Four Stories

Listening

We didn’t go to the community with a draft document in hand. We didn’t manipulate the process in terms of anticipating where we would land or what the final strategy would look like. We went to the community with an open heart and open mind, and we just listened. And what we heard—all of those words, the stories, and the essence of them—is reflected in our strategy. In looking back, I am grateful for our approach. I felt like we had a humble approach as listeners, and I think we truly did listen. During our community dialogues, we also had others in the room who were reflective listeners. They visited each of the tables throughout the day to capture nuances of conversations as they were unfolding. We had note takers, but we really needed that heart connection—an introspective listener or reflective witness to move from table to table to get a sense of how the dialogue was going and how people were responding to some of the questions that we put to the table.

Shawna Cunningham

Hard Stories

During the Gathering Stories phase of our process, we learned of the stories of residential school survivors here in our area. I am sure that these stories were hard to tell—I know that they were very difficult to hear. We appreciated the gift of hearing these stories—they strengthened our resolve and sense of responsibility and obligation to make sure that we got the strategy right. We learned of overt racism on our campus—from both students and staff—these stories were also hard to hear, and frankly it is unacceptable that these stories exist on our campus. We must tackle the issue of racism head on if we are truly going to create a campus where everyone feels valued and included.

Dru Marshall

Square Corners and Circles

The other comment that stands out from the Elders’ dialogue was a private comment made in passing by one of the Elders. The Elder said to me, “Everything on this campus has square corners, and that’s the way that all of you are trained to think.” It’s a very structured approach to the world. And the Elder said, “We don’t think in square corners, we think in circles, and you need to understand what that means.” And at first glance it’s a simple statement, but as I’ve thought about it now for a few years, to me it reflects a very different foundational assumption about how the world works and how we all interact with one another and our obligations to one another. So that simple statement about square corners and circles still has me thinking how do I change my assumptions about the world to get rid of square corners?

Jackie Sieppert

Coming Together

I recall being touched and excited about layering our gatherings with Indigenous ways of doing: creating ethical spaces, talking circles, beading, Pendleton pouches with rocks from Moh’kinstsis, Elders’ prayers, pipe ceremonies, the sweet smell of sweetgrass and sage smudge, Indigenous speakers and stories. It seemed surreal. With these traditional practices, I hoped that the Indigenous people who attended the dialogue sessions would feel affirmed and summon the courage to share truths and be honest about their overall relationship with schooling. I also hoped that non-Indigenous participants would appreciate the symbolism and the different ways of coming together. I witnessed people truly listen to each other and some otherwise soft-spoken individuals exercise their voices. As a community, we were envisioning a new future. As I walked around the room of the largest intercultural gathering that we hosted, I felt the energy in the room: apprehension, fear, nervousness, excitement, appreciation, hope, and happiness.

Jacqueline Ottmann

Bringing the Stories Home

The third stage of our Indigenous journey framework entailed the review and analysis of large amounts of information compiled from diverse sources. This began with campus leaders and members of the Working Group who compiled information from the university-wide internal scan, a series of campus focus groups, and an external scan that provided information on where other postsecondary institutions were at in terms of Indigenous programming, strategic development, and responses to the Final Report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC 2015). To this foundation, we then added narrative data from our in-person community dialogues. Notetakers captured the narratives, which included many vital stories shared by individuals who participated in the dialogues and table conversations. Finally, we compiled and integrated the results from on-campus focus groups and the online survey into these analyses. For the survey, we analyzed responses to open-ended questions and added the results to the data that guided development of the Indigenous Strategy.

Key leaders guided the analysis. With assistance from gifted doctoral students Vicki Bouvier (Métis/Michif) and Gabrielle Lindstrom (Kainai/ Blackfoot), and two faculty members, David Lertzman and Jim Frideres, Jacqueline Ottmann (Anishinaabe) led the narrative analysis of the three in-person community engagement dialogues: the Inner-City Dialogue, the Stakeholders/Full-Circle Dialogue, and the Traditional Knowledge Keepers Dialogue. The narrative data/stories went through a rigorous coding process done manually and through NVivo.¹ Ottmann, Bouvier, and Lindstrom, the data analysis team, came together each week to discuss the process and progress of the analysis (e.g., words and phrases that formed the codes [nodes] and emerging findings, discussion of quotations that supported the findings). The team then analyzed textual data from the 1,370 respondents who completed an online survey available to the internal and external communities from November 4 to December 5, 2016.

The extensive narrative findings from the community dialogues and public survey were integrated into a summary report. The results presented here were drawn from that report. The findings from these diverse and rich sources of data represent “what we heard” to guide the journey toward an Indigenous Strategy.

Rather than detailing specific results from each data source, in this chapter we “bring the stories home” by organizing information into five core themes identified from the analyses: (1) understanding barriers to postsecondary education, (2) challenging institutional myths about Indigenous peoples, (3) becoming a welcoming place, (4) expanding worldviews, and (5) listening deeply to Traditional Knowledge Keepers. We begin by reflecting on potential barriers that Indigenous students face when considering postsecondary education.

Understanding Barriers to Postsecondary Education

Important stories about the significant barriers that Indigenous students face emerged from the first moments of our consultations—the Inner-City Dialogue held at Fort Calgary. At that event, we hoped to hear stories that would help us to understand how the University of Calgary was perceived in our community. It was also important to learn more about how community members imagined ways that the university could be of service through teaching, learning, research, and partnerships. What we heard most powerfully, though, were descriptions of negative experiences with school systems and several deeply personal stories about why Indigenous people did not attend postsecondary institutions.

For many, the first thing that came to mind when thinking about postsecondary education was the challenge of coming from families or communities where education was valued but not accessible because of societal, economic, academic barriers, and the lack of family support given negative perceptions of Eurocentric education systems. This was not a surprise to us. Education was described as a struggle and difficult to access for reasons related to historical efforts at assimilation (e.g., systemic barriers legislated by the Indian Act, Indian residential schools, permit systems, enfranchisement). It was clear that the residential school experience and the associated trauma of physical, verbal, and emotional violence are still present and continue to profoundly shape experiences of education.

Participants pointed to several core challenges stemming from their negative experiences with Western systems, such as low achievement results, the lack of diversity on university campuses, struggles with addiction, trauma, and funding shortfalls. Being the first family member to attend a postsecondary institution was also described as difficult because of culture shock, unfamiliarity with the processes, expectations, and ways of navigating funding and program scheduling.

Prior experiences with dominant school systems have been problematic for many Indigenous people. For many who responded to us, schooling meant struggles, alienation, isolation, and a general lack of support. Some participants shared their residential school experiences and stories of being forced to go to school. Moreover, some thought that they were never a part of the school environment because generally there was a small number of Indigenous students in rural and urban schools. This was compounded by the absence of Indigenous cultural presence in our education systems. For some, not seeing references to their own cultures created the feeling of isolation and a sense that postsecondary institutions generally were unwelcoming to Indigenous students. Multiple participants asserted that there is a lack of recognition and understanding of Indigenous students’ adverse life experiences, including trauma, loss, poverty, racism, and social marginalization.

Having a strong sense of Indigenous identity was described as important to the process of education, and those struggling with their own identities expressed doubts about postsecondary education. In the dialogues, some participants talked about their experiences of being “mixed-race” and how it challenged the development of a healthy sense of Indigenous identity. Some thought that those in “mainstream society” often conceptualized indigeneity as deficient and that this conception created a significant barrier to their participation in higher education. They indicated that such a perspective negatively affected their self-esteem and resulted in a tenuous relationship with their Indigenous identities. In general, some participants thought that they did not look Indigenous enough, whereas others felt the need to hide their indigeneity.

These questions of identity were clearly related to stories of racism and exclusion. Racism was consistently identified as a concerning and recurring theme in our data collection. In some of the table conversations at our community dialogues, participants mentioned that they had been dealing with racism since childhood. Many also said that racism among students, teachers, and administrators had continued into their postsecondary experiences. We heard stories of professors and other students who had told Indigenous students that they should just take Native Studies courses or that the university’s Native Centre was not equipped to deal with racism on campus. Several participants noted that educational institutions, including universities, lack the necessary emotional, mental, and spiritual supports to ameliorate or manage the effects of racism and racial violence for Indigenous students, staff, and faculty. That is, the lack of campus-wide action plans aimed at combatting racism was seen as a significant barrier for Indigenous students at postsecondary institutions.

Importantly, examples of racism went beyond the stories told by Indigenous participants in our consultations. Analysis of comments submitted through the public survey also revealed clear and troubling racism. Although few, these overt comments revealed that racism toward Indigenous people was real on our campus and would have to be overcome if we were to be truly supportive of Indigenous students, staff, and faculty.

Several Indigenous learners pointed, of course, to university structures and processes as substantial barriers to postsecondary education. Many suggested that processes to access postsecondary education were rigid and focused on measures of educational success that reward Eurocentric ways of knowing. Existing university policies were also described as narrowly defined and exclusionary. Examples included postsecondary recruitment procedures, entrance requirements, timelines, and discrepant expectations between reserve and provincial schools.

Another significant barrier identified throughout our conversations was the lack of funding for Indigenous students across Canada. The dialogues included comments from or about individuals who were accepted into programs but were unable to attend them because of the lack of postsecondary funding. Participants also commented about insufficient funding available to individual First Nations students. Some pointed to challenges with sponsorship opportunities available through the Post-Secondary Student Support Program (PSSSP) funded by Indigenous Services Canada. They described the PSSSP as insufficient since the federal program does not cover the number of First Nations students who apply and are eligible for sponsorship. Participants said that PSSSP sponsorship is difficult to receive, and if received the amount allocated to individuals does not meet the increasingly high costs of education and living.

Despite the significant obstacles that Indigenous students face in seeking postsecondary education, our research analysis also identified a strong sense of optimism about the roles of universities in supporting Indigenous people. Despite the challenges associated with postsecondary education, some participants highlighted positive schooling experiences. They believed that education is an opportunity for self-discovery and to learn about Indigenous histories and current issues in Canada, especially regarding residential schools and Indigenous identities. Some participants noted that education is a source of hope for Indigenous people and that school is important. The positive aspects of the educational experience might be conceptualized as a range of protective factors that help mitigate challenges created by colonized school systems. Indigenous people might be more likely to overcome the lack of Indigenous cultural presence on campus if they have a keen sense of personal determination to contribute to their communities.

Challenging Myths about Indigenous Peoples

Discussion related to the institution’s inclusion of Indigenous peoples and cultural competence revealed several important themes centred on the need to dispel prevalent myths about Indigenous peoples. The first might be framed best by a concept called the “affective domain,” which refers to an emotive dynamic that, in this case, maintains and perpetuates negative conceptualizations of Indigenous peoples (Krathwohle, Bloom, and Masia 1973).²

Using the affective domain to analyze the emotive aspects of the data, we discovered that participants wanted negative attitudes and affective conceptualizations about Indigenous peoples to change. This was a significant and recurring theme across the dialogue sessions. Negative conceptualizations identified during table conversations included perception of or actual exposure to elitist attitudes among some University of Calgary faculty members and leaders. Some Indigenous community members perceived the university itself as intimidating and postsecondary education as unattainable. They noted that challenging and changing attitudes, values, and belief systems of the dominant society will also change how people interact, thereby increasing the long-term quality of relationships.

A subtheme of “epistemic conflicts” (Wagner 2021) also emerged in our sessions. Epistemic conflicts are reflected in or emerge as racism, discrimination, and persistent marginalization of Indigenous peoples. Examples included the “othering” (Ahmed 2002 ; Spivak 1988) of Indigenous knowledge systems, implying that traditional Indigenous knowledge is inferior to Western knowledge—leading to the continued marginalization of Indigenous ways of knowing and doing in the academy. Epistemic conflicts are essentially clashes of worldviews, linked theoretically to epistemic violence and the colonization and imminent marginalization of others (Spivak 1988).

Throughout our dialogue sessions, but especially in our on-campus dialogues, there was a strong call to increase awareness of the lived realities of Indigenous peoples among non-Indigenous staff, faculty, and students. This included a demand that non-Indigenous members of the university learn about the histories and current realities of Indigenous peoples and their worldviews/perspectives.

Participants suggested that acknowledging these lived realities is critical to building relationships that help students to succeed. Front-line staff members, especially those working closely with Indigenous students, need opportunities to develop their knowledge, learn about the challenges that Indigenous students face, and realize how negative experiences affect the university experience. New faculty or employee “onboard” training needs to incorporate Indigenous facilitation of authentic content to generate understanding and empathy. Participants also mentioned ongoing professional development as important, with suggestions that non-Indigenous university members should learn about the TRC (2015) Calls to Action.

One element under the topic of “challenging myths regarding Indigenous peoples” did relate specifically to those Calls to Action. We heard demands that the University of Calgary respond to the calls. Many participants suggested that a first step would be to ensure that university staff are knowledgeable about Indigenous students’ realities, histories, issues, and barriers. Some suggested that this training be mandatory for all university personnel. They described this kind of professional learning as one way to increase the overall cultural competencies among non-Indigenous people.

Finally, data from the survey identified a general need to change the negative attitudes toward Indigenous peoples and cultures. A deeply entrenched colonial history has influenced the belief systems of Canadian society (often resulting in micro-aggression and biased behaviour), and colonial mindsets, behaviours, and policies are evident in education systems. Some participants suggested that anti-racist, anti-oppressive pedagogies be included in faculty and staff professional development programs to combat racist and discriminatory attitudes and actions and false information about Indigenous peoples. We were disappointed to see clearly, if not prevalent, racist comments from a small number of survey respondents.

Becoming More Welcoming

At the first Inner-City Dialogue held at Fort Calgary, several participants mentioned that postsecondary institutions are isolating and marginalizing environments for Indigenous people. Similar comments were made in the other community dialogue sessions, focus groups, and online survey. Participants identified a wide range of issues, including the non-inclusion of Indigenous cultures and cultural competencies in learning environments; the need for on-campus resources for Indigenous faculty, students, and staff; and a pressing need for authentic relationship building and anti-racist pedagogies.

A central and recurring theme related to the importance of ensuring that Indigenous perspectives and histories are evident and centred across campuses, especially in student programming and curricula. The pervasive under-representation of Indigenous perspectives on campuses was a frequent concern, as was the perception that postsecondary instructors demonstrated insufficient experience with, and knowledge of, Indigenous peoples and their histories, current experiences, cultures, and ways of knowing. There were concrete suggestions for how the university can indigenize and decolonize curricula by increasing program and course offerings with Indigenous content created by Indigenous scholars or educators, introducing more Indigenous-focused courses in every faculty, and increasing opportunities for experiential learning related to Indigenous cultures and traditions. Generally, participants thought that the university needed to create new programs and degree options based on Indigenous knowledge systems. Participants believed that, by making these curricular changes, the University of Calgary programming would be more appealing and relevant to the lived realities and career aspirations of Indigenous students. Such changes could also make the university an institution of choice for Indigenous students.

To create and deliver such enhanced programming in meaningful ways, the data clearly indicated that there needs to be broader hiring of Indigenous staff and faculty and inclusion of community members across the institution. Yet this need goes far beyond simply increasing the number of Indigenous personnel and students on campus. Their contributions would increase the visibility of Indigenous people through their sharing and highlighting of Indigenous stories, traditions, languages, and lived experiences. Participants also said that including Indigenous perspectives in curricula and programming would lead to an increase in Indigenous student enrolment and program retention since Indigenous students would feel represented and have a sense of belonging.

In the early stages of our dialogue sessions, we identified the need for increased cultural competence for all at the university. Participants suggested that there was a need to educate faculty and staff who work with Indigenous students (in both the K–12 and the postsecondary systems). They suggested that faculty and staff learn about the perspectives, histories, cultures, traditions, and lived experiences of Indigenous peoples. There was a call for the university to introduce more intercultural education for staff and faculty guided by the TRC Calls to Action (TRC 2015). Participants also noted that the university must invest in the education of non-Indigenous students, including international students and new immigrants, about Indigenous peoples’ histories, cultures, worldviews, and contemporary experiences in Canada. How these cross-cultural teachings are delivered and experienced is important since the goal is to facilitate learning and understanding from Indigenous perspectives.

Cultural Humility

As our dialogue sessions progressed, the conversation about cultural competence evolved significantly. Some participants argued that it would be impossible for non-Indigenous people to truly understand the worldviews and lived experiences of Indigenous peoples. Others stated that it was not enough to be “competent” in such understanding, for it would not necessarily change entrenched negative perspectives or behaviours. So these discussions shifted to the concept of cultural humility. Engaging in cultural humility would place Indigenous cultures on an equal footing with Eurocentric cultures and require non-Indigenous people to be prepared to reflect on, acknowledge, and interrogate the values, assumptions, and belief systems of the dominant cultural worldview that they have espoused.

The evolving discussion on cultural humility was closely connected to participants’ concerns about and experiences with negative, racist, discriminatory, and stereotypical attitudes toward Indigenous peoples and how these attitudes overtly and covertly permeate the university campus. Participants mentioned that these attitudes could be found among university structures, governance and policies, educational programs, campus media, and faculty and leadership. Participants also suggested that universities are in fact steeped in systemic racism. They said that offering more opportunities for non-Indigenous faculty, staff, and students to engage in activities that increase cross-cultural understanding would help to alleviate racial biases and perhaps change negative individual mentalities. There was also a specific recommendation to make trauma-informed education a part of efforts aimed at Indigenous inclusion since Indigenous students can be retraumatized by existing university structures and processes. It was apparent that trauma and intergenerational trauma were still parts of the lived experiences of Indigenous students, many of whom were beginning or still on the path toward healing.

Another theme related to the topic of “making campuses more welcoming” revolved around the enhancement of specific on-campus resources for Indigenous students and staff. This theme highlighted meeting the basic needs of students (e.g., food, shelter, transportation) along with providing cultural and academic support for them (from university admission to program completion). Participants suggested on-campus resources such as food and clothing banks, affordable housing options, access to cultural supports, more space for traditional cultural and ceremonial practices, and access to degree programs through online and virtual learning initiatives. They also suggested that additional resources need to be dedicated to recruitment and accessible admission policies and procedures for Indigenous students at the university, including attention to more culturally sensitive criteria and guidelines for university and program admission. Other ideas included promoting and implementing transitional and bridging programs or courses made for Indigenous students and orientation and community outreach initiatives designed for them. Finally, participants also identified increasing online course and program opportunities for Indigenous students, especially those in remote and rural communities.

Some Concrete Steps

We heard a specific call to ensure that available support services include Indigenous perspectives on healing. Participants argued that wellness must focus on healing from trauma and that healing processes are essential for student and community success. They noted that, for healing to begin, trust must be gained, and once trust is achieved Indigenous people will be more willing to attend postsecondary institutions and feel safer on their campuses. Supporting student wellness was a recurring theme. Participants recommended providing supports and mechanisms that enabled students to adjust to postsecondary and city life away from their families.

Participants also suggested that increased financial aid for Indigenous students—such as scholarships, subsidized tuition, and reduced application fees—would increase their engagement. In our online survey, several respondents expressed the need to increase funding to support Indigenous programming on campus with an emphasis on the Native Centre, now known as the Writing Symbols Lodge.³

Participants identified culturally appropriate, on-campus resources and supports and many concrete steps that the university should consider. Following are some of their suggestions.

• There should be increased Elder involvement on campus and opportunities for Indigenous and non-Indigenous people to practise ceremony (particularly smudging).
• Safe and welcoming spaces should be created and maintained to allow for the inclusion, rather than the segregation, of Indigenous students.
• Services should be developed to support Indigenous students during transitional phases, especially during their first year.
• There should be on-campus housing for Indigenous students and their families.
• A climate should be created that ensures positive relationships with campus staff, especially the registrar’s office, perhaps through cross-cultural professional development training.
• There should be campus-wide awareness of the many services offered by the Native Centre (now called the Writing Symbols Lodge).
• There should be increased Indigenous cultural visibility as reflected in place naming, arts, and architecture.

The points related to physical places and spaces are important and should be highlighted. Many participants in our dialogues underlined the lack of historical and contemporary representations of Indigenous peoples throughout the campus. Respondents pointed to the importance of acknowledging traditional territories, increasing the visibility of Indigenous cultures on campus through art and architecture, making First Nations and Métis flags permanent fixtures, and naming places and spaces after significant Indigenous people and historical events. There was also a call to create more and improved spaces that facilitate cross-cultural exchanges, including Indigenous cultural celebrations open to the public, ceremonial events, and spaces for Elders where Indigenous and non-Indigenous students are welcome for advice and support.

We heard that Indigenous peoples do not see themselves in any of the university’s physical spaces. Our data analysis identified a strong demand for the creation of physical spaces in which Indigenous people feel represented, welcomed, and valued on campus. Creating designated Indigenous spaces would amplify the relationship with the land. More green spaces on campus (e.g., gardens, sacred plants) would facilitate connections to nature. We heard many suggestions about how to consciously change the campus architecture, landscape, and art. Some of the suggestions were ambitious, such as the construction of a dedicated Indigenous peoples building to serve as a venue for cultural teachings and events or dedicated transitional housing for first-year Indigenous students.

We heard many comments about the importance of ceremonial space, specifically the space to smudge on campus without having to pay for it or being restricted to the Writing Symbols Lodge. Overall, participants suggested, connection to and comfort with a space or place happen when people see themselves in it. Spaces that celebrate and honour Indigenous peoples include, but are not limited to, amphitheatres, tipis erected in the proper way with the appropriate protocol, art, and Indigenous-language place names.

Relationship Building

From our dialogue sessions, a final theme—“becoming more welcoming to Indigenous peoples”—was about the importance of relationship building. Participants believed that, to indigenize our institution, there must be a fundamental commitment to reimagining the relationship with Indigenous peoples and their communities. The participants often framed relational change as moving from transactional engagement to mutually beneficial relations. They stated that services to students must be holistic and family centred, helping the university to gain a better understanding of Indigenous students’ struggles and lived experiences in the context of a culture based on collectivism and familial relationships. They also pointed to the need for multi-dimensional collaboration. Collaboration among the institution’s units could help to avoid the “siloing” of Indigenous people or perspectives and provide opportunities for departments to exchange ideas, discuss challenges, and reach solutions. Networking and partnering among multiple postsecondary institutions could ensure smooth transitions (transfers) between universities to improve educational mobility and increase the ability to identify and address common challenges that Indigenous students experience. Perhaps most importantly, participants suggested that universities move beyond their historical spaces and domains to work side by side with Indigenous communities, both physically and metaphorically.

Expanding Worldviews

As the Inner-City Dialogue concluded, participants called for the University of Calgary to work with Indigenous communities to move beyond dominant worldviews deeply rooted within the institution’s structures and processes. We heard calls for the university to shift models for teaching and learning, with a focus on creating curricula inclusive of First Nations, Métis, and Inuit worldviews, histories, and lived experiences. These calls also addressed the institution’s core research policies and processes. To conduct research, participants suggested, the university should be guided by a fundamental commitment to develop respectful and reciprocal relationships with Indigenous communities. These discussions also highlighted core issues, such as acceptance of Indigenous ways of knowing, ownership of intellectual property, the critical role of ceremony, and policies and procedures related to research ethics.

Enhancing Teaching and Learning

In terms of teaching and learning at the University of Calgary, the dialogue sessions revealed a strong sense that Indigenous worldviews and ways of knowing were both under-represented and unappreciated on campus. Participants argued that the institution must better bridge Indigenous knowledge(s) and practices with its teaching and learning. There were numerous suggestions about how to do so. Participants called for the university to embrace Indigenous pedagogies, which would require an examination of its current pedagogies and learning evaluation strategies. Other ideas focused on enhancing community engagement to identify common points of interest and developing a staff and faculty cross-cultural education program.

Many respondents thought that it was important to actively pursue changes to the university’s curricula. Some argued that these changes must be evident in all courses across the university, not just those specific to one faculty or department. There were suggestions for mandatory inclusion of Indigenous knowledges and perspectives in course content. This went beyond the inclusion of specific historical topics, and suggestions included creating new pedagogies such as land-based learning and ceremony. To accomplish this goal, participants stated, Elders should be involved at every stage of teaching and learning design and be present to support students in actual learning activities.

In addition to the shift in course design, some participants spoke about the importance of having more non-credit learning opportunities available to students, faculty, and staff. Examples included lecture series, lunch and learns, increased cultural events on campus, and awareness training. These opportunities would increase learning about the colonial history of Canada and Indigenous worldviews, practices, and protocols.

Participants suggested that including Indigenous worldviews in curricula would require extensive consultation and collaboration with Indigenous community members, leaders, students, educational leaders, and Elders. They also thought that more content should be developed or led by Indigenous scholars and educators and that classroom pedagogies engage with Indigenous knowledges and ceremonies when appropriate. Participants suggested that this could be done by bringing in more Indigenous guest speakers and Elders and Traditional Knowledge Keepers. Some participants asked about the academic and research backgrounds of sessional instructors and/or faculty members hired to teach Indigenous-based courses at the University of Calgary, implying that some instructors had insufficient knowledge and/or experience. We heard regular calls for the university to focus on hiring more Indigenous faculty who can authentically inform and engage learners across campus.

To strengthen Indigenous programming and curricula, participants stated, the university should implement anti-colonial and anti-racist pedagogies, adopt co-teaching strategies, and provide more opportunities to leave campus to learn (e.g., visiting reserves to learn from community members and Elders or engage in land-based learning). Adopting these strategies in a meaningful way would require involving Traditional Knowledge Keepers (e.g., teaching about knowledge systems) and honouring their knowledge as parallel to that of those with PhDs.

In all of the dialogue sessions, participants mentioned that an Indigenous course be mandatory for all students. All students would therefore learn about sophisticated Indigenous knowledge systems and the history of colonization and its impacts on Indigenous peoples. However, some participants expressed mixed feelings about whether this course would be beneficial. Some indicated that it would evoke all kinds of emotions, including fear of change, and that faculty pushback should be expected and not underestimated.

Finally, participants mentioned the importance of celebrating success among Indigenous students, staff, faculty, and projects. Although their comments likely extend beyond teaching and learning specifically, they do indicate that we could measure success by tracking the numbers of Indigenous instructors and graduates, noteworthy curricular changes, and increases to teaching about Indigenous histories and worldviews. Focusing on success could change educational discourses from trauma-based to strength-based positive perspectives.

Re-Envisioning Research

As we expected, the community dialogues and online survey included many comments about research, a central function of the University of Calgary. Many participants in the dialogue sessions identified the need to reposition, or reconceptualize, research at the university. They noted that research is valid when undertaken with Indigenous research methodologies and that quality research is not exclusive to Western worldviews. They asked questions about the openness of the university to Indigenous research methodologies. We also heard comments that research is value laden and thus reflective of Eurocentric societal value systems with which the university is clearly aligned. Some questioned whether the university’s fundamental research processes could change. Regardless, they thought that this reconceptualization of research was an important process of decolonization for the university.

A dominant theme on the topic of research related to engagement and consultation with Indigenous communities and students. Repeatedly, many participants mentioned that university researchers must ask Indigenous students and communities what they want, need, and see as important: that is, what matters to them? Many thought that non-Indigenous research agendas have driven research on Indigenous peoples for far too long and that it is time for Indigenous peoples to determine what is important. This entails far more than just control over the research questions. Instead, participants suggested, research frameworks must expand to appropriately honour Indigenous knowledges, methodologies, and the essential roles of protocol and ceremony.

Notably, an important aspect of respectful research frameworks focused on capacity building. This includes resources such as funding for Indigenous gifting and honoraria, seed money for Indigenous research projects, and monetary incentives for those engaging in Indigenous research. However, capacity building is much broader in scope for the participants. On campus, it is also related to the importance of Indigenous knowledge training for faculty, administration, and service staff. Off campus, it involves ensuring that research processes help to build knowledge and sustainability for Indigenous communities rather than being an extractive process that leaves little behind.

Several institutional and social barriers were identified as key in the process of reimagining research within postsecondary contexts and ultimately universities’ abilities to serve Indigenous communities. Examples include the inability of non-Indigenous researchers to make meaningful connections with Indigenous communities, ongoing encounters with systemic and individual racism, micro-aggression, discrimination, social marginalization, lack of funding for community-driven research, and the privileging of science and social science research over Indigenous methodologies.

Participants suggested that these barriers lead to hesitancy among Indigenous communities to engage with outside researchers because of negative experiences. Importantly, many of the barriers identified had little or nothing to do with research. Instead, many conversations focused on the social marginalization of Indigenous peoples, culturally inappropriate testing methods, and a general sense of not feeling welcomed by, or able to succeed in, the university.

Participants stated that a core part of reconceptualizing research is identifying and understanding various research interests. This critical theme emerged in the context of Indigenous people’s past experiences with research and encompassed the subthemes of appropriation and the long history of mistrust. Current research, according to one participant, only validates what Elders already know, but it is published as if the findings are new knowledge. Participants also expressed concern about government- and industry-funded research and how it affects Indigenous communities, especially regarding the environment, health and wellness policies, employment, and social programming.

Two ways to mitigate research unwanted by Indigenous peoples are to have Indigenous representation in the research process from the beginning and to ensure that the research will benefit the community. It was clear that Indigenous people will no longer tolerate being put under the microscope by outsiders. Participants described Indigenous-driven research as having an action-oriented framework and a strengths-based orientation that help to dispel the myths about Indigenous peoples.

Alternative research pathways, although broadly conceptualized, primarily involved creating new norms for evaluation, promotion, and tenure and dissemination/publication of results. Participants suggested that there should be ways of disseminating results other than through the publication of articles and that the community should be involved in the dissemination and be given proper recognition. The pressure to publish was perceived as a frustration, and one participant thought that Indigenous research should not be seen as purely an academic endeavour or responsibility and that learning about Indigenous research methodologies should be promoted as an equally rigorous and a complementary academic activity rather than an enforced add-on.

Finally, participants described the processes of conducting and applying research through Indigenous worldviews and methodologies as very different from the dominant research models in universities. They indicated that the shift to respectfully recognizing Indigenous research methodologies is reliant on a strong commitment to community involvement and an authentic, meaningful consultation in research initiatives. Participants regularly pointed to the need for respectful relationship building that begins with Indigenous communities taking the lead in determining what to research, how it is researched, and how the results are disseminated. This was often framed as authentic community-driven research. There seemed to be overall agreement that collaborative partnerships must include Indigenous communities, funding bodies, policy makers, governance structures, and individual researchers. Support should be given to Indigenous researchers, their research should be showcased, and Elders’ wisdom should be part of the research process (e.g., the application of Indigenous research ethics alongside university research ethics).

The demand for recognition of diverse worldviews (e.g., ways of conducting research and practising pedagogy and service) touched on other key aspects of university operations. For example, both dialogue participants and survey respondents pointed to the university’s process for making faculty promotions and annual assessments. They viewed this process as inherently competitive and based on a Eurocentric framework misaligned with traditional Indigenous values of community and Indigenous faculty members’ cultures. One participant noted that the barriers encountered in society are reproduced in university structures, programs, and policies, especially in individual performance assessment and evaluation processes.

As a final note, some participants argued that the act of implementing an Indigenous strategy would demand new and unique relationships with Indigenous communities. Many participants in both the dialogues and the survey thought that Indigenous people should take the lead in developing and implementing the Indigenous Strategy and in how success is defined and measured.

Listening Deeply: Traditional Knowledge

This chapter would not be complete without essential knowledge shared by Traditional Knowledge Keepers at a full-day dialogue held on the university campus on November 18, 2016. They represented a range of Indigenous Nations and diverse experiences with the University of Calgary and the postsecondary system.

Throughout the day, reflective listeners heard stories and recorded reflections on the discussion. A narrative analysis was then conducted on the recorded reflections. Additionally, Dr. David Lertzman, a faculty member from the Haskayne School of Business and a member of the Indigenous Strategy Working Group, contributed his notes and interpretive analysis of the Elders’ dialogue, creating an opportunity for further reflection and cross-referencing based on what we heard.

Given the personal, cultural, spiritual, and sacred nature of this gathering, those engaged in the analysis of the information and stories shared by the Elders realized that the analytical process had to be different from standard thematic coding methods. The two graduate students engaged in the data analysis could not move forward with the analysis of the Elders’ stories using the NVivo software because of the internal dilemma that they felt. The stories sat for weeks as the lead, Jacqueline Ottmann, prayed and reflected on a respectful process that would honour the Elders’ words. Ultimately, she decided to present the information shared by the Elders in a creative form that reflected the fluidity, straightforwardness, and subtlety embedded in the stories. She used a creative analytical approach to express the results of this dialogue in prose. In the poem below, one fictional Elder shared the themes that surfaced during this impactful session. Essentially, this fictional Elder presented the wisdom of all the Elders at this session in a compilation of important truths and teachings for the university.

The Gifting

by Jacqueline Ottmann

There is a strong spiritual dimension, look it’s evidenced in all things.

In humility, we speak from our own perspectives, of our own processes of“coming to know” from personal lived experiences.

We do not own the land, we belong to it. The land is sacred, from it we are born

and reborn each day. We are renewed. The land provides the laws, practices, and

protocols teaching us how to be human. The land defines who we are, so

experience the land, nurture that relationship.

“Your body is my body, my body is your body.”

Language

comes from the land, it defines our reality, how we see the world. Show respect,

acknowledge the language of this place.

Deeply listen . . . heighten all your senses.

“The language has the vibration and the energy of the land, of where it

comes from. Our languages

are in tune with the earth,

this is why there are so many different languages.”

Stories tie us to a specific place; they will provide direction . . .

if you listen to the stories, then you will understand.

We have lived our lives, look through our eyes.

We each have a responsibility to encourage, support, nurture, and help maintain

the worldviews of our children, our youth—ensure they do not lose their identity

when they come through your doors.

You can show young people that education is important, how great a culture

is, develop pride in who they are,

but this place, the spaces, need to feel like home.

Our youth, the young adults, need to feel like they belong, then they will be

successful as they maintain

their connection to identity and culture. We can help our young

people by living a good life. Let us be in good relationship.

We all need to be indigenized, indigenize ourselves and our communities.

There is hope.

We have our own pedagogies, our own ways of learning. We know education is

good for our communities, that there is wholeness and humility in learning

that leads to

being fully human.

Experience is learning. Heighten your senses, your awareness, learn the natural

laws of nature, how the past informs the present, and can step into the future to

those not yet born.

Let us honour the different ways of learning, of knowing.

Many are matriarchal societies, our women are powerful beings, we are here

because of

women’s strength,

some of their voices have been violently silenced.

We cannot rebuild our nation without our daughters, mothers, grandmothers.

Let us share our stories and sing our songs,

as they were shared with us,

so we can remember.

We hope for change.

Elders, let us teach the young people, we have knowledge to give, let us all

connect with our youth, with people from other nations to build cultural

crossroads.

Let us share our stories and sing our songs,

as they were shared with us. They

are containers of knowledge, containers filled with life, validators and permits.

Let us go on this journey together, in parallel down

the same river, the same path, connected, interconnected, beside each other. We

have done this before . . .

look to the treaties, they have answers.

But let’s keep what’s sacred to us.

These need to be earned in respectful ways, and this all takes time and trust.

There is a strong spiritual dimension, look it’s evidenced in all things. The

Creator’s touch and breath are all around us.

We are all related, we are all connected.

Let’s start braiding something new together.

The poem summarizing our dialogue with Traditional Knowledge Keepers represents a creative account of their stories and ideas. The title acknowledges the gift that the Elders gave to the university at this gathering. The day was moving and powerful for all who attended the session. The poem honours the Traditional Knowledge Keepers who willingly and generously shared from their hearts. Without their generosity and wisdom, the Indigenous Strategy would not exist.