What Do Indigenous Education Policy Frameworks Reveal about Commitments to Reconciliation in Canadian School Systems?

Abstract

The national Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada has challenged governments and school boards across Canada to acknowledge and address the damaging legacies of residential schooling while ensuring that all students gain an adequate understanding of relations between Indigenous Peoples and non-Indigenous peoples. This article explores the dynamics and prospects for effective change associated with reforms in elementary and secondary education systems since the release of the Commission’s Calls to Action, focusing on the policy frameworks employed by provincial and territorial governments to guide these actions. The analysis examines critically the overt and hidden messages conveyed through discourses within policy documents and statements. The key questions we address include: What do current education policy frameworks and actions regarding Indigenous Peoples reveal about government approaches to education and settler–Indigenous relationships in Canada? To what extent is effective reconciliation possible, and how can it be accomplished in the context of institutional structures and discourses within a White settler colonial society? The findings reveal that substantial movement towards greater acknowledgement of Indigenous knowledge systems and incorporation of Indigenous content continues to be subordinated to or embedded within Western assumptions, norms, and standards.

“Errors were made:” Public attitudes regarding reconciliation and education in Canada

“…Relatively little research to date has explored how schools are responding to calls to action to facilitate reconciliation, and even less on the impact of these initiatives. Our findings reinforce the general conclusion that schools’ activities in relation to reconciliation are characterized by mixed signals at various levels – in what they are doing, in how these activities are being understood, and in the ways that they have been influenced or interpreted among wider publics (e.g., Gebhard, 2017; Gibson & Case, 2019; Wotherspoon & Milne, 2020). In this paper we have advanced the understanding of processes that have contributed to these outcomes by exploring more directly both the public contexts in which these initiatives are undertaken and the ways in which schools’ activities have been understood and assessed by community members.…”

“…In particular, it emphasizes the dual significance of schooling as deeply implicated in the colonial oppression of Indigenous peoples and cultures but also as essential for advancing new relationships, understandings, and opportunities (TRC, 2015, p. 234). Schools across the nation have embraced the challenge on several fronts, advancing initiatives to improve educational outcomes for Indigenous students, seeking to engage Indigenous peoples in educational decision‐making and practices, and introducing curricula and activities to ensure authentic representation of Indigenous peoples, cultures, and experiences (Wotherspoon & Milne, 2020). Yet, as these initiatives continue to expand, events like the forceful removal of Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs and supporters from protests to protect rights to their traditional territories in early 2020 have mobilized prominent Indigenous writers and community members to declare that “reconciliation is dead,” if in fact it ever existed (Starblanket & Green, 2020; Szeto, 2020; Talaga, 2020).…”

“…Initial actions following the release of the final report of the TRC suggested a strong will to move forward (Government of Canada, 2017, 2019). Education ministries and school authorities across Canada have implemented an extensive array of educational reforms through curriculum development, cultural activities and workshops, consultation with Indigenous partners, and other initiatives (Gibson & Case, 2019; KAIROS Canada, 2018; Wotherspoon & Milne, 2020). Public opinion reinforces the sentiment that reconciliation is important for the nation; though perspectives are mixed in the Prairie region where support for reconciliation tends to be lower and negative views about Indigenous peoples are more pronounced than in other regions (Angus Reid Institute, 2015; Environics Institute, 2016, 2019a; Jedwab, 2019; Office of the Treaty Commissioner, 2019a, 2019b; Parkin et al., 2017).…”

“…While collective myths are important for maintaining state legitimacy and mobilizing populations for common purposes, they can also give rise to tensions associated with the differentiation and relative positioning of insiders and outsiders as illustrated by the case of Québec and the rest of Canada (Bouchard, 2013). In the Canadian context, where jurisdictional responsibility for schooling lies with provinces and territories, it is possible for curricula to tell multiple stories about the nation's founding and identity (Bouchard, 2013; Stamp, 1971; Von Heyking, 2006; Wotherspoon & Milne, 2020). These dominant narratives, framed as “official knowledge” and enacted through the dynamics of schooling processes, conceal and reproduce various forms of exclusion and inequality (Apple, 2000; Bernstein, 1971; Bourdieu & Passeron, 1977; Lareau, 2011; Smith, 2000; Weis, 2004).…”

Public perspectives on curriculum reform for truth and reconciliation in Canada

“…Implementation of key measures in nearly all areas has been limited, despite the fact that the Calls have been formally endorsed by the federal government as well as provincial and territorial governments (Assembly of First Nations, 2020;Jewell & Mosby, 2020). In the realm of schooling, while an extensive range of curricular and pedagogical initiatives have been introduced across the country, evidence regarding their reach and success remains mixed (Historica Canada, 2021;KAIROS Canada, 2018;Wotherspoon & Milne, 2020b). This pattern also describes the varying degrees of support among Canadians for public policies oriented to Indigenous peoples as well as the divergent views within the population on the legacy of residential schools and the rights and status of Indigenous peoples (Angus Reid Institute, 2018;Environics Institute, 2019).…”