Native Studies

Native Studies in Saskatchewan: A Policy for Change

EADM 310Darryl Hunter5 APR 2009

1

Native Studies

When the Canadian government began its move westward, its leaders had to

decide how best to deal with the population of people who were already living in the

territories. They decided upon a series of numbered treaties, which guaranteed certain

concessions to First Nations groups, in exchange for access to land. One of the most

important treaties’ clauses dealt with education. First Nations leaders understood the

importance that an education would play in the future of their people, so they wanted to

ensure that their descendants would benefit not only from their traditional knowledge, but

also learn the ways of the “White man.” Now, over a century later, it has become

painfully obvious that the education guaranteed to Saskatchewan’s First Nations peoples

has not been properly provided.

In recent years, the Saskatchewan government has responded with several

different initiatives focused on improving the standard of education offered to First

Nations students. One such initiative was the creation of a separate Native Studies

curriculum, which for the first time allowed a class to be focused solely on First Nations

content. Though noble in its intent, Native Studies has not been without its detractors,

especially at the university level, and there is a question as to whether or not it should

remain a separate discipline in the K-12 curriculum.

It is hard to ignore the startling figures regarding this issue: Nearly 50% of self-

declared Aboriginal students in grade ten do not make it to grade twelve. One must also

consider the implications for those who do not make it to grade ten. Also, of those who

do make it to grade twelve, there is an average of two fewer credits per-year, for a total of

6 credits (or classes), less than their non-Aboriginal counterparts. And on average, the

2

Native Studies

marks for Aboriginal students are between 5- 10% lower than their non-Aboriginal

counterpart (Ministry of Education 2008). What this means is that there is a large

segment of students who are not being properly prepared for life beyond school. This is

particularly troubling because the non-Aboriginal population of Saskatchewan is getting

increasingly older, with the highest median age in Canada at 38.8 years old; meanwhile,

Saskatchewan’s Aboriginal population is the youngest in Canada, with a mean age of

20.1 (Saskatchewan Learning 2003). When you also consider that by 2016 it is believed

that 50% of the school age population will be of Aboriginal heritage, it becomes very

apparent that the Ministry of Education faces a difficult challenge. This is why policies

have been put in place to ensure equitable education for Saskatchewan’s Aboriginal

population.

Several policies from Saskatchewan Ministry of Education play a particularly

important role with regards to Native Studies. The Ministry of Education is quick to

recognize the contradiction in the overrepresentation of Aboriginal students’ failure, with

the under-representation of Aboriginal input into education. The Ministry also

recognizes the increase in Aboriginal population, and the proposed decrease in the

available labour force (Saskatchewan learning 2003, p. 1-2). They also recognize the

need for enhanced Aboriginal education to ensure that they can become a viable part of

Saskatchewan’s labour force. For this reason, the Ministry outlined the following

policies in its fall 2003 publication Building Partnerships: First Nations and Métis

Peoples and the Provincial Education System:

The learning program is responsive, academically challenging and culturally

3

Native Studies

affirming. Curricula and learning materials present First Nations and Métis peoples accurately in historical and modern terms. Aboriginal content and perspectives are integral to all subject areas so that all children and youth gain knowledge, insight and understanding… Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal populations respect and value the diversity of cultures and experiences of all citizens… the provincial education system, division boards and schools actively engage First Nations and Métis peoples in collaborative partnerships… the provincial education system respects and affirms the diverse cultures of First Nations and Métis peoples by responding to and reflecting differences, cultures, worldviews, learning styles and needs in the curricula, teaching methods and environment in schools (Saskatchewan Learning 2003, p.5-6).

By emphasizing the importance of First Nations content, the Ministry is

displaying its support for the Native Studies curriculum. In this way, it is hard to deny

the need for a school system that will serve to better meet the needs of all of its students;

however, it can be argued that the Native Studies curriculum does not fulfill the policies

supported by the ministry of education, and that it has failed to serve the purpose it was

created for.

Native studies as a discipline arose out of the civil rights movement of the 1960’s

(Wheeler 2001), and became a concern for Saskatchewan educators in the 1980’s in

response to the high dropout rates, and the still prevalent racist attitudes within society

(Stonechild 2005). Finally in 1991, new curriculums for Native Studies 10, 20, and 30

were announced: Native Studies 10 began in 1991, 20 began in 1992, and Native Studies

30 was introduced in 1997 (Saskatchewan Learning 2003). Also, the goal of Native

Studies is to increase the amount of pride and awareness of First Nations students, and to

provide positive role modeling for a segment of students who really need them (Wheeler

2001). Another goal of Native Studies is the decolonization of First Nations history.

Without a form of writing, First Nations groups now rely almost solely on accounts of

European explorers for pieces of their history that have been lost through centuries of

4

Native Studies

assimilation practices (Price 1981). The unfortunate side effect of one culture group

determining the history of another is that a substantial amount of detail and nuances can

be lost in the inherent cultural biases. Consequently, Native Studies courses attempt to

reestablish the unique method that First Nations people have in examining their own

history. At the same time, First Nation people hope to reintroduce the notions of

spirituality into the study of their history. Winona Wheeler speaks to this issue here:

“to strip our intellectual knowledge of its spirituality is colonialist” (Wheeler 2001,

p.100). Therefore, by reintroducing aspects of Aboriginal spirituality, into the study of

First Nations people, it is the hoped that a more authentic version of their history and

culture may emerge.

Teachers, who seek to teach authentic versions of First Nations content, can face a

great deal of pressure: Native studies teachers must attempt to undo years of colonial

influence on First Nations culture, be accountable to a growing segment of the

population, and work hard to build up a knowledge base and skills beyond what was

taught to them in their schooling (Wheeler 2001). For teachers of Aboriginal decent this

will simply mean transmitting a wealth of information that they have lived first hand.

For non-Aboriginal teachers, however, this poses a great deal of problems. Ideally, there

would be a plethora of Aboriginal teachers all teaching Native Studies, the reality of the

situation is that the majority of teachers in the province are not of Aboriginal decent

(Ministry of Education 2008). For most concerned, this is one of the largest problems

facing the discipline.

5

Native Studies

There are many concerns raised over having non-Aboriginal teachers in charge of

Native Studies classes. The first, and most obvious, concern is that non-aboriginal

teachers will bring a Eurocentric worldview to the class, thus nullifying the desire to

decolonize the course material (Price 1981; Lindsay 2003; Rice 2003). While the

concern of these articles, Brian Rice in particular, is the overlooking of qualified First

Nations teachers for Native Studies positions; it is not from the stance of job equity, but

rather what content is being taught. This is made clear when William Lindsay is critical

of those First Nations professors who do get hired being Aboriginal on the outside, but

not on the inside (2003, p.189). The argument then becomes, is the important factor what

is being taught, or who is teaching it.

Rice (2003), in an impassioned retrospective of his career as a Native Studies

professor, argues that the most qualified person to teach Native Studies is someone who

has lived as an Aboriginal person (a feeling echoed by Wheeler 2006, and Lindsay 2003),

and that the discipline has essentially be hijacked by white professors, or Aboriginal

Professors who fit the white mold. Winona Wheeler (2006) adds that there needs to be a

high level of community involvement, and notions of Aboriginal spirituality, that can

only be provided by a First Nations teacher; otherwise the discipline is not unique, and “if

it is not unique, there is no reason for it to be separate” (p. 100). Lindsay (2003) even

goes as far as to say that the day-to-day experiences of First Nations students are often

not understood by non-aboriginal teachers, and are therefore they do not receive the

proper support that they may receive from an Aboriginal teacher (p. 191). Even those

teacher’s having what Lindsay refers to as the “Dances with Wolves” complex, meaning

6

Native Studies

those non-aboriginal teachers who had spent a great deal of time living and working in

Aboriginal communities, often had a hard time authentically relating to First Nations

students (2003, p.187). Clearly the indication is that the background of the person

teaching the course is just as important as the content. It is still worthwhile, however, to

examine what makes Native Studies unique enough to deserve a class all its own.

One of the key aspects to Native Studies arises from its unique view of the world.

First Nations notions of history, politics, and even economics, are rooted in their spiritual

beliefs. In this regard, religion serves as the root of their society, and dictates how they

should relate to their surroundings. Aboriginal educators must then examine how best to

express First Nations worldview in regards to their culture, history, and current situation,

and ensure that it does not compromise the integrity of their traditions (Wheeler 2001). In

many cases Aboriginal groups are used to ensure that programs are set up along certain

criteria that is deemed acceptable by the First Nations community (Lindsay 2003). It is

hoped that by fostering a more authentic view of Native Studies, that Aboriginal students

will be able to have a greater connection to the material, and therefore a greater chance at

success. It is also hoped that, by having an authentic Aboriginal classroom experience,

non-aboriginal students would gain a better understanding of First Nations Culture.

In a paper she prepared for a conference at the University of British Columbia,

Frances Widdowson (2008) takes on the idea of “authentic Aboriginal content.” Her

argument is that in the rush to acknowledge the distinct nature of the Aboriginal

worldview, and a desire to allow First Nations groups to break their dependency of the

7

Native Studies

Eurocentric influence, they are avoiding educational scrutiny. She asserts that to better

help First Nations groups remove years of oppression from certain disciplines, such as

history and political science, these subjects should include examinations from an

Aboriginal perspective. However, a problem arises when people attempt to define what

constitutes Aboriginal content. Widdowson cites several examples of universities giving

preferential hiring to teachers who are capable of incorporating Aboriginal content in

their classrooms. When pressed to clarify what Aboriginal content is and how it differs

from non-Aboriginal content, most universities could not provide a suitable definition.

Next, Widdowson critiques the accepted definition of the Aboriginal conception of

history. Citing the Royal Commission on Aboriginal People, the First Nations’

conception of history is cyclical and crosses the boundaries between physical and

spiritual reality. First Nations people feel that the storyteller is as important as the story

being told, even if their account conflicts with another story teller or empirical evidence.

In Widdowson’s thinking the reliance on oral accounts creates a lack of objectivity, as a

result, Aboriginal theories and methods lack credibility.

According to Widdowson, there are many similarities between Aboriginal

methods and Western theories. A problem arises from the interpretation of Western

examination as labeling Aboriginal cultures as inferior. The unwillingness to recognize

the developmental gap between the First Nations and Western cultures, during the

Contact Period, has allowed people to romanticize ideas about the complexities of First

Nations’ society. Consequently, persons who service Native Studies do not have to prove

8

Native Studies

their truth claims with reliable evidence. As a result:

Political scientists…are able to prevent their own truth claims from being scrutinized by arguing that their views are rooted in “Indigenist thought”, and therefore any challenging of their veracity is an indication of “Eurocentrism”. The tactic of name-calling is used to prevent the irrationality of “indigenous theories and methodologies” from being recognized. The result is that many of the arguments linking indigenous perspectives to decolonization have not been critically analyzed. This has enabled ideas that actually maintain aboriginal dependency and marginalization to be put forward under the banner of “decolonization” (Widdowson, 2008, p. 11).

The implication of Widdowson’s argument is that the desires of White professors

to portray Aboriginal culture as different and distinct isolates Aboriginal thought in the

field of Native Studies. Unfortunately, this means that First Nations methods will not be

exposed to intellectual challenges necessary for their progress. As a result, the entire

purpose of including Aboriginal content, giving voice to Aboriginal people, is thwarted

because Aboriginal perspective is contained in the untouchable box of Native Studies

(Widdowson 2008). Essentially, in Native Studies’ mad drive to purge itself of Western

thought it has subjugated itself to it; the exact opposite intention.

There is much to consider in regards to Native Studies classes in Saskatchewan.

The implications of Wheeler et al that the teachers of Native Studies should be

predominantly First Nations, and that the content must have distinctive Aboriginal

methods, proves to be a large obstacle: because the majority of teachers in Saskatchewan

are not First Nations. Beyond the concerns that low First Nations representation creates a

lack of significant role models for Aboriginal students, there is also the concern that the

material is being taught from a Eurocentric point of view (Lindsay 2003, Wheeler 2001).

One of the main concerns for non-aboriginal Native Studies teachers in Saskatchewan is

the idea that they are teaching a culture they are not necessarily familiar with, to a group

9

Native Studies

of students who belong to that culture. It would be akin to someone who cannot speak

French working in a Fransaskois school. It is conceivable that a non-aboriginal teacher

would be capable of learning the content of a First Nations class in a manner suitable to

teach it to the students. Indeed, if the University of Regina is to be believed, most

teachers should be capable of teaching any class, with the proper pedagogy. However, it

would require a great deal of self-awareness with regards to any bias the teacher may

have. There is also the concern, as Lindsay has already pointed out, that non-aboriginal

teachers may have a difficult time overcoming these biases and relating to the

experiences of their First Nations students.

Even more difficult is the view held by Widdowson that there is not necessarily

such thing as a unique Aboriginal approach. This idea flies directly in the face of the

policies laid out by the Ministry of Educations discussed at the beginning of this paper.

Though her point about the possibility of current Aboriginal methodologies being counter

productive may be valid, one can only imagine the amount of backlash that would occur

if the Ministry of Education adopted Widdowson’s views. It is no surprise that the topic

of Native Studies and Aboriginal content are touchy at best, considering the long history

of poor treatment of First Nations people in Canada, and even more recently the media

attention given to the atrocities conducted at residential schools in Saskatchewan.

While it may have seemed beneficial for First Nations students to create a

separate Native Studies program that better serves the Aboriginal population of the

province with regards to methods and content, it is perhaps fair to say that it has not met

its expectations. The majority of First Nations students are either failing or struggling to

10

Native Studies

pass, and creating a single separate class is not the answer of how best to tackle this

problem. Another concern that arises is the notion of exposure. What this means is that

by having a separate First Nations content class, schools are effectively instituting a

segregation policy. Though nobody is forcing non-aboriginal students into history or

social, or barring Aboriginal students from those same classes, the perception is that

Native Studies is for First Nations students and non-Aboriginal students who are not

smart enough to take a real humanities class. As a result, Native Studies has become a

sort of dumping ground for students to get an easy credit (Saskatchewan Bulletin 2007).

It is also possible for a student who attends a school with no Native Studies program to

go their entire educational career without being formally taught any First Nations content.

By not being exposed to any other cultural content, these students are not meeting the

expectations of the policies of the Ministry of Education.

So who exactly is benefiting from the Ministries policies, or are we simply falling

prey to superficial Aboriginal content like Widdowson warned about. What would seem

more beneficial to First Nations students would be a focus on the Aboriginal perspectives

in all curriculums. This holds especially true for the social sciences, which Native

Studies is currently a part of. Recently there has been a call for a reunification of Native

Studies into the history and social curriculum. By mandating that there be First Nations

content within these classes, it is ensured that every student in the province is given

access to Aboriginal perspectives (Saskatchewan Bulletin 2007). This is not to say that

every class needs to utilize aboriginal methods; because, as has been illustrated,

incorporating Aboriginal methods can be somewhat problematic, not only for non-

11

Native Studies

aboriginal teachers, but for First Nations teachers as well. What it does ensure, however,

is that there is a certain level of exposure to Aboriginal perspective, which can allow for a

higher level of empathy from non-aboriginal students, and the desire to work towards a

common future. Rick Ast, a member of the Regina Public Board of Education, through a

personal e-mail, expressed this same idea:

If there was a singular, unified, social studies course (Grades 10-12) that included the best of history, and Native Studies and social studies education. All students would have the opportunity to learn about and understand First Nations and Métis culture and history. It would have to be carefully constructed and well vetted. A common course would ensure that all students would learn about Treaties and First Nations and Métis history, culture and contemporary issues.This would strengthen the resolve for building a shared future together among all of the people of this province (March 31, 2009).

Through many different conversations with high school teachers involved with the social

sciences, the same notion that a unified curriculum, one without Native Studies, would be

the preference (personal communications with Shawn Stieb, Ben Freitag, and Mark

Leupold from Luther College High School, March 30 2009; and Brian Marin from

Archbishop M.C. O’Neill High School, December 2008).

It may be argued that the consensus for amalgamation of Native and social studies

seems to be amongst the non-aboriginal majority; however, Del Anaquod, Professor of

Indigenous Studies, and former president of the First Nations University of Canada, who

is a Cree man from the White Bear Reserve, holds the same view (Personal conversation,

April 2, 2009). Anaquod went on to say that he was asked, but had to decline, to chair a

committee charged with the task of creating a new social studies curriculum that includes

a significant amount of First Nations content, which should be released by the Ministry of

Education in the next few years. Anaquod is in favor of a more unified approach, and

feels that there needs to be greater inclusion of Aboriginal content in all class

12

Native Studies

curriculums, be it math, science, history, or religion. Wheeler even states that Native

Studies is trans-disciplinary in nature (p.100), and can therefore be applied to several

different disciplines, which also fits well with the policies of the Ministry of Education.

It seems counterintuitive then to want to limit Native Studies to one separate class.

The main obstacle that still remains after the assumed shift to a unified Social

Studies curriculum is the argument that non-aboriginals are not properly qualified to

teach First Nations perspectives. By instituting more Aboriginal content it would be

hoped that the success of First Nations students would increase, and that eventually the

number of those students attending post-secondary institutions would also increase.

Perhaps then there may be a rise in the number of First Nations students entering the

College of Education, and becoming teachers and role models for a new generation of

First Nations students. Unfortunately, at this point in time non-aboriginal teachers are just

going to have to do their best to ensure that Aboriginal perspectives are shown with as

little bias as possible. As suggested by the Ministries policy, the best method may be to

invite members of the Aboriginal community into the classroom to gain a more authentic

view. Teachers must at the same time be wary that the content presented by these

community members is relevant, and just as open to critical evaluation as the rest of the

content of the class. The goal should be to improve the educational opportunities to all

members of society in order to share a more unified vision of the future.

13

Native Studies

References:

Lindsay, W. G. (2003). The Key and the Coveted: An Exposé on the Lack of First Nations Representation in the First Nations Studies Programs at the College and University Level. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies Vol. 23 (1), 185-194.

Ministry of Education. (2008). Saskatchewan Education Indicators- Pre-kindergarten to Grade 12. Government of Saskatchewan. Retrieved from http://www.education.gov.sk.ca/AAR_Indicators_Program

Price, J. A. (1981). Native Studies in Canadian Universities and Colleges. Canadian Journal of Native Studies Vol. 1(2), p. 349-361.

Rice, B. (2003). The Whitewashing of Native Studies Programs and Programming in Academic Institutions. American Indian Quarterly Vol. 27 (1), 381- 385.

Saskatchewan Learning. (2003). Building Partnerships: First Nations and Métis Peoples and the Provincial Education System- Policy Framework for Saskatchewan's Pre-kindergarten to Grade 12 Education System. Government of Saskatchewan. Retrieved from http://www.publications.gov.sk.ca/details.cfm?p=11498

Stonechild, B. (2006). Aboriginal Peoples of Saskatchewan. In The Encyclopedia of Saskatchewan Online. Retrieved from http://esask.uregina.ca/entry/aboriginal_peoplesof_saskatchewan.html

Teachers left with plenty to ponder after Kókom and Mosõm workshop. (2007, November 21). Saskatchewan Bulletin, p.2

Wheeler, W. (2001). Thoughts on the Responsibilities for Indigenous/Native Studies. The Canadian Journal of Native Studies, Vol.21 (1), p. 97-104.

Widdowson, F. (2008). Native Studies and Canadian Political Science: The

14

Native Studies

Implications of “Decolonizing the Discipline.” Unpublished paper prepared for the annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association. Retrieved from http://www.cpsa-acsp.ca/papers-2008/Widdowson.pdf

15