That’s when everything went to hell in a handbasket, because the
114 Dean had no control over this money and the University had totally different priorities”
(Frideres, 2015). Frideres recalls constantly asking for clarification of the budget for his planning and hiring purposes, to which he would never get a straightforward answer. Like I had heard from most administrators and teachers that I spoke with, making progress was dependent on who your Dean was at the time, and the lengths to which they were willing to go to get things done for you. In Frideres’ case, Dean Randall would eventually tell him to do what he needed to do, and he would try and find the money in his budget to support it: “So that was the kind of little dance that we would go on every year about how many courses could I offer, how many people I could hire, etc.” (Frideres, 2015). There was nothing intentional, or strategic about the support of this program to be successful. The fact that Frideres describes the process of acquiring the necessities of the program as a dance between him and the Dean makes it clear how unimportant the program’s success was for the University of Calgary. While the support of the Dean was given, it resulted in the bare minimum of resources. Had there been more support from the Dean in terms of advocating for the program to his superiors perhaps the program would have flourished more. Yet, again, the program was of minor consequence to the University over all, while other programs thrived, had multiple donors and buildings to support their value within the institution.
What seems to have made matters even more difficult for the success of International
Indigenous Studies was the transition of interdisciplinary programs out of the faculties of
Humanities, Social Sciences, and Communication and Culture and into the newly amalgamated
Faculty of Arts, which was created in 2010. This institutional reshuffling meant that many courses were cut. In particular, courses in the program that were cross-listed between departments tended to be discontinued at the whim of those departments. Eventually the course
115 offerings got smaller and smaller, and the breadth of courses for the two streams (domestic and international) was deemed to be too complex, though this is contradictory considering the initial structure of the program was to equally offer domestic and International Indigenous content. The decision makers in specific departments did not take into consideration the holistic nature of
Indigenous studies, that it should be interdisciplinary, and they chipped away at some of the core of the program offerings. Martin Nakata and his co-authors (2012) claim that “Indigenous
Studies, even when under the control of Indigenous scholars, operates in a ‘discipline-like’ way”
(p. 125). They consider this singular state to be too simplistic in its practice of merely decolonizing western knowledge (p. 120). The tools necessary to support Indigenous studies and learners (Indigenous and non) should be interdisciplinary in nature to meet the unique challenges of understanding Indigenous studies:
A rationale that focuses on revealing the politics of knowledge production in Indigenous
Studies – one that makes spaces for the exploration of ideas, that insists on critical
reflection on the limits of all thinking on both sides, and that requires the development of
better language for navigating such intricate and complex entanglements of meaning -
provides good grounds for teaching both non-Indigenous and Indigenous students
together (Nakata et al., 2012, p. 136).
The rationale here is interdisciplinary; it is a holistic and embedded Indigenous perspective that cannot be defined or closed off within one discipline. The initial long-term vision for the program, from Frideres’ and Ponting’s position, was that it would eventually become such a stand-alone interdisciplinary department. However, once they realized that the University was not going to set aside additional funds to support the program to add to what the province had provided in the early days, their mission became more oriented toward survival, and the program
116 has operated under that reality ever since.
My focus was not on the quantitative data, as numbers only tell us part of the story, therefore my data collection was limited to a few key points that we may relate to the qualitative stories. In July 2016, I connected with the Student Success Centre for some very specific data from the inception of the degree program (Fall 2014) to the most current data of the time (Fall
2016). I requested: 1) the number of Majors enrolled in the International Indigenous Studies (IIS) program; 2) the number of degrees that were completed by IIS Majors; 3) the number of Minors in Indigenous Studies38 (INDG); 4) the number of degrees that were completed with a Minor in
INDG; 5) the total number of courses that have been offered to date; 6) the number of classes that have been cancelled; and 7) the total number of students from any faculty that has enrolled in classes. Please see the chart below in Figure 4.
Fall 2004-Fall 2016
250
200
150
100
50
0 Major in IIS Degrees Minor in Degrees Courses Cancelled granted to INDG granted Offered Classes Majors w/Minor
Figure 4. Course History Overview in IIS from Fall 2004-2016
38 I was told by the Student Success Centre contact that Minors are categorized as just Indigenous Studies versus the International Indigenous Studies Major
117 As one point of comparison, the total number of students that have enrolled in any named39
Indigenous studies classes at the University of Calgary during the time period of Fall 2004 and
Fall 2016 is 3,742, yet the total number of students that are enrolled in the degree Major and
Minor is only 238. To be fair, with this data it is unclear how many courses these 238 students enrolled in to make up the bulk the total 3,742. One can assume that there was a significant amount of student enrollment from outside of the department from many different faculties.
At the University of Alberta during the same time period they had a total of 1561 students enrolled in the undergraduate degree program in the Faculty of Native Studies, 140 on average per year. They have awarded 350 undergraduate degrees between Fall 2004-Fall 2016
(University of Alberta, 2017). Based on just the numbers, it would appear that the program at the
University of Alberta has been more successful in their delivery of Native Studies as its own faculty.
Looking back at the data from the University of Calgary, we can see that the occurrence of classes being cancelled 30 times is quite high considering that there were only a total of 207 courses that were offered (237 were planned). This could amount to at least two courses canceled per year. This is reflected in the stories from the sessional instructors who expressed frustration with classes being cancelled on them (Laplante, 2016; Kelly, 2015). While the data does not include how many students were in enrolled in the class prior to the cancellation, it was told anecdotally to sessionals (and to myself when I was going to teach INDG 201) that the magic number for a viable class was 30 students. At a closer look of the classes that did go as planned,
39 These are classes that begin with INDG versus a class that is cross-listed with Indigenous content; while this would add to the data pool of students and courses offered, it does not relate directly to the number of Majors/Minors or degrees offered.
118 there were times when the numbers were not at 30 students40 per class, so it is unclear what the real unwritten policy or formula is for cancelling classes. Eber Hampton (2000) would consider the cancelling of classes and lack of course offerings as hidden curriculum: “Universities teach about First Nations in their hidden curriculum as well as their stated curriculum. They transmit attitudes, values, and beliefs about what is important, who is credible, the “right” way to do things, and the place of Aboriginal peoples in Canada” (p. 214). The University has excluded, cancelled, and prevented the program’s growth over the years through its approach to course offerings, and this speaks to the value placed on Indigenous education, and the systemic racism that permeated into multiple administrative areas.
The figure that troubles me the most is the difference between those that are registered with International Indigenous Studies as their Major (146) versus how many students have obtained their degree (27). While I do not want to look at this as a negative result, given that institutions value the number of students and degrees granted as a measure of success, we can see how the University of Calgary has undervalued and under-supported the International
Indigenous Studies program because of its low numbers across the board. Had the program been allowed to utilize an evaluation system defined by Indigenous peoples that centers a tribal epistemology into the delivery of the program, they could have narrative and story along with data to best support the growth and progression of the program.
Personnel
Directors
40 In fact, I counted only 34 times that there were more than 30 students enrolled in a class. 34/207 course offerings.
119 Once the International Indigenous Studies program was approved and had its first cohort of students in the 2003/2004 academic calendar year, Sarah Carter would be the first official
Director of the program after Rick Ponting. Carter had previously been a professor in the History department, and has since moved on to a position at the University of Alberta. During Carter’s tenure as Director, there was record of one Steering Committee meeting on November 9, 2004, which is the only record that I received from all of the administrators. I had asked Shawna
Cunningham, the Director of the Native Centre, if she had any meeting notes from that time, and she reported that she had recently disposed of them.
There is no record of who attended this Steering Committee meeting, though there is reference to people in the notes including Marie Marule, Red Crow College president, Jim
Frideres, Sociology professor, Betty Bastien, Professor. The topics for discussion at the meeting included the success of course offerings, student evaluations, and plans for future semesters.
There is a note that they were having trouble finding an instructor who could teach one of the capstone courses Indigenous Studies 407 and the cancellation of Holistic Science 217 due to low enrollment, which had an impact on the 311 and 313 Cultural Immersion courses as it was the pre-requisite course (Steering Committee International Indigenous Studies, 2004). The discussion around budget requests were briefly outlined. The Director (Carter) was requesting about $52,000 for the program and noted that it was “still totally dependent on the Dean of
Social Sciences to keep afloat” (Steering Committee International Indigenous Studies, 2004). It is apparent from the meeting minutes that several attempts and ways of looking for fundraising opportunities occurred.
Two points of interest with regard to the program’s financial and institutional support are outlined in these meeting minutes, which have a foreshadowing element to the future support of
120 the program over the years. The first is a note on the Director’s dealings with the VP Academic as there was no new provincial ACCESS funding available that year:
I had a meeting with the VP Academic Robert Woodrow about this in September. He
assures me that this program is on the university’s priority list, among the top 4 or 5 was
as specific as he would be - he is not in a position to say where as they respond to what
they understand the areas of emphasis are as set by government in how they prioritize –
and he noted that he hadn’t heard anything about Aboriginal issues being a priority at this
time. (Steering Committee International Indigenous Studies, 2004)
While this report may have attempted to make the update sound positive, it appears to show another example of how the University of Calgary de-valued the program in relation to other priority areas. Being in the 4th or 5th spot is not very promising, and what is even more discouraging is that the University also took direction from the government’s prioritization (or lack thereof) of Indigenous issues to justify the low ranked priority of the program for adequate funding. The messaging that they were receiving from Alberta Learning in accessing funding for this program was also not as supportive. In their review they wanted to know a number of things:
If we have other sources of funding secured to date, what plan the UofC has for this
program if provincial funding is not secured, can the initiative be staged over a long
period of time or scaled down, a gauge of support of the International Indigenous
community, how well we are able to develop and nurture relationships with Alberta First
Nations…and finally more of the university’s plans for delivering the program (Steering
Committee International Indigenous Studies, 2004).
These two barriers to accessing funding – not a high priority for the University of Calgary or the government – were in fact two sides of the same coin, and from the notes it appears that neither
121 party seemed overly supportive of Indigenous issues at the time and would deflect their responsibility on to the other. Given that systemic racism has a stronghold in government, this made it easier for the University to latch on to that same horse.
Carter spoke to me about the difficulties she had as the Director, and described the program as being “cobbled together” with a lack of financial support (Carter, 2015). Despite the setbacks, she was able to launch a number of initiatives and events that year and tried to raise the profile of the program as well as conduct fundraising. Carter believed in the unique position that the program had in having both an international and domestic focus, a comparative component she felt was ahead of its time then for postcolonial and transnational thinking (Carter, 2015).
From today’s decolonizing perspective, Indigenous studies need not be comparative in nature, or simply binary to western thinking. It can stand on its own as valid knowledge, valid research and epistemologies that by their very nature are diverse (Wilson, 2008), which often does not make comparisons possible or desirable.
While Carter emphasized certain challenges she felt that impacted the students – particularly the lack of transferability of courses between tribal colleges and the University of
Calgary (Srivistava mentioned this as well) and the math requirement from the Faculty of Social
Sciences that impeded admission into the program (Carter, 2015) – Carter’s overall assessment of her time as Director was rewarding thanks to the students and the Indigenous community support that she had.
The program has never been a priority of the University of Calgary on multiple levels, which is evidenced in the lack of physical, human and financial resources. Epistemologically the
University has failed to deliver a program that meets the needs of the Indigenous communities and learners making it difficult for administrators, instructors, and learners to succeed. These are
122 all complex components of institutional and systemic racism that all together tell a disappointing story.
Sessional Instructors
According to Frideres, the hiring practices at the beginning of the program were handled differently in that they operated on the principle that they would hire all Indigenous instructors to teach in the program. At that time, they would consider going down to an Master of Arts level instructor to ensure that they had Indigenous sessional instructors. By and large, they held that practice throughout the initial phase of the program, and a majority of the sessionals were
Indigenous. The intention to make this program stand out was the smaller class sizes and
Indigenous instructors. These elements, had they been retained, would have better supported the program. When the transition of the program happened “it was: we don’t care who the instructor is, if they have some expertise in the area” (Frideres, 2015), and the program could no longer offer small class sizes. Under many circumstances, there were opportunities for the University to take a leadership role in supporting the success of the program, and these missed opportunities in retrospect highlight its lack of priority status. Large class sizes and non-Indigenous instructors are neither learner-centered models, nor centered on indigenization.
My own experience in the program bears out Frideres’ assessment. I can recall early in my undergraduate degree taking one of the capstone Indigenous courses for the international focus, INDG 401, where we had 10 people in the class. Later in my career, I came up against the systemic underfunding of the program alongside institutional racism when I was part of a teaching team to offer Indigenous Studies 201, an introductory class, in Spring 2013. It was a team-teaching plan that included myself, my husband, who had just completed his MSc, and
123 Jennifer Kelly, who had taught the class before. As it was a Spring course offering, the class was cancelled because we had 24 students enrolled when we were told by the Dean that we needed at least 30 to make a viable class. I had recalled the smaller class sizes in the past, so I was surprised at the Dean’s response to our class enrollment. Considering that sessional instructors put in a lot of labour, unpaid, ahead of time to create the course, compose the outline, find sources, and create the curriculum plans, it is unfortunate that they are so easily dismissed.
The role of sessional instructors as temporary labour solutions for universities is highly problematic, and arguably it does not benefit the intellectual culture as these over worked and underpaid sessionals are left with little time to do research that would advance their status and the possibility for a tenure-track position (Giroux, 2009, p. 681). Hiring practices that resemble business models of bottom line savings is the current trend. Part-time employees save the university money and allow for flexibility to respond to market changes in course content offerings, but this is usually at the expense of women and people of colour (Osei-Kofi, 2012, p.
235). The road to tenure for a person of colour in the academy is thus even harder to climb. The major concern here is that “junior faculty of color have fewer points of entry to long standing, typically white, typically male, historical relationships and networks often to critical funding sources and with the power to shape academic careers in significant ways” (Osei-Kofi, 2012, p.
234). This systemic issue has just as much to do with power and access as it does opportunity.
Providing an opportunity is one thing, acknowledging that there is a power and access issue would be a good start to working on addressing this concern with Indigenous community members, scholars, and even graduate students who hope to one day teach in these institutions.
I was able to speak to two sessional instructors, one Indigenous and one non-Indigenous.
Line Laplante has been a sessional instructor for the International Indigenous Studies program
124 for eight years. She is Cree Métis from the Ottawa Valley and has the unique experience of also being one of the first cohort and graduates of the International Indigenous Studies program in
2006. Like all of my storytellers, Laplante was open and honest about the state of the Indigenous
Studies program that she had witnessed and how it had impacted her since the inception.
Laplante has taught important classes in the program’s history, which have been central to
Indigenous ways of teaching and learning. She has taught Indigenous Ethics and Protocols
(INDG 315), Holistic Perspectives on Indigenous Science/Ecological Knowledge (INDG 317), and special topics courses that she developed such as Aboriginal Spirits and the Natural World
(INDG 397). These courses provide foundational knowledge for those new to the content and provide a glimpse to the ways in which experiential learning, ceremonial learning, oral literacy and Indigenous perspectives can be taught in a university class (Laplante, 2016).
In Laplante’s case, there have been two major challenges that have impacted her teaching career at the University of Calgary. The first has been financial constraints. Laplante was aware of the lack of financial support in general for the program, and the competitive nature of the university governance structure that would pit programs and departments against each other to vie for financial support (Laplante, 2016). Specifically, in her case, there were concerns with paying for Elders to come into the class to share their knowledge with her students. For a long time, she paid for Elders out of her own pocket, as well as covering the costs of ceremonial resources and activities. She was later informed about a Teaching Activity Grant that she could apply for, though it was a competitive process with no guarantee and only a small amount of funding available per course (Laplante, 2016). As a past sessional instructor myself, I can attest to the lack of transparency between the administration and instructors on these types of teaching supports. For example, I was not made aware of this grant when I was teaching, and paid for my
125 Elders and knowledge keepers out of pocket as well. My wage for the course amounted to roughly $3000, which also had to support four guests to come into the class. As I was co- teaching, regular salary for new instructors of $6000 was split between us, and then I offered tobacco and a small honorarium or gift to each guest. Overall I shared about $600 of my wage to support diverse Indigenous voices and perspectives in my course content. Many sessional instructors work for very little pay and go above and beyond in these kinds of ways (Osei-Kofi,
2012). I know that is a systemic wide concern in all faculties that use sessional instructors, however, where it becomes a “special case” here is that Indigenous studies requires competent cultural, sometimes spiritual, knowledge keepers and sources to present the learning appropriately and authentically.
Many Indigenous people are very humble, and we do not claim to be the expert in any area, given the imperative of Indigenous researchers as insiders to be ethical, respectful, reflexive, and humble (Smith, 1999, p. 138). In my experience, we are wary and should be wary of anyone who claims unequivocal, individual expertise. Most of the work that I do in the
Indigenous community is prefaced on the understanding that it really does take a village. This builds upon my research framework that prioritizes interconnectedness and reciprocity. I work on multiple research projects and initiatives where I have partners, working groups, Elder support, and community wide support. I can only share my knowledge and ethical spaces for learning with those that have the authority to as well. Authority is different than expertise. In most cases with Indigenous knowledge, authority comes from the community, the Elders, the
Creator. In some community research projects Elders are often selected or volunteer to be the guardians of research to support the Indigenous researcher and assist in safe guarding the community’s information (Smith, 1999, p. 139). I am merely a vessel, a bridge, a facilitator of
126 the knowledge. I do not own it. In this case, the need for Indigenous and non-Indigenous instructors to share their ethical learning spaces with other knowledge keepers and Elders is an integral component to Indigenous studies, and it is not merely about budget lines and policies.
This ties directly into the second major concern that Laplante has faced in her career as a sessional instructor, which is the dichotomy between western and Indigenous worldviews. In
2015, while she was teaching the Aboriginal Spirits and the Natural World class (INDG 397), she encountered a lack of understanding from administrators who argued the validity of her choices to teach the class from an authentic Indigenous perspective. Laplante shared with me a redacted email correspondence between herself and unnamed administrators at the University of
Calgary, presumably in the Faculty of Arts. Her encounter came by way of a request for financial support in her class for materials, ceremonial food, Elder’s honorarium, and travel costs for the class to go to a historical medicine wheel site in Alberta about 170kms from Calgary. Laplante described the budget, the rationale for the costs, and what benefit this ceremonial activity would have as a learning opportunity for the students. Her plan was to make little beaded moccasins and leave them for the “Little People”41 in ceremony at the sacred historical site so that students would be able to participate and learn, and connect the knowledge that they had in the classroom to the community via experiential ceremonial learning.
At first glance, the response she received could be seen purely as a matter of budget constraints: while the faculty administrators said they would not directly support the supplementary fee, they directed her to the Teaching Activity Grant and after that avenue was explored to also check with the Interdisciplinary Programs for up to $750 if she was not
41 Little People in Blackfoot stories are usually child-sized, benevolent, and shy nature spirits. They are said to have a variety of magical powers, most often the ability to become invisible or shapeshift into animals. In many legends they reveal themselves only to children, with whom they have a special affinity. http://www.native-languages.org/blackfoot-legends.htm
127 successful with the activity grant. However, they then remarked on her choice of learning activity with the following statement:
Finally, the guidelines from the university ethics office suggest that students should be
permitted to observe the ceremony without participating in prayers, offerings, according
to their beliefs. I recognize that there’s a fine line between ‘understanding’ and
‘experiencing’ (in your words) sacred ceremonies, and trust you to maintain that
distinction. Needless to say, students’ grades should depend on their knowledge,
capabilities and understanding rather than their private belief systems. For that reason we
can’t support your request for moccasin supplies because they entail requirement that
students use them to pray, rather than observe. (Laplante, 2016)
Laplante felt that this response was a direct correlation between the lack of understanding and the colonial perspective on matters of Indigenous spirituality, which poses a major challenge to understanding Indigenous worldviews. Gregory Cajete (2000) describes how Native spirituality and science are not about religion at all: “The essence of Native spirituality is not religion in the
Western sense of the word, but rather a set of core beliefs in the sanctity of personal and community relationships to the natural world, which are creatively acted upon and expressed at both the personal and communal levels” (p. 14). Had the administrators understood this, perhaps they would have seen the unique learning opportunity being offered to the learners, rather than thinking their rights were somehow being infringed upon. Laplante gave a very detailed response in her rationale. She described what the learning objectives would be, how the activity connected to the course content directly, and that it would provide the students a glimpse of how the mental, spiritual, emotional, and physical balance of human beings could be experienced. She also spoke of their personal understanding of how and why the land is an extension of self and
128 this is a key learning element to understand Indigenous ways of knowing (Laplante, 2016). She tried communicating with the un-named individuals of the email on three separate occasions afterwards and never received any reply.
Laplante felt that her attempts to promote experiential knowledge as an authentic way of
“understanding” a complex topic such as Aboriginal spiritualty was discriminated against and de-legitimized. She felt insulted, ignored, patronized, and discredited as a professional (Laplante,
2016). Furthermore, the suggestion that students should stand on the outside of ceremony and observe was disconcerting to her, since it “rings of an Anthropological gaze, has a tone of superiority and looking down at an Indigenous practice” (Laplante, 2016). Laplante was clear that no student would be forced to participate, and neither would their grades be affected if they chose not to participate, because forced participation was not the point of including Indigenous practices into the classroom experience.
My second instructor storyteller is Jennifer Kelly. Her research spans postcolonial theory, feminist writing, Indigenous women’s lifestorytelling, Australian and Canadian Indigenous topics, and English. Before teaching her first course in the International Indigenous Studies program in the Winter of 2005 (INDG 407), she taught at Red Crow Community College on the
Kainai First Nation from 1999-2005. Kelly identifies herself as a “white, middle class, straight
Canadian woman” (Kelly, 2015), and she was hailed as one of the greatest champions in this program by students (including myself) and administrators alike. Her integrity, honesty, humility, and willingness to learn and facilitate ethical spaces for leaning by others stood out as
Kelly’s main attributes. As a critical thinker, and like many sessional instructors who have put their energy into the International Indigenous Studies program, Kelly is passionate about her role in the program and the impact it has had on herself and students. Kelly describes the time she
129 was in the program as “piecemeal and inconsistent”, particularly because of funding issues:
Because of the lack of funding, the program was put into a ridiculous and doomed catch-
22 position. As I understood it, the university would not fund the program without more
evidence of a successful program (i.e., tuition dollars coming in); however, there was NO
budget to advertise the program, attract and pay full-time, tenured faculty, attract
Indigenous Faculty, support research programs, etc. (Kelly, 2015)
Her words echoed those of Laplante and Srivistava and again evidence the perceived lack of adequate and respectful support on behalf of the university. During her time teaching, Kelly describes how the program was “shunted about to different departments in the university, none of which really wanted it… This is telling of the low value the university places on not only this program, but Indigenous Studies as a field” (Kelly, 2015). Kelly frames the lack of institutional support for the program as a “result of the institutional racism at work across the university, which, in turn, is related to the society-wide attitudes towards education and towards Indigenous peoples” (Kelly, 2015).
In almost all of the conversations that I had with my storytellers, the question would arise as to how the atmosphere and experience in Calgary was so different in comparison to those
Indigenous and Native Studies programs that were well established at the University of Alberta in Edmonton and the University of Lethbridge. In most of those conversations, people would comment on the un-friendliness towards Indigenous people in Calgary, and ultimately call it racism:
Because of the layers of denial and silences around the existence of racism, including
institutional racism, it is not surprising perhaps that students, graduate students, future
instructors/professors are rarely taught how to effectively navigate racism as it manifests
130 in the classroom. (Kelly, 2015)
Given the historical exclusion of Indigenous studies and perspectives in many institutions, an
Indigenous Studies program would be the ideal place to address concerns of racism. When racism appears in the safety of an Indigenous studies classroom, where everyone has signed up and paid to learn, it can be tricky for the teacher to navigate, but essential: “Curricula that teach directly about racism have a stronger positive impact than curricula that portray diverse groups but ignore racism” (Sleeter, 2011, p. viii). In this sort of anti-racist pedagogy, racism must be situated in contemporary lives of Indigenous people, rather than be placed in the historical past of events, which can further lead to racist encounters when that truth is contested in the classroom (Sleeter, 2011, p. 3). My experience as an Indigenous student, community facilitator, and sessional instructor can corroborate this Kelly’s conclusion about the difficulty of addressing racism in the classroom. It is something that I also hear from all of my Indigenous colleagues and peers in their educational and career experiences. Our societal denial of racism in Canada, under the guise of tolerance and multiculturalism (Mackey, 2002), leaves a silent and hidden truth that impacts everyone in the classroom, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike.
Kelly worked towards an inclusive, ethical and safe learning environment, but it was challenging at times to address racism in the classroom, in the historical truth telling, and the current perceptions of Indigenous people:
One of the challenges with addressing racism is its deep emotional content, and any
thinking/feeling instructor cannot help but be struck by the risk posed to Indigenous
students when exposed to racist comments in the classroom. The comments are never
“intended” as racist but seem “obvious” or “natural” to the student, and it is the work of
anti-racist teaching to both firmly and compassionately deconstruct the assumption and
131 provide opportunities for alternative ways of understanding to be developed. (Kelly,
2015)
Racism in the classroom is not just about the impact in the moment, but it also about “a lasting effect on self-perception and worldviews” of the learner (Kohli, 2008). The balance that is required by an instructor to provide a safe and ethical learning space for both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students alike takes strength and tenacity. When done correctly, the impact of these learning experiences will benefit all learners. If handled poorly, the risk and danger could cause confusion and leave students divided.
One of the students that I spoke with from the Penticton Indian Reserve appreciated the ethical spaces for learning that Kelly’s courses provided, even though university was a difficult process for her. In her experience coming from a lifetime of learning on the reserve with traditional knowledge keepers, she found the transition to the classroom and western ways of knowing and learning to be messy. Kelly challenged her, and she felt that she was always open to assisting her through processing stages. In her mind, Kelly was a strong advocate and was very committed to the Indigenous Studies program (Student P., 2016). Evidently, Kelly was an important non-Indigenous ally in the program, which was explicitly noted by one of my other student storytellers. Those who have the respect for Indigenous people’s ways of knowing and learning have been helpful in the learning process for many students (Horsefall, 2016).
While non-Indigenous instructors have historically supported the International
Indigenous Studies program from a good-hearted space, there has been a denial of Indigenous knowledge centering the program itself that must be reconciled. The Indigenous community has been fighting for educational sovereignty as far back as the 1960s:
132 For too many years, non-Indians, including representatives of most universities, have
been speaking for Indians. The days of that are long over. We will present our own case,
in whatever forum, whenever the need arises. Certainly we appreciate the efforts others
have made on our behalf, and certainly we seek continued cooperation between Indian
and non-Indian societies. However, it must be just that – cooperation – not assimilation.
(Taner, 1999, p. 292)
Unfortunately, not much has changed in fifty years, as we are still in desperate need of
Indigenous teachers, administrators and policy makers that can and will put Indigenous knowledges and ways of teaching and learning at the center. By 1984, there were still only a small number of Indigenous people in the country with a PhD (Taner, 1999, p. 304), a figure that provides some context for the systemic concerns in the story of the International Indigenous
Studies Program.
Kelly spoke about the lack of genuine commitment to Indigenous epistemology and pedagogy within the program and the University of Calgary, evident not only in its continual lack of funding but also in its institutional structure:
The program was originally conceived within Social Sciences and had a social science
perspective. Of course the original conception included humanities courses etc., but isn’t
this part of the problem, creating an Indigenous Studies Program as a subset of existing,
western paradigms and structures? This sets up the program to perpetually have to ‘fit
into’ the dominant system rather than to emanate from an Indigenous framework and
enter into dialogue and partnership with other (i.e., western) ways of knowing. (Kelly,
2015).
Fitting in to the western dominant system is not the answer. From the program’s inception, every
133 effort was made to ensure that it was a program that could fit into the system neatly: not duplicate what other institutions in Alberta already had; fit into the internationalization strategy; and finally, fit into existing disciplines as a subset. As Margaret Kovach (2009) warns, “‘add
Indigenous and stir’ is not a valid response”: “For Indigenous academics, there is a responsibility to not submerge identity under the weight of a worldview that is not our own” (p. 157). Without active listening that leads to systemic changes, the program may be welcoming students, but does it truly allow for learning and research that is congruent with Indigenous worldview and perspectives (Kovach, 2009, p. 163)?
Kelly’s critique of the institutional structure was linked with a related point about the use of contingent faculty to teach in the International Indigenous Studies program. Her advice for current and future students was to “POLITICIZE, STICK TOGETHER, and demand better.
Protest, LOUDLY”, and to “Support each other. Remember that power holds its power by divide-and-conquer tactics (like sessionals competing with sessionals for crappy pay)” (Kelly,
2015). Here, Kelly explicitly connected the precarious labour of sessional instructors to the politicization of students within an anti-racist educational context:
While the lack of job security, benefits, pensions, research support, etc. is important and
easily measurable, it is more difficult for me to articulate the long-term effects of this
system on one’s morale and sense of value. The implicit assumption is that sessional
instructors are “lesser” faculty, and that we “failed” because we have not secured a
tenured position and therefore do not deserve more than we get. We are told we should be
grateful for what we are given and to not complain. The implicit threat there is that others
will get the sessional teaching jobs… Moreover, during my final year teaching in the
Indigenous Studies Program, as more cuts to the course offerings were being proposed, it
134 put the sessional instructors in the program in a problematic competition with each other
for even fewer positions (Kelly, 2015).
The theme of teaching as a commodity seems to be on the rise with a business model that is dependent on sessional faculty, online learning, and new courses dangerously coasting along the edges, hoping that the number of students in the classroom will turn a profit for the university, or at least be a cost recovery (Osei-Kofi, 2012, p. 235). The truth is that the university did not support the instructors in the International Indigenous Studies program to further their academic careers. There was little to no support for conference attendance to present research. On top of all the work that they did inside and outside the hours of the classroom, the prep work, the ceremonial work, inviting and paying for Elders and guest speakers, they are also expected to research, write, and publish in order to secure a tenured faculty position. Yet, there had never been an opportunity or a posting though for a tenure-track professor for the International
Indigenous Studies program.
Students
Almost all of the students that I met with spoke about their experiences through the framework of transformational learning. Based on John Mezirow’s theory, “transformative learning is a deep structural shift in basic premises of thought, feelings and actions” (Kitchenham, 2008, p. 104).
They were speaking of the personal impact on them as learners to be transformed after participating critically and reflexively with the content and people they were learning with and from. This is about personal impact. This is about centering the knowledge within yourself. This learning fits in nicely within an Indigenous paradigm.
135 Transformational teaching and learning as well as content needs to be at the core for learners and for institutional reconciliation. According to Eber Hampton (1995) “the transformation of personal, cultural, and historical misunderstanding into understanding demands that both Native and non-Native have a place to stand, that both accept the other’s right to be, and that the fact of misunderstanding is recognized” (p. 41). The transformation that Hampton is speaking of benefits all learners, faculty and administrators.
Transformational learning for Indigenous learners is essential to their success, a claim rooted in my Indigenous research framework and specifically the work of Stó:lō author Lee
Maracle. Maracle (2015) describes how in Stó:lō worldview, “We are Transformers”:
We are transformers. We arrived through transformation and our stories are documents of
the historical transformations we have experienced. We are expected to carry on the
tradition of continuous transformation by re-creating new stories that are connected to our
history of story and transformation. We are expected to live our lives as story. We
breathe story, tell and re-tell story, we alter our being over and over again throughout our
lives based on the creation and recreation of story. The stories we tell address the
transformations we have and have not made in our lives (pp. 225-226).
Transformation is not just essential, it is our duty to transform; the transformational learning that
Mezirow describes can thus be seen to be intimately tied to Indigenous paradigms.
Other themes that arose from my conversations with students included experiential learning, holistic knowledge, personal experiences of identity, and self-reflection. The learning environments that they were a part of in the International Indigenous Studies program were vastly different from the courses they were used to and what they encountered in the mainstream western institution. There was less of a sense of hierarchy between students and teachers, a more
136 inclusive and caring space, and more of a community or family approach (Students, 2015).
Social culture in the classroom, where traditionally multiple kinship and social roles are at play in the “circle of learning”, allows for knowledge to be shared cooperatively between learners and teachers (Stairs, 1995, p. 142).
One of the students I spoke with was one of the first graduates of the International
Indigenous Studies Program. As an Indigenous person, the most valuable learning that she experienced was in the smaller seminar courses, with Elders, guest speakers and the field studies courses in the community: “With seminars or the field studies you’re learning from Indigenous knowledge, like people versus from a western perspective, like a book” (Student I., 2016). The instructors that impacted her learning were also the visiting scholars from Red Crow College, the late Narcisse Blood and Dwayne Mistaken Chief. In particular, those courses that were about language, on the land and in the field – the experiential learning courses – were the most impactful for her (Student I., 2016). Yet, these field courses were often shorter block week courses, and occurred sporadically in any given year. It should have been the rule, and not the exception, that the learning opportunities align with Indigenous ways of teaching and learning.
One of my other student storytellers was not in the Indigenous Studies program, but noticed the lack of Indigenous perspectives in her environmental studies courses, which prompted her to enroll in Indigenous courses. As she was someone who grew up on the reserve, her relationship to land was very well developed, yet her ability to make it all fit into this new way of thinking and learning through a western lens made her journey messy (Student P., 2016).
The things that she leaned on in those times were the strong Indigenous women scholars that were present in the University: Cora Voyageur in Sociology, Betty Bastien in Social Work, and
Heather Devine in History. They all offered her confident and credible role models who paved
137 the way before we were there (Student P., 2016). This validates the need for more Indigenous instructors in the university as Indigenous teachers have been proven to support retention and avoid dropout (Mackay & Myles, 1995, p. 174).
After our phone conversation, this student emailed me some follow-up comments that she had thought of after having dug up some old papers from her school files. The papers reminded her of the way she felt at that time, and allowed her to reflect on how those feelings and experiences had made an impact on her today:
An academic approach to Indigenous Studies did provide a sense of validation of an
Indigenous World View for me (because my on-reserve experience/background form the
power system of the Indian Affairs influence which has, more often than not, encouraged
an unfortunate dynamic (internal/lateral) that has tended to sideline (and therefore
undermine) cultural values, knowledge and practice (i.e., generally speaking, Band-style
administrative politics and practice vs. communal grassroots…colonized vs. de-
colonizing spectrum)). The University setting/influence/instruction/research/etc. gave me
an opportunity to reframe and empower the significance and value of Okanagan Ways of
Knowing and Operating at the family, communal, Band and Tribal levels (Student P.,
2016).
In her case, the confluence of western ways of knowing with her existing Indigenous worldview and perspectives were messy and caused her stress and confusion at the time. She was used to learning models that were rooted in her nation-specific worldview, which is epistemologically different from a western approach to teaching and learning (Kovach, 2009, p. 25). However, the balance of these worldviews did have an impact on Student P.’s understandings later in life, when she returned to her community and put all of her knowledge into practice.
138 My final student storyteller was Barb Horsefall, who graduated in 2005 with a Bachelor of Arts in Communication Studies with a focus on Native North America. For Horsefall, the sense of community with other Indigenous students is what kept her going throughout her undergraduate experience. And like other students, the role that Indigenous scholars and minority teachers had in her experiences was seminal. Most of the time the Indigenous studies courses had more group-oriented learning opportunities, with peer learning and dialogue between students. In contrast, Horsefall’s experiences in western oriented courses was more of a “stand and deliver” lecture style, and in the example of an Anthropology class, Indigenous students were often on the defensive, defining and validating knowledge that was not rooted in the past, but still alive and present (Horsefall, 2016). I had my own such experience in Anthropology 203, a cultural anthropology class, where the student teacher was speaking about the Kwakwaka'wakw peoples of Northern British Columbia in the past tense: how the totem pole used to mean this, and the canoe was important to them, as if they had all died and were part of a sad movie. I made the effort to speak to the teacher afterwards and let her know that I was offended by that, and we have to be careful how speak about Indigenous people who are still very alive and whose cultural artifacts still hold important cultural significance to them. I come across this in many circles of my academic and career life. Many of my colleagues speak to the unfair position that they are often put in as the single Indigenous person in the class or in the workplace. They often take it upon themselves to educate others, and in many cases they are expected to know and teach to non-Indigenous peoples. No other race of peoples is expected to the be the expert nor feel the pressure to call out ignorance when they see it. This is another by-product of racism.
One important factor that Horsefall noted was the lack of external community involvement in the University, besides the cultural support to and from the Native Centre there
139 was not a lot of connection between the course content and the outside community (Horsefall,
2016). In her experiences, exposure to the Indigenous community via social networks, practicums, internships, and so on would have provided practical application of the Indigenous ways of knowing (Horsefall, 2016). The inadequate external community involvement is a result of the structural and institutional racism (as noted by Frideres, Srvistava, and Kelly) that impedes the program’s success in this area. As previously mentioned, the Indigenous community relationships that were tied directly to teachers were viewed as positive and helpful, but they did not extend to the university as a whole, and did not support the program on an ongoing basis.
Battling against the obvious and sometimes covert racism in the classroom is a difficult task for a non-Indigenous teacher (Kelly, 2015). More intentional support from Indigenous community members, Elders and Knowledge Keepers would assist to break down some of the boundaries for all student learning and wellbeing.
Indigenous Community Support
Almost all of the students indicated that community support, Indigenous Elders and Knowledge
Keepers were important to learning from a lived experience, and they wished that they had more of this kind of learning. The consultation for the program proposal in the planning phases did reach out to the Indigenous community and they did try and keep the relationships with the external community. Rick Ponting spoke fondly about the initial consultation meetings, where a number of Indigenous Elders and knowledge keepers attended (2015). There were also various relationships that flourished into institutional partnerships between the University of Calgary and
Old Sun Community College and Red Crow Community College. Eventually the Steering
Committee for the program became redundant, however, and institutional relationships began to
140 falter. According to Frideres, the university was not sincerely interested in the community – they were just interested in setting up the program (Frideres, 2015).
Initially the program partnered with Red Crow College to bring Indigenous instructors to the University of Calgary to teach. The late Narcisse Blood and Duane Mistaken Chief both taught courses a few times. Red Crow had recently installed a conferencing system so they also thought they could have University of Calgary students sit in classes that Red Crow hosted or vice versa. The Indigenous studies courses that Narcisse Blood and others from Red Crow taught received very good reviews, however, the president of Red Crow at the time was not entirely happy with the situation. The University of Calgary was hiring her faculty, paying them and using the content and knowledge that they had developed at Red Crow, while Red Crow did not benefit from this relationship. Red Crow had requested that a portion of the tuition profit should go to them, but the University of Calgary did not agree, and the institutional relationship between the Indigenous studies program and Red Crow was severed (Frideres, 2015).
Most of the people that I spoke with referred to the individual relationships that instructors, administrators, and coordinators had with Elders and community members as the only real connection to the Indigenous community, with the exception of the relationships maintained by the Native Centre. The onus for making community connections indeed often fell on individual instructors, employed on fixed contracts. For example, Kelly involved Indigenous community members in her teaching and took advantage of community events, speakers, and sessions that were organized outside of her classroom and incorporated them into her course outline. She used such relationships so that students would have a holistic experience and they could learn from a variety of knowledge keepers that perhaps they would not have been exposed to otherwise (Kelly, 2015). For Kelly and my other instructor and student storytellers, the
141 inclusion of Indigenous community, Elders and Knowledge Keepers was integral to the learning environment. They provided validation and authenticity to the content, and ensured that cultural ethics and protocols were followed. For example, if research or teachings of a particular nation are being discussed “community, Elders, tribal ethics boards, and local protocols can be particularly helpful in determining what knowledge to share” (Kovach, 2009, p. 148).
Current Context
As it stands, the separation of the departments within the Faculty of Arts may be coming at this from the long way round. They may not have the capacity, knowledge, and understanding of
Indigenous perspectives as they relate to their disciplines. As they are attempting to hire for new research and scholarship positions, the Faculty of Arts is also undergoing an indigenization process to bring the faculty up to speed on past, current, and future Indigenous issues, concerns, and hopes. The 2015-2016 Annual Final Report for the Faculty of Arts outlines four areas of
Indigenizing initiatives: Indigenous research and scholarship; student success; community partnership; and a review of the International Indigenous Studies program (Faculty of Arts,
2016). I requested a copy of the forthcoming Indigenous Strategy from the Faculty of Arts along with any updates via email on October 11, 2017 and eventually did hear back from the Vice
Dean. Given that the University of Calgary is working on a campus-wide Indigenous Strategy, the Faculty of Arts is waiting for that to roll out before they continue with their internal strategy.
In the meantime, they have completed what they call “cluster hiring” and now have a total of nine staff across the faculty in Sociology, Political Science, Religion, Psychology, History,
Anthropology & Archaeology, and English with a focus on Indigenous research.
Moreover, none of the new hires are teaching only in the Indigenous Studies program and
142 will likely have courses that are cross listed. As was mentioned by a candidate for the Director position for the Indigenous Studies program, each of these instructors will have their own bosses and departments in which direct reporting will occur, without a broader consideration of the
International Indigenous Studies program. This dispersal of expertise goes hand in hand with a continued lack of dedicated financial support for the program. This is also in direct conflict with
Indigenous epistemologies that see all things as interconnected, yet the choice to have them de- centralized does not make sense. From a student perspective, the heart of the program has been the sessional instructors that have made the most meaningful learning experiences for learners, but their precarious position within the university is not necessarily sustainable in the long term considering the hiring that has happened within specific departments. In meetings that I have attended with Sessional Instructors on the future of the program, a big concern discussed has been their future roles in the university as they implement the Indigenous Strategy. Some of the sessional instructors do not have PhDs, and those that do, are new scholars with limited publishing and granting success. The new strategy could push these instructors right out of the university. This is a systemic problem.
Despite such challenges, the hiring decisions made indicate that the Faculty of Arts has prioritized the Indigenizing elements of its most recent strategic plan. The Energizing Arts 2017-
202242 strategic plan includes under its third priority area of Citizenship, Diversity and Inclusion a statement that: “We will decolonize our academic programs and build meaningful partnerships with Indigenous communities within and beyond the Treaty 7 region and the Metis Nation of
Alberta Region 3” (Faculty of Arts, 2017, p. 16). Under this priority area, the second major goal is articulated in relation to such a decolonizing approach:
42 https://www.ucalgary.ca/utoday/issue/2017-05-05/faculty-arts-launches-its-strategic-plan
143 We will embark on the journey of decolonizing and indigenizing the Faculty of Arts’
academic programs through the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge, voices, critiques,
practices, scholars, students and materials by creating a Faculty of Arts Indigenous
Strategy responsive to the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission
(TRC), the Treaty 7 and Metis Nation of Alberta Region 3, and to Indigenous issues
globally. We will attract a senior academic as director of our International Indigenous
Studies program and further develop our partnership with the university’s Native Centre
(Faculty of Arts, 2017, p. 16).
So, while the faculty has put a lot of this work on hold while waiting for the university-wide strategy to be announced, they have attempted to hire a senior academic for the position of
Director. While the search committee received many applications, there was only one person interviewed for the position. On June 26, 2017 I attended an open presentation by David Chang for the position of Director for the International Indigenous Studies Program. A native Hawaiian,
Chang presented his plan for the program to the Faculty, including academic staff, administrators, and students. His presentation highlighted some examples of what has worked in other universities and suggestions that he has to orient the program around community building.
By community building, he means the intellectual and social communities among faculty, students, and between the faculty and students. This aligns well within the context of a reciprocal paradigm and a “two way brokerage between Native culture and formal schooling validates
Native ways of learning, responds to urgent mainstream needs, and is our collective path to success in Native education” (Stairs, 1995, p. 151). He spoke about “serving and connecting
Indigenous students”, where not only does the program need communities, but in fact it deserves communities.
144 In terms of support for faculty and the program administratively, Chang spoke to the need for research dollars, partnership grants, and fellowships in International Indigenous Studies.
Historically, there has been chronic underfunding for Indigenous education at all levels. Staffing support would be critical for an interdisciplinary program that includes advising, complex grant applications, and cross-listing of courses. Also, a proper space that supports the needs of learners was noted to be particularly important to an Indigenous program. The space should be welcoming and serious, and be a place to go. These are all important in this field given the displacement of Indigenous people, spaces and land. It is important to note that all of these examples and ideas of Chang’s address systemic changes recommended by the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Regarding Education (1997) and the Truth and
Reconciliation Calls to Action on Education (2015).
Regarding the curriculum and revitalization of courses offered, Chang emphasized the importance of enhancing the Indigenous language course(s). Chang noted that Indigenous language is “transformative for access to Indigenous ways of knowing”. These types of courses can also support relationships and good will with surrounding First Nations communities. This would assist in healing “the divide between Indigenous communities and the Academy”
(Archibald et al., 2004) that has historically been divided by the exclusion of Indigenous knowledges, languages, and assimilation policies (Hampton, 1995, p. 9).
Overall, Chang’s plan reflected the central tenets of Indigenous education and respected
Indigenous ways of knowing within the structure of the university. However, as of December
2017, I have not heard any announcements for the Director position, nor seen any subsequent updates from the Faculty on the search. It was not clear from the interview time, nor when I requested follow up information, when the position start date would be.
145
Conclusion
As I indicated in the introduction to this chapter, I found that systemic racism and colonialism has obstructed the International Indigenous Studies program from reaching its potential. The comments from many of my storytellers pointed to the overt and covert systemic racist issues at the University of Calgary. Colonial education practices often hide behind policy and “ethics”, yet there needs to be a challenge to the worldviews that are behind these policies and ethics. The example from sessional instructor Line Laplante’s inability to share Indigenous ceremonial and experiential learning opportunities is not only disappointing but in effect is unethical to
Indigenous paradigms. If there is any place for spiritual and ceremonial experiential learning to occur, it is in the Aboriginal Spirits and the Natural World class, nestled within an Indigenous
Studies program.
The impact of denying these learning opportunities impacts both Indigenous and non-
Indigenous students’ learning alike. It also inhibits the ability of Indigenous faculty to teach from an Indigenous holistic perspective. In particular, the use and inclusion of Indigenous Elders and external community support embedded within the program would be of the utmost importance. I believe that the real value and contribution that the Elders and Knowledge Keepers have today is the ability to reflect on what has occurred, understand the current context, and provide direction for the future of the program. That is where the strength of the Indigenous community should come into play, and where I suggest their input to this research continues. Elders and Knowledge keepers could support the program administrators to ensure that there is adequate support, resources and that the content and curriculum is validated, centered and taught from an
Indigenous perspective.
146 Each of my storytellers could point to positive experiences in relation to the program, with often good intentions, but they also had disappointing and sometimes preventable experiences that one would not expect from an Indigenous program. The program was proposed and implemented over ten years ago, and the current context supports a decolonized, Indigenous centered model of teaching and learning. One of my recommendations, that I will speak more about in the thesis conclusion chapter, would be to align the renewal of this program with the
University of Calgary Indigenous Strategy, and more importantly consult with the external
Indigenous community, Elders and Knowledge Keepers on the direction they think the program should take in this era of reconciliation.
Lhít:els – Potlach Give Away: Conclusion
Since March of 2016, the University of Calgary has been engaged with an Indigenous Strategy
147 Task Force under the direction of the Provost and Vice President Academic Dru Marshall
(Provost and Vice President Academic Office, n.d.). The strategy was officially launched on
November 16, 2017. While the intention of this strategy is to inform the university as a whole, it is unclear how this will trickle down to the Faculty of Arts in their own Indigenous Strategy work, and how that will in turn impact the International Indigenous Studies Program. Here are the intended outcomes of the Strategy for the University, as outlined on their website:
Through the Strategy, the university is committed to creating a rich, vibrant and
culturally competent campus – one that welcomes and supports Indigenous learners, is
inclusive of Indigenous perspectives in teaching and learning, encourages Indigenous
community partnerships in research and academic programming and is appropriate and
thoughtful in its response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s ‘Calls to
Action’. (Provost and Vice President Academic Office, n.d.)
One can hope that the work being done is centered on Indigenous ways of knowing and doing, rather than replicating another western academic exercise in strategic planning where there is no space for Indigenous perspectives. Systems change is a hard process to go through, and as one of my Elders, Reg Crowshoe, Piikani FN, recently shared with me, we have been in a state of
“systems poverty” for too long. We have been limited to the one way, one perspective, of doing things when we know that there are multiple ways of knowing and each of them are as valid, authentic, and useful as the other. As Indigenous people, students, teachers, and advisors, we need to advocate for those Indigenous systems, ways of knowing, learning, being, and doing. It is also important to tie the knowledge systems back to the land, the local Indigenous communities where the systems originate.
Locally Developed Indigenous Studies Curriculum
148 I propose adapting some of the principles from the First Peoples Principles of Learning framework to create a new vision for the program as is moves forward. This Indigenous framework of recommendations for the program were created by Joanne Archibald. These are
Stó:lō specific learning experiences/principles from the Stó:lō Sitel Curriculum Development
Guide:
Education must encompass our traditional patterns of teaching and learning in which
children learn best by doing and experiencing, as opposed to using only written materials.
These patterns encompass: independence, self-reliance, observation, discovery, practical
experience and respect for nature. (Archibald, 1995, p. 303)
These principles are reflected in the provincial guidelines, created in collaboration with the First
Nations Education Steering Committee, whose “primary goal is to promote and support the provision of quality education to First Nations learners in BC” (First Nations Education Steering
Commitee, n.d.). This is just one model or framework that could be used to support the growth and future of the International Indigenous Studies program. I am using this as it ties into my research framework, from my learning, and my Indigenous perspective. The need to create one that works best for the program would be decided by the Indigenous communities that will support the program, and should be localized to the community of Calgary, or in the least vetted by them to see if there are parallel principles of learning that can be used.
The poster below (Figure 5) depicts the principles, showing how these changes in the way teaching and learning occurs within any level of the education system would benefit an
Indigenous Studies program, whether or not the learners are Indigenous. When the Stó:lō community was going through the process to develop a localized Indigenous studies curriculum, the Elders agreed that “non-First Nations children would also benefit from learning about Stó:lō
149 lifestyles” (Archibald, 1995, p. 298).
First peoples PRINCIPLES
OF LEARNING
Learning ultimately supports the well-being of the self, the family, the community, the land, the spirits, and the ancestors. Learning is holistic, refl exive, refl ective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place).
Learning involves recognizing the consequences of one’s actions.
Learning involves generational roles and responsibilities.
Learning recognizes the role of indigenous knowledge.
Learning is embedded in memory, history, and story.
Learning involves patience and time.
Learning requires exploration of one’s identity.
Learning involves recognizing that some knowledge is sacred and only shared with permission and/or in certain situations.
For First Peoples classroom resources visit: www.fnesc.ca
Figure 5. First Peoples Principles of Learning Poster
150 One of the goals that I hoped to achieve by conducting research through a storytelling lens was to determine whether the Indigenous studies program can be assessed with the second
First Peoples Principle of Learning: “Learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place).” While I was not able to strictly do this in the time that I had, or with the access that I had to people and records, I do believe that creating such an assessment should be a future goal for the
International Indigenous Studies program moving forward.
Because these principles of learning represent an attempt to identify common elements in the varied teaching and learning approaches that prevail within particular First Peoples societies, it must be recognized that they do not capture the full reality of the approach used in any single
First Peoples society (Aboriginal Education Branch of BC, 2017).
Recommendations
Humbly, I offer recommendations for the future of the International Indigenous Studies program from my research. It is important for me to state that none of these changes should be made without the explicit support, consent, and involvement of local Indigenous community, Elders and Knowledge Keepers. My research has pointed to these recommendations, however, I am just the editor of this story.
I have tried to categorize my recommendations according to certain priority areas, though there would be some overlap when put into action. In total, I have five recommendations for the program: 1) deeper Indigenous community support; 2) priority in the newly released Indigenous
Studies Strategy; 3) autonomy to use Indigenous ways of teaching and learning; 4) creation of a distinct department; and 5) creation of a graduate degree program.
151
1. Deeper Indigenous community support
Learning ultimately supports the well-being of the self, the family, the community, the land, the spirits, and the ancestors.
It has become very clear to me in the last few years of my career that Indigenous community support is everything. It is the primary tenet of good research, validation, and integrity of the work. The students that I spoke with during the course of my knowledge gathering spoke to the importance of the community involvement in their classrooms. This would include local Treaty 7 representation, as well as the diverse Indigenous representation that exists in the urban
Indigenous context of Calgary. Inclusion of Elders and Knowledge Keepers that are born in the relationships of deep community involvement will lead to more inclusive classroom spaces that ethically support the program overall.
2. Priority in the Indigenous Strategy
Learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place).
As there already exists an International Indigenous Studies program in the University that has not been a high priority on the list, it is logical to start where this is a foundation. As previously indicated, the program is mentioned in the strategy, but not prioritized. This could be an easy
‘win’ to bolster the program via the strategy and make it a strong example of how to Indigenize the academy. There would need to be a focus on recruitment and retention of students to the undergraduate degree program as well as a review of the enrollment policies to define what
152 ‘successful’ enrollment for experiential Indigenous studies classes could look like.
3. Autonomy to use Indigenous ways of teaching and learning
Learning involves generational roles and responsibilities. Learning recognizes the role of
Indigenous knowledge.
The ability to define what success looks like for the program should be centered on Indigenous ways of knowing. The hiring of more Indigenous teachers within tenure-track appointments should be the priority to support Indigenous ways of teaching and learning to permeate the program. While the Faculty of Arts has made strides in this area, the new hires are not required to be Indigenous, but only to have experience with Indigenous research or Indigenous content.
Professors have distinct teaching and learning styles, but the question should be: are they rooted in Indigenous ways of knowing? And, whose knowledge is it? When there are so many sessional instructors with no core (strategic, intentional, and holistic) at the heart of the curriculum, there is no consistency in what is shared with the learners. I acknowledge that there are currently not a high percentage of willing and able PhD Indigenous scholars to fill these positions. The number of current Indigenous people in Canada with PhDs, according to Statistics Canada’s 2016 data, is only 2,075 (1000 First Nations, 930 Métis, 45 Inuk, 100 in single, multiple, and other categories) compared to 229,440 Non-Aboriginal PhDs (Government of Canada, 2017). There should be a system that looks at the way institutions give credit for community research work that reflects oral and community leadership that is not solely about publishing to meet the PhD gap.
Elders in the classroom to support teachers seeking to parallel western and Indigenous perspectives in the classroom would not only be a good model, but also create mentorship
153 opportunities for new Indigenous scholars and teachers to learn and grow with Elder support.
The Elders should also review current curriculum and support future co-creation of curriculum to best facilitate holistic learning. It is also important to have a system of oral referencing to the knowledge that you are sharing, just as you would with written citations in academic writing, which Elders could cultivate.
4. Creation of a Distinct Department
Learning is embedded in memory, history, and story.
The Indigenous Strategy should also support the program to transition to its own department.
Ideally, in the long term, it should have its own faculty, such as at the University of Alberta, but there would need to be a phased approach to this. Jennifer Kelly contends that the program deserves a faculty of its own, and that its current positioning “and its move to Political Science is an insult to Indigenous Studies” (Kelly, 2015). She believes that its existence at this stage is “a token gesture on behalf of the administration so it can pretend it is ‘doing the right thing’ when in fact it is doing nothing” (Kelly, 2015). The creation of a distinct department would indicate that Indigenous Studies is recognized as a legitimate approach on its own merits.
Greater internal and administrative support, as well as financial support from the main budget would be needed for this initiative. As a stand-alone department, there could be potential for targeted fundraising opportunities where the program would not necessarily compete with other smaller programs for financial stability. I would also suggest to drop the International component to the name and focus on Indigenous Canadian course content, and to offer internationally focused courses as options.
154 5. Creation of a Graduate Degree Program
Learning involves patience and time.
The lack of an Indigenous Studies graduate degree at the University of Calgary is something that
Barb Horsefall notes should be addressed. She enrolled in a Master of Arts program in another department and eventually had to withdraw as the program she was in did not align with the research that she wanted to do. What she wanted was an Master of Arts that was rooted in
Indigenous Studies. This was very disappointing, and sadly she was made to feel like a failure because this was not the learning experience or environment that she wanted (Horsefall, 2016).
I too had a tough decision when I was planning for my graduate degree. I had a vision of what kind of research I wanted to do, and I knew what I didn’t want to do. I would have preferred an Master of Arts in Indigenous Studies, but went with the department of my undergraduate degree, because honestly, I thought it would be easier than a social science degree. Well it has not been “easier” and after much struggle, disappointment, and learning from mistakes, I have landed in a space that allows me to research the way that I want, and to write the thesis that I know I will be happy with, and hopefully one that the community will be happy with too.
155
Bibliography
Aboriginal Education Branch of BC. (2017). Province of British Columbia. Retrieved from Aboriginal Education in BC: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education- training/ways-to-learn/aboriginal-education Abrams, L. (2016). Oral history theory. London: Routledge. Absolon, K., & Willet, C. (2005). Putting ourselves forward: Location in Aboriginal Research. In L. Brown, & S. Strega (Eds.), Research as Resistance (pp. 97-126). Toronto: Canadian Scholars' Press. Ahmed, S. (2007). A phenomenology of whiteness. Feminist Theory, 8, 149-168. Archibald, J.-a. (1995). Locally Developed Native Studies Curriculum. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. 288-312). Vancouver: UBC Press. Archibald, J.-a. (2008). Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body and Spirit . Vancouver: UBC Press. Archibald, Q.-a., Menzies, C., & Hingangaroa Smith, G. (2004). Editorial: Transformational Sites of Indigenous Education. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 28(1/2), 1-7. Bart, C. (1997). Sex, Lies and Mission Statements. Business Horizons, 9-18. Bastien, B. (2004). Blackfoot ways of knowing: The worldview of the Siksikaitsitapi. Calgary: Univeristy of Calgary Press. Battiste, M. (1995). Introduction. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. vii-xx). Vancouver: UBC Press. Battiste, M., & Youngblood Henderson, J. (2000). Protecting Indigenous Knowledge and Heritage. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing Ltd. . Battiste, M., Bell, L., & Findlay, L. (2002). Decolonizing Education in Canadian Universities: An Interdisciplinary, International, Indigenous Reserach Project. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 26(2), 82-96. Boas, F. (1887, December). Notes on the Ethnology of British Columbia. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 24(126), 422-428. Bond, R. (2015, November 19). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Cajete, G. (2000). Native Science: Natural Laws of interdependence. Santa Fe, NM: Clear Light Publishers. Carlson, K. T. (1997). You are asked to Witness: The Sto: Lo in Canada's Pacific Coast History. Chilliwack: Sto: Lo Heritage Trust.
156 Carter, S. (2015, November 27). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Castellano, M., Davis, L., & Lahache, L. (2000). Post Secondary Education: Negotiating the Promise . In Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise (pp. 171-175). Vancouver: UBC Press . Cole, P. (2002). Aboriginalizing methodology: Considering the canoe. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(4), 447-460. Delgamuukw v. British Columbia , 1010 at para. 82 (The Supreme Court of Canada 1997). Dictionary, G. (2017, November 6). Google. Retrieved from Google. Duran, B., & Duran, E. (1995). Native American Postcolonial Psychology. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Environics Institute. (2010). Urban Aboriginal Peoples Study. Toronto: Environics Institute. Ermine, W. (1995). Aboriginal Epistemology. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. 101-112). Vancouver: UBC Press. Faculty of Arts. (2016). Faculty of Arts Annual Report 2015-2016. University of Calgary . Calgary: Univeristy of Calgary . Faculty of Arts. (2017, November 1). Careers. Retrieved November 26, 2017, from University of Calgary : http://careers.ucalgary.ca/jobs/8102847-canada-research-chair-tier-ii-in- indigenous-heritage-faculty-of-arts Faculty of Arts. (2017). Faculty of Arts Strategic Plan 2017-2022. University of Calgary , Faculty of Arts. Calgary : Univeristy of Calgary . First Nations Education Steering Commitee . (n.d.). First Nations Education Steering Commitee. Retrieved July 31, 2016, from First Nations Education Steering Committee: http://www.fnesc.ca First Nations Education Steering Committee. (n.d.). Learning First Peoples Classroom Resources . Retrieved 2017, from First Nations Education Steering Committee: http://www.fnesc.ca/learningfirstpeoples/ First Nations Information Governance Committee. (n.d.). First Nations Information Governance Centre. Retrieved December 9, 2017, from OCAP: http://fnigc.ca/ocap.html First Nations Steering Committee. (2015). First Nations Education Steering Committee. Retrieved March 8, 2016 , from First Nations Education Steering Committee: http://www.fnesc.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/PUB-LFP-POSTER-Principles-of- Learning-First-Peoples-poster-11x17.pdf Frideres, J. (2015, November 19). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Frideres, J. (2016, August 17). Email Correspondence. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Gardner, E. (2000). First Nations House of Learning: A Continuity of Transformation. In M. Catellano, L. Davis, & L. Lahache (Eds.), Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise (pp. 190-207). Vancouver: UBC Press. Geertz, C. (1973). Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books, Inc., Publishers. Giroux, H. A. (2009). Democracy's nemesis: The rise of corporate university. Cultural Studies? Critical Methodologies, 9(5), 669-695. Gordey, E. (2016). The State of Indigenous Research in Canada: A Review of Canadian University Graduate and Post-Graduate Theses 2010-2015. Laurentian Univeristy , Faculty of Arts. Sudbury : Erin Gordey. Government of Canada. (2017, November 29). Statistics Canada. Retrieved from 2016 Data Tables: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2016/dp-pd/dt-td/Rp- eng.cfm?TABID=2&LANG=E&APATH=3&DETAIL=0&DIM=0&FL=A&FREE=0&G
157 C=01&GK=1&GRP=1&PID=110693&PRID=10&PTYPE=109445&S=0&SHOWALL= 0&SUB=0&Temporal=2017&THEME=124&VID=0&VNAMEE=&VNAMEF= Grant, A. (1995). The Challenge for Universities. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. 208-223). Vancouver: UBC Press. Hall, S. (1992). The West and the Rest: Discourse and Power. In Formations of Modernity (pp. 185-225). Hampton, E. (1995). Redefintion of Indian Education. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. 5-46). Vancouver: UBC Press. Hampton, E. (2000). First Nations-Controlled University Education. In M. Brant Castellano, L. Davis, & L. Lahache (Eds.), Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise (pp. 208-223). Vancouver: UBC Press. Hart, M. A. (2010, February). Indigenous Worldviews, Knowledge, and Research: The Development of an Indigenous Research Paradigm. Journal of Indigenous Voices in Social Work, 1(1), 1-16. Hegde, R. S., & Shome, R. (2002, August). Postcolonial Approaches to Communication: Charting the Terrain, Engaging in Intersections. Communication Theory, 12(3), 249-270. Horsefall, B. (2016, March 13). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Irwin, K. (1992). Towards Theories of Maori Feminisms. (R. d. Plessis, Ed.) Feminist Voices: Women's Studies Texts for Aotearoa/New Zealand, 5. James, K. (2001). There are Doorways in These Huts: An Empirical Study of Educational Programs, Native Canadian Student Needs, and Institutional Effectiveness in British Columbia and Ontario, Canada . Journal of American Indian Education, 40(3), 24-35. Kelly, J. (2015, November 20). Interview Responses by J. Kelly . (M. Fry, Interviewer) Kemmis, S. (1985). Action Research and Politics of Reflection. In D. Boyd, D. Keogh, & D. Walber (Eds.), Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning (pp. 139-164). London: Kogan Page. King, T. (2003). The Truth About Stories: A Native Narrative. Toronto: House of Anansi Press Inc. King, T. (2012). The Inconvenient Indian: A Curious Account of Native People in North America. Canada: Double Day Canada . Kitchenham, A. (2008, April). The Evolution of John Mezirow's Transformative Learning Theory. Journal of Transformative Education, 6(2), 104-123. Kohli, R. (2008, Fall). Breaking the cycle of racism in the classroom: critical race reflections form future teachers of color. Teacher Education Quarterly, p. 177. Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations and Contexts. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press Inc. Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations, and Contexts. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Laplante, L. (2016, March 20). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Lather, P. (1986b). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review(56), 257-277. Mackay, R., & Myles, L. (1995). A Major Challenge for the Education System: Aboriginal Retention and Dropout . In First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Untolds (pp. 157-178). Vancouver: UBC Press. Maracle, L. (2015). Memory Serves: Oratories. Edmonton, AB: Newest Press. Marmolejo, F. (2010, October 22). The Chronicle of Higher Education . Retrieved November 22, 2017, from Internationalization of Higher Education: the Good, the Bad, and the
158 Unexpected: https://www.chronicle.com/blogs/worldwise/internationalization-of-higher- education-the-good-the-bad-and-the-unexpected/27512 Nakata, N., Nakata, V., Keech, S., & Bolt, R. (2012). Decolonial goals and pedagogies for Indigenous studies. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society, 1(1), 120-140. Ong, W. (1982, 2002). Orality and Literacty: The Technologizing of the Wors. New York: Routledge . Osei-Kofi, N. (n.d.). Junior faculty of color in the corporate university: implications of neoliberalism and neoconservatism on research, teaching and service. Critical Studies in Education, 53(2), 229-244. Ottmann, J. (2013). Indigenizing the Academy: Confronting “Contentious Ground”. The Morning Watch: Education and Social Analysis, 40(3-4), 8-24. Patai, D. (1994). When Method becomes power (Response). In A. Gatlin (Ed.), Power and Method: Political activism and educational research (pp. 61-73). New York: Routledge. Peeters, B. (n.d.). Cedar. In C. Elders, Upper Sto: lo Interaction: Teachings from Our Elders (p. 27). Upper Sto: lo: Sto: lo Sitel . Pillow, W. (2003). Confession, catharsis, or cure? Rethinking the uses of reflexivity as methodolgical power in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 16(2), 175-196. Ponting, J. R. (2003). Exectutive Summary: Proposal for a B.A. Degree in International Indigenous Studies. Executive Summary , The University of Calgary , Faculty of Social Sciences , Calgary . Ponting, J. R. (2003). Proposal for B.A. Degree in International Indigenous Studies. Proposal, Univeristy of Calgary, Calgary. Ponting, R. (2015, November 10). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Provost and Vice President Academic Office. (n.d.). Indigenous Strategy. Retrieved 2017, from Strategic Initiatives : http://www.ucalgary.ca/provost/strategic-initiatives/indigenous- strategy/what-we-heard Q'umQ'umXiiem, J.-a. A. (2008). Indigenous Storywork: Educating the Heart, Mind, Body and Spirit. Vancouver: UBC Press. R.A. Malatest & Associates Ltd. . (2002, May). Best Practices in Increasing Aboriginal Postsecondary Enrollment Rates. Victoria , BC, Canada. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1997). Gathering Strength, Recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples Regarding Education. Ottawa: Canadian Government Publishing. Sams, J., & Carson, D. (1988, 1999). Medicine Cards, Revised Expanded Edition. New York: St. Martin's Press. Schwarz, H. (2000). Mission Impossible: Introducting postcolonial studies in the US academy. In H. Schwarz, & S. Ray (Eds.), A companion to postcolonial studies (pp. 1-20). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers. Sleeter, C. E. (2011). The Academic and Social Value of Ethnic Studies: A Reserach Review. National Education Association. Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples. New York: Zed Books. Smith, L. T. (2012). Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples (Second Edition ed.). New York: Zed Books. Srivistava, A. (2015, December 3). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer)
159 Stairs, A. (1995). Learning and Teaching in Native Education. In M. Battiste, & J. Barman (Eds.), First Nations Education in Canada: The Circle Unfolds (pp. 139-153). Vancouver: UBC Press. Statistics Canada. (2011). Aboriginal Peoples in Canada: First Nations People, Métis and Inuit. Retrieved March 8, 2016, from Statistics Canada: http://www12.statcan.ca/nhs- enm/2011/as-sa/99-011-x/99-011-x2011001-eng.cfm Steering Committee International Indigenous Studies. (2004, November 9). Meeting Minutes . Sarah Carter Files . Calgary . Student, I. (2016, March 12). Interview . (M. Fry, Interviewer) Student, P. (2016, March 14). Email . Student, P. (2016, March 12). Interview. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Students. (2015, December 10 ). Focus Group. (M. Fry, Interviewer) Taner, S. (1999). The Evolution of Native Studies in Canada: Descending from the Ivory Tower. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies XIX, 289-319. The Alberta First Nations Information Governance Centre. (2014, May). What is OCAP? Retrieved December 9, 2017, from O'Brien Institute : https://obrieniph.ucalgary.ca/system/files/ocap-faq-may2014.pdf Todd, Z. (2016, March). An Indigenous Feminist's Take on The Ontological Turn: 'Ontology' Is Just Another Workd for Colonialism. Journal of Historical Sociology, 29(1), 4-22. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Final Report of the Truth and Reconcilation Commission of Canada, Volume One: Summary, Honouring the Truth, Reconciling for the Future. Toronto: James Lorimer & Company Ltd. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Truth and Reconcilation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action . Winnipeg: Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada . Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2016). Reconciliation...Towards a new relationship. Retrieved August 24, 2016, from Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: http://www.trc.ca/websites/reconciliation/index.php?p=331 University of Alberta. (2017). Statistical Reports. Retrieved December 10, 2017, from University of Alberta: https://www.ualberta.ca/reporting/statistical-reports University of Alberta. (n.d.). Faculty of Native studies. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from University of Alberta: http://nativestudies.ualberta.ca/about-us/what-is-native-studies University of Alberta. (n.d.). Faculty of Native Studies. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from Univeristy of Alberta: http://nativestudies.ualberta.ca/about-us University of Alberta. (n.d.). Faculty of Native Studies. Retrieved June 30, 2016, from University of Alberta: http://nativestudies.ualberta.ca/about-us/vision-goals University of Alberta. (n.d.). Statistical Reports. Retrieved July 15, 2016, from Reporting : https://www.ualberta.ca/reporting/statistical-reports University of Calgary . (2017). ii’ taa’poh’to’p, Together in a Good Way: A Journey of Transformation and Renewal, Indigenous Strategy. University of Calgary. Calgary: University of Calgary. University of Lethbridge. (n.d.). Faculty of Arts and Sciences. Retrieved June 10, 2016, from Native American Studies : http://www.uleth.ca/artsci/native-american-studies/about Webb, A. (2014, January 8). Biofuelnet Canada. Retrieved March 8, 2016, from McGill University: http://www.biofuelnet.ca/2014/01/08/aboriginal-communities-energy- development-canada/
160 Wheeler, W. (2001). Thoughts on the Responsiblities for Indigenous/Native Studies. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, XXI(1), 97-104. Wilson, S. (2008). Reserach is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Halifax & Winnepeg: Fernwood Publishing. Wilson, S. (2008). Reserach is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Winnipeg, MB: Fernwood Publishing.
Appendix A
Interview Questions
*There are three groups of interviewees for this case study. Please find the following drafts for (1) Program Administrators, (2) Faculty, and (3) Students.
All groups will be asked the following demographic questions:
1. Are you Indigenous? Y/N
1.a. If so, do you identify as First Nations/Metis/Inuit ______
1.b. If not, how do you self identify? ______
2. What is your gender? ______
3. What was your role with the International Indigenous Studies Program?
______
Group (1) Administrators
1. When were you involved in the program?
161 2. How were you involved in the program? 3. Were you involved in the creation of the program or in the implementation? 4. What was the catalyst for the program 5. What did you notice in terms of institutional support? 6. Were there any challenges to the start up/implementation? 7. What were some benefits noted to the start up/implementation of the program? 8. What were some of the changes to the original program plan? 9. Was there involvement from the Indigenous communities? 10. Was there a champion of the program? Y/N a. Who? 11. Were there enough resources to support the program? Y/N a. Why? 12. What recommendations do you have for the future of the program?
Group (2) Faculty
1. Are you a tenured professor? Y/N 2. What are your credentials? 3. How many years have you been teaching? 4. When did you teach in the INDG program? 5. What courses did you teach? 6. What is your knowledge of the program evolution? 7. Do you feel that there has been sufficient institutional support? Y/N a. Please explain. 8. What challenges did you face as a faculty member teaching in this program? 9. What did you find most rewarding about teaching in this program? 10. Where there program changes during your time with the program? Y/N a. What? 11. Did you involve members of the surrounding Indigenous communities in your teaching? 12. Was there a champion of the program? Y/N a. Who? 13. Do you have knowledge of how the program was financially supported? 14. What recommendations do you have for the future of the program?
Group (3) Students
1. Are you a current student? Y/N a. If so, what is your program of study? b. If not, when did you attend UofC and what was your program of study? c. Did you obtain your degree? Y/N d. If no, why? 2. How many courses did you take in Indigenous Studies? a. Can you list them off? 3. Did you feel supported by faculty? Y/N a. Please explain
162 4. Did you feel supported by administration staff? Y/N a. Please explain 5. Were the Indigenous Studies classes beneficial to your program of study? Y/N a. Please explain 6. Were there significant program changes during your time in the program? Y/N a. Please explain 7. Did you experience involvement of Indigenous community leaders in your courses or at the administrative level? Y/N a. Please explain 8. Was there a champion of the program? Y/N a. Who? 9. Do you feel there was a lack of support in the program? Y/N a. Please explain 10. What recommendations do you have for the future of the program?
Appendix B
Letter of Introduction
Approved by the University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board.
My name is Monique Fry and I am from Cheam of the Sto: Lo First Nations and a descendant of the Pilalt Tribe. I am a Master of Arts student at the University of Calgary in the Department of Communication and Culture within the Faculty of Arts.
I am undertaking a thesis that will review the evolution of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary and determine if the program has met the needs of learners and the those of Indigenous communities.
You have been contacted to participate in my case study because you were involved with the program as either a student, instructor, administrator or a member of the Indigenous community.
I would be honored and humbled if you would assist me in meeting my goal to complete my Master’s degree by participating in an informal conversation with me in person, on the phone, or via Skype. Please be advised that participation in the study is conditional on audio-recording interviews.
Please see the following attachments associated with this study:
163 1. Informed Consent Form 2. Draft Conversation Questions 3. Indigenous Protocol Document
If you agree to discuss your participation please email me back with your response at [email protected] or by phone at 403.921.7253 to set up an initial meeting.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
All my Relations,
Monique Fry
Appendix C
Consent Form
Name of Researcher, Faculty, Department, Telephone & Email: Monique Renee Fry, Faculty of Arts, Communication and Culture, 403.921.7253, [email protected]
Supervisor: Dr. Cora Voyageur, Department of Sociology [email protected]
Title of Project: Memory, History and Story: An ethnographic case study on the evolution of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary.
This consent form, a copy of which has been given to you, is only part of the process of informed consent. If you want more details about something mentioned here, or information not included here, you should feel free to ask. Please take the time to read this carefully and to understand any accompanying information.
The University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board has approved this research study.
164 Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to review the evolution of the International Indigenous Studies Program at the University of Calgary and determine if the program has evolved in ways that best meet the needs of learners in the program and the needs of Indigenous communities.
What Will I Be Asked To Do?
You will be asked a variety of questions in an informal conversation about your experiences with the International Indigenous Studies program over the years. Please see the attached questions that will be used to guide our conversation.
The questions are not of a sensitive or personal nature, however as the questions are about your experiences your honest opinions are most appreciated. Your participation should take between one and two hours.
With your permission, I would like to record our conversation so that I can re-visit the material for consistency and accuracy in my thesis.
Please note that your participation in this study is completely voluntary and you can remove yourself from the study at any time during the process without any judgment or penalty. You have every right to refuse to answer any question or participate in any part of the study.
The decision to participate in this study will have no bearing on your relationship with the Department of Communication and Culture, or with the University of Calgary as a whole.
What Type of Personal Information Will Be Collected?
I will be collecting your name, email and phone number so that I can schedule our conversation, however this information will not be stored with our conversations for privacy measures.
Should you agree to participate your role in the program i.e. student, teacher, administration, or community member role will be collected.
I will only access the audiotapes and they will not be used publicly.
You have the right to choose whether or not your participation is to be shared anonymously. Please consider these options if you decide to take part in this research. You can choose all, some, or none of them. Please review each of these options and choose Yes or No:
I grant permission to be audio taped: Yes: ___ No: ___ I would like to see a transcript of my conversation: Yes: ___ No: ___ I grant permission to have my Indigenous community’s name used: Yes: ___ No: ___ I wish to remain anonymous: Yes: ___ No: ___ I wish to remain anonymous, but you may refer to me by a pseudonym: Yes: ___ No: ___
165 The pseudonym I choose for myself is: ______You may quote me and use my name: Yes: ___ No: ___
Are there Risks or Benefits if I Participate? There are no known harms or inconveniences for your participation in this study. There may be perceived political risk for current faculty and staff of the University of Calgary.
Participants will not be paid for participation, however gifts of traditional tobacco in line with cultural protocols will be offered.
What Happens to the Information I Provide? I will have sole access to the information that you provide, and only my Supervisor will be allowed to see or hear any of our conversations. If you choose to be anonymous, I will ensure that all information is confidential, safely locked away and inaccessible by others. When giving presentation on the findings I will summarize data, and not list you by any identifying markers without your explicit permission.
If at any time you decide to withdraw from the study, I will destroy any audio from our conversation and delete any related files provided. Anonymous data is stored for five years on a USB file, and then it is permanently erased.
Signatures
Your signature on this form indicates that 1) you understand to your satisfaction the information provided to you about your participation in this research project, and 2) you agree to participate in the research project.
In no way does this waive your legal rights nor release the investigators, sponsors, or involved institutions from their legal and professional responsibilities. You are free to withdraw from this research project at any time. You should feel free to ask for clarification or new information throughout your participation.
Participant’s Name: (please print) ______
Participant’s Signature: ______Date: ______
Researcher’s Name: (please print) ______
Researcher’s Signature: ______Date: ______
Questions/Concerns
If you have any further questions or want clarification regarding this research and/or your participation, please contact:
Mrs. Monique Renee Fry
166 Department of Communication and Culture, Faculty of Arts 403.921.7253, [email protected] and/or Dr. Cora Voyageur, [email protected]
167 If you have any concerns about the way you’ve been treated as a participant, please contact the Research Ethics Analyst, Research Services Office, University of Calgary at (403) 210-9863; email [email protected].
A copy of this consent form has been given to you to keep for your records and reference. The investigator has kept a copy of the consent form.
168 Appendix D
Indigenous Protocol Statement
Indigenous Protocol Statement
As a First Nations person I believe in ensuring proper protocol is used when undertaking research with any Indigenous community. Chapter 9 of the Tri-Council policy agreement43 outlines a framework for research protocols and I am using this to guide my research. Elements of reciprocity and the creation of ethical space will be used throughout.
The location of the research will occur primarily in Calgary, Alberta, which is the traditional territory of the Treaty 7 First Nations44. Following the protocols of local First Nations communities I will offer up ceremonial tobacco as gifts to research participants, offer them to smudge45 before our conversations, and if we meet in person offer them refreshments. The smudge ceremony will pave the way for truthful conversations and create ethical space for the research.
As I am from Cheam and the Stó:lō Tribal Nations in British Columbia, my cultural protocol traditions will also be honored and form the Indigenous research framework for my methodology.
Following proper protocol, at the conclusion of my research all information will be made available to the Indigenous academic community and the Indigenous community at large of Calgary and the surrounding area. A final summary report will also be made available to the Indigenous Studies Program.
43 http://www.pre.ethics.gc.ca/eng/policy-politique/initiatives/tcps2-eptc2/chapter9-chapitre9/ 44 Blackfoot Confederacy- Siksika, Kanai, Piikani, Peigan; Tsuut’ina, and the Stoney Nakoda Nations. 45 Smudge is a way to cleanse or bless in prayer that involves the burning of sacred medicines such as cedar, sweetgrass, sage and tobacco. The smoke from the burning of smudge is then waved over you and in the room. 169 Appendix E
Recruitment Poster
STUDENTS: You are invited to a Sharing Circle!
If you have taken an International Indigenous Studies class at all during your time at UofC I would love to hear from you.
My name is Monique Fry and I am a First Nations MA student researching the evolution and impact of the Indigenous Studies Program.
I would like to hear from you about your experience whether you were majoring in Indigenous Studies or just taking a course to support your chosen degree program.
A Sharing Circle will occur at the Native Centre on Thursday December 10th from 11:30-2:30.
This circle will probably be 2 hours in length with a meal for us to share. We will smudge and offer prayers before we begin.
Please send me an email to RSVP at [email protected] or text at (403) 921-7253 with your name and contact info so I can plan food.
170 • With your permission, I will audio record this circle to gather my notes; it will not be shared publicly. • All information will be presented anonymously and you will not be named without your consent. • Some students may be asked to do a follow up interview one-on-one, though you are not obligated to participate. • I will have consent forms for you to sign when you arrive.
The University of Calgary Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board has approved this research study.
171