Native People in the Curriculum
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
DOCUMENT RESUME RC 013 813 ED 225 768 \ AUTHOT Decore, A. M.; And Others TITLE' Native People in theCukriculum. INSTITTI\N Alberta Dept. of Education,Edmonton. Sep 81 . PUB DAT RC 013 814. NOTE 147p.; For related documen', see PUB TYPE Reports - Descriptive(14:, -- Reports Evaluative/Feasibility (142) EDRS PRICE F01/PC06 Plus Postage. , Annotated Bibliographies; DESCRIPTORS American Indian Education; Atlases; *Canada Natives;*Content Analysis; *Controversial Issues (CourseContent); Cultural Awareness; *CurriculumEvaluation; Elementary Secondary Education; EthnicStereotypes; Resource Materials; *Social Studies;Textbook Bias; Textbook Evaluation IDENTIFIEAS *Alberta ABSTRACT In summer 1982, at therequef of Alberta Education, an evaluationstudy was undertaken ofall learning resources presently listed in theirpublications "Alberta SocialStudies Learning Resources for ElementarySchools" and "AlbertaSocial 1980/81," including Studies Learning Resourcesfor Secondary Schools, recommended and required resources,as well asteaching units, Kanata Learning Resources. A totalof 246 named Kits, and Alberta Heritage evaluation titles are included in theevaluation. The basis for the native people are portrayedin the curriculum, andthe was the way This study was unusualin way native-relatedissues are dealt with. kinds of resources at alllevels were that so many different included. This evaluated, and so manycategories of evaluation were itself and an report is divided into twocomponents, the report are annotated bibiliography.Included in the body of the report discussions of what was studied,how the study wascarried out, materials studied, and general observationsabout the curriculum conclusions drawn from thestudy. The second, largerpart of this books that report is an annotatedbibliography (Appendix B) of provided the data for thebody of the report.(AH) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EARS arethe best that can bemade from, the original document. *.*********w*************************.***#******************************* NATIVE PEOPLE IN THE CURRICULUM "PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY .bt ou)i-tuw TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)." U.S. DEPAR7MENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION iE UCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) This document has been reproduCed as received from the person or organization ongiating IL by ' I Mmor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality, A.M. Decore, R. Carney and C. Urion CIO Points of view or opinionslred in this docu. VII ment do not necessarily represent official NIE with D. Alexander and R. Runte pesdion or policy, CC) SEPTEMBER 1981 .4. C1D AIPAIVArAIAIAIAlrfr, // / TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Introduction 3 The Report Children 3 The Alberta SocialStudies Curriculum and Native 3 General Observations Meanings of"Nati;reness" 4 Implications of Typologiesof Inadequacy 5 Illustration 6 Some Other Studies 8 What Was Studied' 9 How The Study Was CarriedOut 11 What Is Reported 11 The Findings ErrorsorRepresenting Theory, Speculation or 13 Approximation as Fact 13 Errors of Fact 15 Errors of Attribution 16 Problems of Context 17 Errors of Implication 18 Stereotyping 20 Some Possible Solutions (i) A Repetition 21 The American Border 22 Periods and Problems 25 Historical Reinterpretations 27 Ideologies 28 Some Problems Related to the Inquiry Approach 29 Why? 31 Appendix A , 34 Appendix B: Annotated Bibliography 35 Prescribed Learning Resources 35 Recommended Learning Resources 57 Atlases 95 . Teaching Units 96 Kanata Kit: 99 Alberta Heritage Learning Resources - Books for YoungReaders 110 Alberta Literature for Senior Students and Adults -'AlbertaHeritage Learning Resources Project 118 Western Canadian Literature for YoUth - Alberta Heritage Learning Resourcet Project 135 Typed By: Kim tlevins Proofread By: Elizabeth McCardle .7 g:t I NTRODUCT ION Beginning in the 1970's, there has been an increasinglybetter-defined discussion going on within the Department of Education and inA!berta's Faculties of Educa- tion about curriculum which deals with issues related toAlberta's native popula- tison, and about the applicability of the availablematerials for use in schools where Indian and Metis children attend. Dissatisfaction with curriculum materials is a usual state of affairs, and that is healthy: a rapidly-changing society must create mechanisms which document those changesin its school curriculum. The discussion about natives and native Lssues withrespect to the curriculum has addressed a more basic level than that, however.That is because the charges of inadequacy and misrepresentation have been so broadly made;because there is evidence that the inadequacies have in some instance been extreme and stark; because the changes that have gone on in schools where"nativestudents attend have been dramatic ones; because there has been a much-welcomed increasein the number of native people involved in formal education at alllevels; and because there has been so little consensus about what shouldbe done. One of the investigators in the current study, Dr.Carl Urion, had the opportunity to discuss some of these issues in general termswith the Curriculum Policy Board in November 1980. The informal venue for the continuation ofthat discussion was in meetings between Mr. Frank Crowther,Associate Director of Curriculum, Department of-Education; and the Intercultural Education groupin the Department of Educational Foundations,Uraversity of Alberta. That group consisted of Professor Marilyn Assheton-Smith, Dr.Robert J. Carney, Dr. Anne Marie Decore, and Dr. Urion. Ms. Donna Alexander, a graduate student inthat department, joined those discussions. The discussion assumed enough specificity thatin early February, the group made a formal proposal to the Departmentthat the gr6up evaluate specific claims about the adequacy of the Social Studiescurriculum respecting native people. We proposed to evaluate the prescribed andfecommended learning resources, for the Heritage series and Kanata Kits. Grades 1 to 12 in Social Studies, as Well-6s There were three general questions brought tothis study: What..,bs*the,relationship of the curricu- 1. The curriculum and native children. lum to native children; that is, Is such that the demographic and social existential reality is ignored or denied: do native children see themselves in-the curriculum? The concomitant question has to do with therepresentation of native people in the curriculum.Does a school "public" see an historical or stereotypic native, nonative.at all; ;"or does the real cultural hetero- geneity of the Alberta population, including thenative population, have place? the social 2. Social science validity. Does the curriculum material reflect science knowledge presently extant in thedisciplines (primarily of anthro- pology, history, and sociology; but political science and economics`Sswell) respecting native people? curriculum 3. Differential applicability. What is the appropriateness of the material in (a) predominantly Indian schools; and (b)in general use in Alberta? 1 The general categories of evaluation were: statement of goals; that I. the adecpacy of coverage, given general topic and is, omissions in treatment; that is, is the 2. the documentation of cultural and ethnicheterogeneity; treatment stereotypic; and 3. what interpretive bias might there be said to existin the treatment. In early April, Dr. Decore, acting on behalf of theIntercultural Education group, contracted with the Department tocomplete the evaluation. Because Pro- fessor Assheton-Smith was obligated outside Edmontonduring the summer, she was replaced on the evaluative team by Mr. Robert Runte, agraduate student in the Department of Educational Foundations. During the course of the research, some of ourproposed categories and research strategies were modified. In particular, for reasons made clearin,our report, we found the distinctionbetween curriculum use by native students and curriculum materials dealing with natives to beinappropriate evaluative cate- gories in the context of the-study.We had anticipated the creation of Likert scale measures for each text, but found that thatadded absolutely nothing of analytic or explanatory value, and in fact muddiedthe waters. We had anticipated observing in classrooms, but abandoned thatidea. We had considered that any study that was evaluative ofcurriculum must appeal to classroom use, and thus that our initiAl questions should be couclndin terms that are meaning-ul in the classroom or which derive from classroom experience. We found that in the many conversations we had with teachers of SocialStudies, and with administrators and students--which we had considered groundwork for ourobservations--me had found enough informatioh to include questionsof classroom relevance in our evaluations. 2 THE REPORT curriculum This report on the portrayalof native people in Social Studies materials used in Alberta has two main components,the report itself and an discussions of annotated bibliography. Included in the body of the report are about the what was studied, how the study wascarried out, general observations The second, curriculum materials studied andconclusions drawn from the study. books larger part of this report is an annotatedbibliography (Appendix B) of that provided the data for the bodyof the report.' THE ALBERTA SOCIAL STUDIES CURRICULUMAND NATIVE CHILDREN include In the initial stages of discussion,it had been proposed that we resources