Indigenous Teacher Education Is Nation Building: Reflections of Capacity Building and Capacity Strengthening in Idaho

Abstract

This article discusses the efforts of the Indigenous Knowledge for Effective Education Program (IKEEP), at the University of Idaho, a predominately white institution (PWI) of higher education, and its struggle to create space in higher education for intentional support of Indigenous self-determination, sovereignty, and Tribal nation building through the preparation of Indigenous teachers. In doing so, we examine the contentious and local work of reimagining education, from the bottom up and top down, to develop leaders to serve the needs of Indigenous youth and communities through the vehicle of mainstream institutions. With data from a multiyear ethnographic documentation, we examine the experiences of IKEEP program administration, teacher mentors, and students through the conceptual lens of Tribal nation building in higher education. Our findings underscore how teacher education programs at PWIs need to engage in a radical shift toward seeing Indigenous teachers as nation builders and to prioritize the infrastructure and programmatic collaboration to support them and their communities as such.

Supporting Indigenous Students in Science and STEM Education: A Systematic Review

“…Of the 24 studies included in this review, two studies, Anthony-Stevens et al [34] and Miller and Roehrig [35], reported hybrid programs that occurred in both formal school contexts (i.e., in-school activities) and out-of-school informal settings (i.e., field trip). Both these programs had Indigenous knowledge keepers participating in the implementation as mentors guiding students' field trips.…”

“…In one program, students experienced and reflected on a traditional outdoor game for 12 weeks [35]. The other program engaged students in exploring topics related to local ecosystems, such as watershed and solar energy, for an academic year [34]. Both programs happened every year and incorporated technologies to support students' learning.…”

“…Involvement of technology was emphasized in four studies (17%). In these programs, students either used technology tools (e.g., Google Earth, GIS, design software programs, or coding applications) for their own projects [25,34] or participated in the program in an online learning environment [35]. Three studies (13%) were assigned with the code others because they had features which were not included in these aforementioned categories.…”

“…Three studies (13%) were assigned with the code others because they had features which were not included in these aforementioned categories. These features were intergenerational collaboration [20], sociopolitical perspective [37], and relationship building with the mentors [34].…”

“…Five studies (21%) presented how the programs improved Indigenous students' interests in science and fostered their positive attitudes towards science, such as Anthony-Stevens et al [34] and Hackling et al [32]. Four studies (17%) reported programs' positive…”