184 S. Poetsch et al.
The Gumbaynggirr Language and Culture Nest
The final initiative considered in this chapter is the one that has been most recently
introduced. OCHRE: opportunity, choice, healing, responsibility, empowerment is
the current NSW Government plan for Aboriginal Affairs (Aboriginal Affairs
NSW, 2013). In formal educational contexts, the plan is implemented through
‘Language and Culture nests’ which have been established for five languages:
Bundjalung, Paakantyi, Wiradjuri, Gamilaraay-Yuwaalaraay and Gumbaynggirr.
The term ‘nest’ here is not used in the way that most Indigenous languages acti-
vists, researchers, learners and teachers around the world would understand it.
In the current NSW government initiative it does not refer an immersion crèche/
preschool where old people who are fully fluent speakers spend time with young
children as a means of restoring intergenerational transmission of their heritage
language. Rather, in NSW, the purpose of the ‘nests’ is to develop and coordinate
language learning pathways from preschool through to primary, high school and
post-secondary education contexts in various towns for each of the five languages.
The Gumbaynggirr Language and Culture Nest was launched in Coffs Harbour
in February 2014. One of the authors of this chapter (Jarrett) has a significant role
in it. Appointed as the central teacher for the nest, his responsibilities are broad
and varied. He responds to requests from schools that would like to start a
Gumbaynggirr program, finds and trains tutors to fill positions in schools, creates
resources, and writes teaching programs which can be followed by all tutors for
consistency across the schools. Currently, 20 schools have Gumbaynggirr pro-
grams, Jarrett travels many kilometres each week of each school term to support
all of the tutors/teachers in their respective schools.
To support the younger end of the continuous language-learning pathway in
the nest, Jarrett teaches Gumbaynggirr songs and games to early childhood tea-
chers who work in six preschools, including two Aboriginal community pre-
schools (Giiguy Gamambi and Kulai). Regarding the higher education end of the
pathway, at this stage demand for a university-level Gumbaynggirr language
course has not yet been identified. Very few Indigenous languages are taught in
degree programs at university level in Australia due to small enrolments, and diffi-
culties in staffing and resourcing the courses (Amery, 2007; Giacon & Simpson,
2011). However, it could conceivably occur for Gumbaynggirr in the future, espe-
cially given the growing number of adults learning their language and the fact that
there is a regional university with campuses in towns in Gumbaynggirr country.
A major benefit of the nest initiative is that it alleviates some of the pressure on
Muurrbay. Before the nest was established, Muurrbay staff needed to devote time
and resources to finding tutors and communicating with schools. Jarrett’s new posi-
tion means that Muurrbay staff can instead now spend that time on language
research and community-oriented needs rather than school-oriented ones. At the
same time, Muurrbay board members and staff can be confident that Gumbaynggirr
community interests will be maximally represented in the mainstream education sys-
tem, since Jarrett is a community member with strong language proficiency and
13 Building on Achievements … 185
teaching skills, and a long-term personal commitment to their language. Similarly,
through his position in the nest, some of the costs involved in tutor skills develop-
ment can be shifted from Muurrbay to the Department of Education, while still
retaining Gumbaynggirr community input into and control of that training.
The Gumbaynggirr Language and Culture Nest initiative has achieved a great
deal in a short time frame, building on the already extensive accomplishments of
Muurrbay. The new initiative holds promise as a significant support structure for
the teaching of the language and culture, though Jarrett is stretched to meet the
expectations of developing the full spectrum of the language-learning continuum
from preschool through to university level study of Gumbaynggirr. At this stage
the current funding arrangement for the nest is secure until the end of 2017, when
it will be reviewed.
Conclusion
The Gumbaynggirr teacher/tutor training options considered in this chapter show
firstly the critical importance of Muurrbay Aboriginal Language and Culture
Centre. Through long-term, reliable Australian Government funding, this small
community-based organisation has been highly successful with respect to
developing adult language proficiency in the community, and also with respect to
developing basic teaching skills for people prepared to work as tutors in schools.
In the absence of an initial teacher education program catering for the specific
needs of Indigenous languages, the paraprofessional role of tutor has assumed
great importance and MILE graduates have added their presence to help satisfy
local school demand for programs.
The introduction of the Gumbaynggirr Language and Culture Nest has enabled
greater coordination of pre-school and school programs than was previously the
case, though there are still significant challenges involved in staffing current and
potential programs due to the high turnover of tutors. The university component of
the language-learning pathway is yet to be developed and human resources in the
nest are currently at maximum capacity. More staff would be required to develop the
higher education component, and to build the full pathway envisioned for the nest.
The training options for Gumbaynggirr people wanting to learn and/or teach
their language are certainly greater today than they were 30 years ago when
Gumbaynggirr language revival began in earnest. As the number and variety of
courses and curriculum in pre-school, school, post-secondary, vocational and tea-
cher education contexts have expanded, Gumbaynggirr people have responded to
all available opportunities and have been the driver of many of them. However,
there is still work to be done. Governments and universities have a responsibility
to continue to work with Aboriginal languages communities in NSW to develop
opportunities that provide useful support as their language circumstances change
and progress. Gumbaynggirr provides an informative case study for the kinds of
opportunities that can be effective and points to likely needs in the near future.
186 S. Poetsch et al.
References
Aboriginal Affairs NSW (2013). Opportunity, choice, healing, responsibility, empowerment
(OCHRE). New South Wales Government plan for Aboriginal affairs: education, employment,
accountability. Sydney: Aboriginal Affairs, Office of Communities, NSW Department of
Education and Communities.
Amery, R. (2007). Aboriginal language habitat in research and tertiary education. In G. Leitner
& I. G. Malcolm (Eds.), The habitat of Australia’s Aboriginal languages: past, present and
future (pp. 327–353). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Ash, A., Hooler, P., Williams, G., & Walker, K. (2010). Maam ngawaala: Biindu ngaawa nyang-
gan bindaayili (Language centres: keeping language strong). In J. Hobson, K. Lowe,
S. Poetsch & M. Walsh (Eds.), Re-awakening languages: theory and practice in the revitali-
sation of Australia’s Indigenous languages (pp. 106–118). Sydney: Sydney University Press.
Australian Government Department of Communications and the Arts (2016a). Annual report on
Indigenous languages stream funding recipients. Canberra: Author.
Australian Government Department of Communications and the Arts (2016b). Indigenous lan-
guages support fact sheet. Canberra: Author.
Board of Studies NSW (2003). Aboriginal languages K-10 syllabus. Sydney: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.boardofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_sc/languages.html.
Board of Studies Teaching and Educational Standards NSW (2015). Aboriginal languages
Stage 6 content endorsed course syllabus. Sydney: Author. Retrieved from http://www.board
ofstudies.nsw.edu.au/syllabus_hsc/aboriginal-languages.html.
Cipollone, J. (2010). Aboriginal languages programs in TAFE NSW: delivery initiatives and
strategies. In J. Hobson, K. Lowe, S. Poetsch & M. Walsh (Eds.), Re-awakening languages:
theory and practice in the revitalisation of Australia’s Indigenous languages (pp. 170–180).
Sydney: Sydney University Press.
Giacon, J., & Simpson, J. (2011). Teaching Indigenous languages at universities. In J. Hajek,
C. Nettelbeck & A. Woods (Eds.), Next step: introducing the languages and cultures network
for Australian universities, inaugural colloquium, The University of Melbourne, September
26–28 (pp. 61–73). Melbourne: LCNAU. Retrieved from http://www.lcnau.org/proceedings.
Hinton, L. (2011). Language revitalization and language pedagogy: new teaching and learning
strategies. Language and Education, 25(4), 307–318.
Hinton, L. (2012). Language revitalisation from documentation: heroes and programs. Paper
presented at the Australian Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies Seminar
Series, March 26, Canberra, Australia. Retrieved fromhttps://vimeo.com/39681092.
Hinton, L., Vera, M., & Steele, N. (2002). How to keep your language alive: a commonsense
approach to one-on-one language learning. Berkeley: Heyday Books.
Hobson, J. (2004). Learning to speak again: towards the provision of appropriate training for the
revitalisation of Indigenous Australian languages in New South Wales. In J. A. Argenter &
R. McKenna Brown (Eds.), On the margins of nations: endangered languages and linguistic
rights. Proceedings of the eighth Foundation for Endangered Languages conference,
Barcelona, October 1–3 (pp. 53–57). Bath: Foundation for Endangered Languages.
Hobson, J. (2006). Who will teach our languages? In N. Parbury & R. Craven (Eds.), Aboriginal
studies: making the connections. Collected papers of the 12th National Aboriginal Studies
Association conference (pp. 166–174). Bankstown: ASA. November 2–3.
Hobson, J. (2008a). Towards a model for training Indigenous languages educators in Australia.
Paper presented at the Koori Centre Lecture Series, April 11, 2008, The University of Sydney
e-Scholarship Repository. Retrieved from http://ses.library.usyd.edu.au/handle/2123/2323.
Hobson, J. (2008b). Training teachers for Indigenous languages education: what’s happening
overseas? In R. Amery & J. Nash (Eds.), Warra wiltaniappendi: strengthening languages.
Proceedings of the Indigenous Languages conference, Adelaide, September 25–27, 2007
(pp. 1–9). Adelaide: University of Adelaide.
13 Building on Achievements … 187
Hobson, J. (2011). How do you teach a language with no teachers? Paper presented at the 2nd
international conference on Language Documentation and Conservation: strategies for
moving forward, University of Hawai’i, Manoa, February 11–13. Retrieved from http://
scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/handle/10125/5211.
Hobson, J. (2014). Potholes in the road to an initial teacher training degree for Australian revival
languages. In C. Travis, J. Hajek, C. Nettelbeck, E. Beckmann, & A. Lloyd-Smith (Eds.),
Policies, practices and research in university language and culture programs. Selected pro-
ceedings of the languages and cultures network for Australian universities colloquium
(pp. 193–206). Australian National University, July 3–5, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.
lcnau.org/proceedings/.
Hobson, J., Oakley, K., Jarrett, M., Jackson, M., & Harris, N. (2017). Bridging the gap in
Indigenous Australian languages teacher education. In P. Whitinui, C. Rodriguez de France &
O. McIvor (Eds.), Promising practices in Indigenous teacher education. Singapore: Springer.
Hudson, J., & McConvell, P. (1984). Keeping language strong: report of the pilot study for the
Kimberley Language Resource Centre. Halls Creek: Kimberley Language Resource Centre.
King, J. (2001). Te kohanga reo: Maori language revitalization. In L. Hinton & K. Hale (Eds.), The
green book of language revitalization in practice (pp. 119–128). San Diego: Academic Press.
McIvor, O. (2009). Strategies for Indigenous language revitalization and maintenance.
Encyclopedia of language and literacy development (pp. 1–12). London: Canadian Language
and Literary Research Network.
Morelli, S. (2015). Gumbaynggir dictionary and learner’s grammar. Bijaarr jandaygam, ngawa
gugaarrigam. Nambucca Heads: Muurrbay Aboriginal Language and Culture Co-operative.
New South Wales Department of Education and Training. (2005). My language, my country
(30 min DVD documentary and teacher training resource). Sydney: Author.
Poetsch, S. (2014). Why Aboriginal languages teaching sometimes works: a view from NSW. In
C. Travis, J. Hajek, C. Nettelbeck, E. Beckmann, & A. Lloyd-Smith (Eds.), Policies, prac-
tices and research in university language and culture programs. Selected proceedings of the
languages and cultures network for Australian universities colloquium (pp. 223–238).
Australian National University, July 3–5, 2013. Retrieved from http://www.lcnau.org/
proceedings/.
Schmidt, A. (1990). The loss of Australia’s Aboriginal language heritage. Canberra: Aboriginal
Studies Press.
Senior Secondary Assessment Board of South Australia (1996). Australia’s Indigenous lan-
guages framework. Wayville: Author.
Wafer, J., & Lissarrague, A. (Eds.) (2008). A handbook of Aboriginal languages of New South
wales and the Australian Capital Territory. Nambucca Heads: Muurrbay Aboriginal
Language and Culture Co-operative.
Walsh, M. (2001). A case of language revitalisation in ‘settled’ Australia. Current issues in lan-
guage planning, 2(2), 251–258.
Wilson, W., & Kamana, K. (2001). Mai loko mai o ka ‘i’ini: proceeding from a dream. The ‘aha
punana leo connection in Hawaii’an language revitalization. In L. Hinton & K. Hale (Eds.),
The green book of language revitalization in practice (pp. 147–178). San Diego: Academic
Press.
Lighting a Fire: Community-Based Delivery
of a University Indigenous-Language Teacher
Education Program
Onowa McIvor, Trish Rosborough, Catherine McGregor and
Aliki Marinakis
Introduction
The time has come for radical change in Indian education. Our aim is to make education
relevant to the philosophy and needs of Indian people. We want education to give our
children a strong sense of identity, with confidence on their personal worth and ability ….
The Indian people are expressing concern that the native languages are being lost; that the
younger generations can no longer speak and understand their mother tongue. If the
Indian identity is to be preserved, steps must be taken to reserve this trend. (National
Indian Brotherhood, 1972, pp. 3, 15)
Following a long, dark chapter in the history of formal schooling for Indigenous
people in Canada came a pivotal shift still referred to today. Our first organized and
coordinated effort to regain control over the education of our children emerged in a
report entitled Indian Control of Indian Education published in 1972 (National
Indian Brotherhood—now known as the Assembly of First Nations). This report
brought on swift government action in 1973 towards a return of control over educa-
tion for the majority of Indigenous children in Canada. Although, the report
O. McIvor (✉) · T. Rosborough · C. McGregor · A. Marinakis 189
Faculty of Education, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada
e-mail: [email protected]
T. Rosborough
e-mail: [email protected]
C. McGregor
e-mail: [email protected]
A. Marinakis
e-mail: [email protected]
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018
P. Whitinui (eds.), Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-6400-5_14
190 O. McIvor et al.
included a focus on reviving our languages, this connection began to unravel over
the next two decades. For example, the establishment of more Indigenous-
governed community-based schools focused more on delivering public education,
and less time on maintaining and/or reviving our languages.
The 1992 report Towards Rebirth of First Nations Languages explained that
‘[t]raditionally, language was taught in the family and the wider community’
(Assembly of First Nations, 1992, p. 2); however, ‘much of the responsibility has
been transferred to the education system’ (p. 18). And so, the school system for
Indigenous peoples needs to play a crucial role in the development of children,
including language development. ‘Consequently, any strategy to increase the
number of speakers of any language must necessarily involve the education sys-
tem’ (p. 2). Despite this clear intention, the majority of schools developed in
Indigenous communities across Canada were French or English-medium schools,
with only a small minority of schools using Indigenous-language as the primary
medium of instruction (Ball & McIvor, 2013; McIvor & McCarty, 2016). In 1991
law scholar James MacPherson noted this gap stating:
The education system over the years has failed to recognize the importance of native
languages. Unless the native languages are taught in schools by sensitive teachers, and
given the prestige that goes with recognition, the languages are condemned to a slow
death. (p. 44)
The 1970s movement for Indian Control of Indian Education also instigated
Indigenous-focused teacher training programs (see Archibald & La Rochelle,
2017) as well as some teacher training focused on our languages, but these early
approaches did not lead to university degrees and professional teacher certifica-
tion. One important difference of that time was that most of our people spoke
their own languages, were first language speakers and were still of working age.
Now, we have far fewer speakers in our communities, and so programs have
focused on both building new speakers and professional teacher training. This is
a daunting task as learning a language within a highly regulated profession,
alongside developing new classroom-ready, proficient language teachers is a
major a challenge.
History and Context of the UVic Program
Prior to describing the details of the Indigenous language programs we offer at
UVic in the Faculty of Education, we want to provide a context by examining
briefly the historical antecedents in British Columbia (BC), Canada. BC is home to
a rich and diverse heritage of Indigenous languages and cultures. Approximately
60% of all Indigenous languages in Canada are spoken in BC. These languages
are spoken in 203 different communities; most are found nowhere else on
the planet and all of them are endangered (First Peoples Cultural Council, 2014).
There are seven language families within BC alone: Wakashan, Dene, Salish,
14 Lighting a Fire … 191
Tsimshian, Algonquian, Haida and Ktunaxa, with 40 distinct languages and 70+
dialects (First Peoples Cultural Council, 2014). In comparison, there are only three
language families in all of Europe. UVic is therefore located in one of the most lin-
guistically diverse areas of the world.
Indigenous language programs for teachers are a recent phenomenon in
Canada. Bear Nicholas (2009) reports on the preparation of Maliseet and Mi’kmaq
teachers as the ‘first ever, native language immersion teacher training programme
in Canada’, established in New Brunswick in 2001. Another notable program in
Canada is the Canadian Indigenous Language and Literacy Development Institute
(CILLDI) based at the University of Alberta (www.cilldi.ualberta.ca) although this
does not lead to professional teacher certification (see Blair, Pelly, & Starr, 2017).
Our program at UVic supports students to both learn their language and gain skills
and training to become professionally certified teachers.
Although several of BC’s major post-secondary institutions (e.g. Simon Fraser
University, University of British Columbia, University Northern British Columbia,
Vancouver Island University) offer undergraduate and graduate degrees in
Indigenous studies, Indigenous education and/or linguistics, few have the same
focus on Indigenous language revitalization (ILR) as UVic. Several institutions
offer programs that lead to partial or temporary certification (such as 1 year certifi-
cates; or a 3-year temporary provincial language teaching certification referred to
as Developmental Standard Teaching Certificate programs—to teach language
only), however, there is no other degree program presently that has as its goal, the
graduation of new speakers with professional skills who can teach in K-12 immer-
sion contexts.1
The current UVic Indigenous language and teacher education programs are
based on a long history of successful language teaching, linguistic research and
study, dating back to 1974. In the 1970s, the Faculty of Education, together with
the Department of Linguistics implemented the Native Indian Language Diploma
Program (1974), taught largely by linguists who worked directly with Indigenous
languages in BC. The Native Indian Language Teacher Training program followed
this in 1980. Both programs responded to the training needs for First Nations lan-
guage instructors. Graduates of this early program were from multiple language
groups and they returned to their communities with linguistic and literacy skills
where they taught generations of school children written and oral language, as
well as developed curriculum, recorded and documented language with elders,
assisted with the development of dictionaries and generally contributed to the
1Other teacher education programs in the province focus on certification, such as the UBC
Native Teacher Education Program (NITEP). This program operates through field centres, and
offers the initial 2 years towards a 5-year teaching degree. Students are expected to attend UBC
to complete the final 3 years. NITEP is a strong, consistent program in the province to certify
Indigenous teachers, however it does not currently incorporate language courses in its program
(see Archibald & La Rochelle, 2017).
192 O. McIvor et al.
health and continuance of their languages. Despite the success and far-reaching
effects of these programs, the program did not continue past the early 1980s due
to a lack of institutional funding. However, at the time, these programs were revo-
lutionary as they provided linguistics training and language teaching instruction
for Indigenous language speakers.
New program thinking emerged in the early 2000’s, first with a 1-year certifi-
cate focused on language revitalization strategies, followed by a 3-year pilot pro-
gram focused on teaching Indigenous languages, which grew into the now full
degree program. The creation and sustainability of such programs also required
Indigenous community consultation, and knowledgeable faculty and staff to
implement. The first permanent Indigenous UVic Faculty of Education member,
Dr. Lorna Williams, was appointed in 2004, followed by a second, Onowa
McIvor in 2008. One of Dr. Williams’s first initiatives was to embark on a year-
long, province-wide consultation process with key First Nations stakeholders to
determine the key directions for Indigenous language-focused degree programs.
Under the visionary leadership of Dr. Williams and McIvor, dedicated staff mem-
bers (Jane Mertz and Aliki Marinakis-author) and several non-Indigenous
Linguistics faculty members holding expertize in ILR, the first UVic language-
focused program was born. Two additional Indigenous faculty members (one in
Linguistics, Dr. Jacobs and one in Education—Dr. Rosborough, author) specializ-
ing in ILR were hired in 2012 and 2013 to help strengthen these programs.
Having Indigenous faculty members provides an important resource for all stu-
dents and faculty, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, and contributes directly to
helping to achieve Indigenous student success.
Program Features
The programs at UVic consist of three related and laddered programs: a Certificate
in Aboriginal Language Revitalization (which exists autonomously as a 1-year
credential in a separate faculty) leading into the Diploma in Indigenous Language
Revitalization (DILR) and then to the BEDLIR program. The degree program fol-
lows a cohort model that is culturally and physically situated in individual lan-
guage communities. The BEDLIR program provides a foundation of skills in
Indigenous language, language revitalization strategies and elementary school
teaching and graduates are eligible to be certified as teachers by the BC Ministry
of Education.
Program Structure
Figures 1 and 2 provide a summary of the programs and notes changes in the pro-
gram structure over the past 5 years.
14 Lighting a Fire … 193
Fig. 1 Original laddered Years 3 & 4 - Bachelor of Education
design of the undergraduate (4 language courses)
language revitalization pro-
grams at the UVic (2010) Year 2 Diploma (5 language courses)
Year 1 CALR
(1-3 language courses)
Fig. 2 The laddering of the Years 3 & 4 - Bachelor of Education
re-designed undergraduate (4 language courses)
language revitalization pro-
grams at the UVic (2015) Year 2 Diploma
(5-10 language courses)
Year 1 Proficiency path
(5 language courses)
or CALR (1-3 language courses)
Curriculum Design
The curriculum design was shaped in response to language revitalization needs
identified by Indigenous communities in BC. Program design goals included a
need to prepare new speakers of diverse Indigenous languages and trained profes-
sionals to work in the field of Indigenous language education from early child-
hood, to K-12 and adult education. Finally, there was the goal of enhancing access
to post-secondary education in Indigenous communities, with multiple exit points
ensuring multiple routes for success.
Distinctive Characteristics
The four key distinguishing characteristics of the BEDILR program include:
1. The program components ladder into each other, providing successful exit
opportunities for students at multiple key points throughout the program;
2. The programs provide an opportunity to learn about how to revitalize language,
as well as the opportunity to increase language proficiency through coursework;
3. The programs are designed for delivery in a community setting, in full or in part.
4. The programs result in language skills and professional teacher certification
that will prepare graduates to teach in immersion language schools.
Target Audience
The two undergraduate programs (Diploma and BED) address a slightly different
target audience: the DILR is targeted towards people who want to build on their
194 O. McIvor et al.
Indigenous language skills, better understand the contexts in which Indigenous
languages can be successfully taught and gain some basic teaching skills. The
BEDLIR program is targeted towards those who want to both learn their language
and become professional K-12 teachers. These students may continue building their
language capacity to ensure they are qualified to teach in an immersion context if
desired. Both programs are designed for Indigenous community members who are
unable or unwilling to leave their home communities for extended periods of time.
Community Capacity-Building
A foundational feature of this program is to build community capacity and draw
upon the knowledge of knowledge keepers and Elders. Whenever possible eligible
local instructors and/or community members are hired to teach courses, and com-
munity members are employed as program coordinators, teaching assistants and
mentor-tutors. Fluent speakers are called upon to assist the students with further-
ing their language skills which leads to the program graduates being prepared to
develop and implement immersion language programming at the K-12 level, a
goal of many First Peoples2 in BC.
Implementation
The BEDILR was launched in 2010 and offered over four and half years in two
different communities. To date the BEDILR has been delivered in its entirety in
two Vancouver Island communities, WSÁNEC´ and Kwakwaka’wakw, as a key
support to revitalizing the SENC´ OŦEN and Kwak’wala languages.
Both communities requested an alternative delivery model with three or four
courses offered each fall and winter semester, and two or three offered in the sum-
mer. This configuration allowed participants to maintain their employment, but
ultimately extended the 4-year Bachelor’s degree to a longer delivery path. In
2014, an external review was commissioned to reflect on and learn from the first
two (concurrent) offerings of the new degree.
What Have We Learned? Evaluating the BEDILR Program
An important feature of the formal review was a desire to assess and evaluate our
successes and build on them, while also noting challenges and opportunities for
change. The principal researcher, Dr. Catherine McGregor, conducted this evalua-
tion with the assistance of WELCIEM Claxton and the guidance of an Indigenous
2First Peoples is common phrase used in Canada for Indigenous peoples.
14 Lighting a Fire … 195
advisory team with representatives from UVic and the WSÁNEC´ and the
Kwakwaka’wakw communities. The evaluator took an Indigenist stance (Wilson,
2007), using culturally responsive evaluation methods that value and recognize
Indigenous peoples, cultural beliefs and worldviews. The evaluation engaged stu-
dents, Elders, instructors, practicum mentors and supervisors, and UVic and com-
munity planners and administrators. The impacts of the program on communities,
schools and students were traced through a careful examination of participants’
perspectives and experiences in classrooms, during practicum and in work with
the community.
Our Findings: Creating a Culture of Hope
The evaluation identified broad impacts across the communities in which it was
offered. First and foremost, the BEDILR program has created a culture of hope
and change at the community level. The big successes of the program were identi-
fied in our analysis as (1) deep learning, (2) credentialing of a new generation of
Indigenous educators and (3) the power of Indigenous languages to heal.
Our Participants
The students in both cohorts have a variety of backgrounds and experiences.
Some began the program with strong academic skills, while others had not com-
pleted high school. Some student entered the program with strong language skills,
while others were beginners to learning their language. There are many other con-
textual issues that need to be considered. For example, some students were survi-
vors of residential schools—and many have affected family members. In
conducting the evaluation, we found that all of our students have multiple respon-
sibilities for family, community, cultural obligation and employment. Cultural and
ceremonial activities remain a big part of these students’ lives despite their addi-
tional responsibilities as students.
Context Matters: The Intersection of Passion and Purpose
It is also important to recognize that both WSÁNEC´ and Kwakwaka’wakw com-
munities had existing leaders and language champions with extensive language
revitalization experience with/in their communities. These leaders were powerful
political voices with considerable influence in the community and were important
allies to the BEDILR program planners. The Kwakuitl Nation leadership (the
administrative lead for the Kwakwaka’wakw community partnership, which
included the, Quatsino and Gwa’sala-’Nak’waxda’xw Nations as well) had a keen
interest in ensuring that more Indigenous teachers were able to work in the local
196 O. McIvor et al.
public schools and a deep desire to ensure these individuals were granted the same
professional recognition and salary as all other teachers. In WSÁNEC´ , the goal of
creating enough teachers to work in their nation-operated SENC´ OŦEN immersion
school was a key priority, given their existing preschool language nest programs.
As these examples show, community leaders were powerful catalysts, advocates
and resources for the BEDILR program; however, they also were agents in their
own right who sought to shape the program in their own way.
What we hope this short summary makes evident is the BEDILR program is
significantly different from a more typical teacher education program, not only
because of its community-based delivery and language specific design, but simul-
taneously it seeks to serve educational, cultural, social, political and linguistic
goals by inspiring current and future community leaders. It is a program model
devoted to meeting community needs, and fulfilling the promise of education to
change the lives of Indigenous children, and in particular, to make them language
warriors of tomorrow.
Program Impacts and Successes—Student Voices
In this next section we provide evidence of the impacts this program had on the
lives of our students. These student stories are inspirational: we share them here as
testimony to the power of the program in effecting Indigenous learners and future
generations of Indigenous language speakers.
Deep Learning
I got schooled in so many ways; the course we took with [teacher’s name] … I had never
heard the stories she shared with us, and the residential school survivors. I had thought:
we have to take control of our lives, stop blaming others and fix what it is now and move
forward, and leave what happened in the past. But now I realize the wreckage that it cre-
ated for many of our people. It does leak, it follows you, it hurts, continues to hurt people.
It doesn’t stop. In thinking about the moments like this in our classes over the last several
years … I am now thinking I need to be more open—why, how, what. I am trying to
answer the questions a lot more. My openness is a result of being in this program. It
opened me to a different perspective. I’m grateful; I was close-minded, but it’s different
now. I like the fact I got to learn that much more of the historical value of our world, and
our people, and that will make me a better teacher … I wasn’t ready for this prior to this
learning. (Program participant)
This story shows the learning offered by instructors and Elders went very deep
with many students—so while much of the program was designed to offer insights
into schooling and teaching, it was the development of their emerging teacher
identities, informed by their cultural and historical contexts, which powerfully
framed their philosophy and stance as a teacher. Such evidence helps to verify our
claim that much deep, contextually rich and meaningful learning has been central
to the program’s success.
14 Lighting a Fire … 197
Creating a Cadre of Indigenous Teachers
[This is a] transformational opportunity to reinvent ourselves as we move into new spaces
[in the community] … It is our work; it is a tremendous responsibility. But we have to be
a part of all that work around language and culture and building the identity of our peo-
ple. (Program participant)
Having our people as teachers in our community on the North Island, that’s what this
program has to be about. (Program participant)
Our university partners are learning too, and becoming our allies. They are doing things
that will change how this program operates, make it easier to participate. (Program
participant)
Indigenous people are largely underrepresented in the teacher profession. Ryan,
Pollock and Antonelli (2007) drawing from 1996 Statistics Canada data stated,
‘5.57% of the total Canadian elementary/secondary teaching and counselling
population were visible minority or Aboriginal’ (p. 10). A more recent British
Columbia Teachers’ Federation report (2015) stated there were 106 self-identified
Aboriginal educators in BC (from a total of 24,000 full and part-time teachers).
Archibald, Glickman and McKinnon (2005) summarize several studies that
argue for tripling the number of BC Indigenous educators (in 2001 estimated at
1,200) for the number of Indigenous teachers to accurately reflect the percentage
of Indigenous students in schools. The BC Ministry of Education (2012) esti-
mates there are currently about 65,339 Aboriginal students in the K-12 system,
which accounts for about 10% of the total student population overall (p. 10).
If there were a match between these percentages, then there would need to be
more than 2,400 Aboriginal educators versus the reported 106. In addition,
Indigenous teachers serve as catalysts for changing the educational system, as
advocates for decolonizing and indigenizing the curriculum, and as role models
for Indigenous and non-Indigenous students who want to make a difference in
their communities.
In our evaluation report, we heard powerful voices for changing the experi-
ences of Indigenous children and youth, and the ways in which Indigenous peda-
gogies and ways of learning could be more readily and fully integrated into public
and nation-operated schools. It is evident that these program graduates will help to
transform our schools, serving as part of a parallel healing process for both
Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities in the teaching profession.
The Healing Power of Language Learning
There is so much beauty in the language, you can know the territory, unleash secrets, tell
your old stories …. Being native and young is hard, our people are going through such
pain and heartache, but then you learn your language, and you have something to be
proud of, it belongs to you, you have names for these islands, they still belong to you. It
makes them light up and be proud again. If we can all be fluent in the language, with a
new outlook on life, we can have a different world. (Program participant)
198 O. McIvor et al.
Evaluation participants conveyed the healing power of Indigenous language
learning, in that, not only does language learning create a sense of confidence in
how to teach Indigenous languages, it also instils a culture of pride as an
Indigenous person. This is a key finding of our evaluation; language is a powerful
vehicle that can empower learners and deeply affect their sense of agency and cap-
abilities. It is clear that embedding Indigenous language learning into formal and
informal educational spaces will make a difference for many learners, now and
into the future.
Language Warriors: Lighting the Fire
I am grateful to the Elders I’ve worked with, the language champions, the teachers, the
learners, the way they have pushed me and allowed me to learn from them. So it is very
much a co-construction, and we each bring something different to the situation. And
someone new is created from that … that is especially important in a classroom with a lot
of Aboriginal students … Where we come in, we come in as supporters—and allies—to
the work of language revitalization … At the same time, I need to respond to why am I
here? Why do I have to do this stuff? What I do is explore what is potentially practical,
and what is beautiful and exiting, interesting … and what it tells us about who we are as
human beings. (Program participant)
My granddaughter is five, I can speak to her in our language, and she understands quite a
bit more. She has been spoken to by her mother, and me, so she knows it more than some
others … in the years to come, we’ll better understand the legacy we’ve created.
As First Nations people, you are the ones that have to be the expert, the champion of all
things. You may be one of the first, and you are blazing a trail. (Program participant)
These students are trail blazers—they are on a journey to effect positive
changes in their community, and they are inspiring others as they do this work,
making a path that others can more easily follow. A strong desire to learn and
serve is evident in many of the stories heard during the evaluation. These stories
illustrate the power of Indigenous communities to draw from their past—their his-
tories, their spiritual beliefs and the cultural traditions they have practiced since
time immemorial. Their stories identify language as a cultural symbol and the tool
through which they can heal themselves, despite the barriers and obstacles. We
learned how much these participants are the new language warriors, lighting a fire
that will burn intensely as they build a stronger future.
Identifying and Meeting Challenges
While we are inspired by the words of our participants and their community leaders,
our evaluation also revealed the challenges we faced. Some of the greatest chal-
lenges identified directly relate to the divide between education institutions and
14 Lighting a Fire … 199
Indigenous communities and students. Program partnerships and administrators
address challenges as they arise, however some of the challenges are more complex
and involve outside factors. Community politics and dynamics around language
revitalization, for example, are ongoing challenges as they include attitudes towards
dialect and orthography differences, including political divisions within language
communities. Some of these dynamics were addressed through coursework within
the program, and inclusive approaches of community collaboration. We are able to
address logistical delivery challenges around coordination and communication
across distances as they arose, however academic preparation is an ongoing chal-
lenge both in recruiting and retention. Flexible entry opportunities created to ensure
anyone wanting to learn their endangered language has that opportunity, can lead to
difficulties in later meeting program requirements. Different kinds of challenges
around expectations and ideology that arose in practicum placements (usually
within public schools) offer an example of the ongoing need to continue building
understanding of expectations between Indigenous communities and students, and
western academic institutions. Our programs continue to challenge the university
and provincial expectations in a number of areas, from admissions policies, to
Teacher Regulation Branch regulations, to more direct accommodation for commu-
nity events, such as deaths or weddings during times of course delivery. The two
most pressing issues continue to be: (1) seeking and obtaining funds to deliver the
program, and (2) improving upon on language teaching and learning opportunities
in order to address the need to create new adult speakers.
Need for Stable and Adequate Funding
We would be remiss if we did not address the key challenge of funding. The fund-
ing of BEDILR programs is a combination of external funds, community partner
contributions and university ‘base’ funding. Tuition alone is not adequate to
fund these community-based programs. There are extra costs associated with
community-delivery and Indigenous education, such as travel, and honorarium, as
well as the extra costs of practicum. The involvement and support of community
is both costly and essential. Our partners resource the programs with language and
traditional knowledge experts, access to facilities and local coordination. Each
individual community-delivery requires external funding, which is accessed
through lengthy and competitive proposal processes. This means that communities
and institutions must direct much of their time and effort towards seeking and
securing adequate funding for language teacher education programs. Recent politi-
cal attention towards the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls
to Action (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015) the need to
better support ILR efforts, however, we have yet to see an injection of funding
that is both adequate and stable.
200 O. McIvor et al.
Responding to the Challenges: Emergent and Ongoing Changes
Implemented
Given this context, we have taken a variety of measures to adapt and modify the
programs in the face of the challenges and opportunities identified by the program
staff and evaluation team. As result, we are more focused on changing and
improving the areas we have influence over. In this final section of our chapter,
we focus on two key areas of change: an increased focus on language proficiency,
and the need to re-design the credential to better serve the needs and interests of
our Indigenous community partners.
Increased Focus on Language Proficiency Development
We continue to learn and develop our approach to delivering a program that meets
the dual need of developing new proficient speakers who also build skills towards
certification to teach in their languages. While the BEDILR evaluation identified
and celebrated the importance of language learning that occurred within the pro-
gram, it also spoke to the challenge of learning one’s language while simulta-
neously taking courses in teacher education. Many students expressed anxiety
about their progress in learning their language and expected that participation in
the program would have led to higher levels of language proficiency. In response
to the needs of students, program leaders created a proficiency path option as the
first year of the DILR.
The proficiency path of the DILR begins with three complimentary language
courses: a language course that covers sounds of the language, vocabulary and
grammar; a mentorship course that pairs learners with speakers for one-one and
small group immersion; and, a newly created course, Learning to Learn, that
examines effective strategies for adult language learners such as self-directed
learning. A key factor to gaining language proficiency is time (McIvor, 2015).
Launching the programs with a heavy emphasis on language proficiency building
and devoting more class time to this endeavour bolsters early success and makes
language learning seem like a real possibility. The Learning to Learn course
responds to the recognition that students must manage their language learning
path, both in and outside of courses. One of the aims is to support the students to
become lifelong learners of their language.
The language learning outcomes of these community-based programs are also
dependent on the first language speakers who support the students as mentors. The
role for mentors is to speak the Indigenous language with students in one-one and
small group immersion settings and to support the instructors in the delivery of
language courses. In many cases, mentors too, are recovering their language in
their own lives. Having their language disrupted by residential schools and other
colonial influences, some of the mentors have used their language very little since
14 Lighting a Fire … 201
childhood. While the recovery of one’s language can be joyful, it is complex and
can raise issues of trauma and pain for both mentors and students. It is important
that instructors, students and community liaisons are mindful of the social-
emotional issues that surface and can be barriers to ILR. These dynamics require a
respectful and thoughtful learning community and explicit agreements about how
to support language learning and recovery. In some programs, students and Elders
have developed an agreement in the form of an oath that describes how they will
support each other through positive practice and the creation of safety within their
shared language work.
The mentorship course has allowed us to respond to the learners’ need for
more time devoted to the language. With much resourcing from community part-
ners, we have used this course as an opportunity to provide sustained immersion
experiences. These immersion sessions are delivered in the form of activities such
as camps, exploration of traditional territories, medicine and food gathering and
food perpetration. Students often report that these experiential activities are an
important part of their language learning journey. When describing the value of
these activities, students speak about hands-on learning, language in the context of
meaningful and real life experiences, and connections with ancestral teachings, as
accelerating their language learning and strengthening their identity.
Moving Forward
Developing the language proficiency of the students is simultaneously the greatest
success and the greatest challenge of the BEDILR program. Language revitaliza-
tion is about bringing language back into the spaces of everyday life (e.g. see
Hinton, 2013). For learners to become strong proficient speakers across broad
domains takes time and much effort. In the words of one student,
Language was supposed to be a keystone of what we were trying to accomplish …. The
other things are important, but more time spent building proficiency and then going to the
core courses that teachers need would be better. (Program participant)
While the BEDILR continues to evolve and respond by building in more
language-focused courses and experiences, the time to devote to language profi-
ciency development continues to be limited by teacher education regulation lead-
ing to certification. An obvious new direction is the need to negotiate an
alternative structure for degrees which are dually focused on Indigenous language
proficiency building and creating professionally certified teachers. This must not
be a lesser than or second rate degree but rather a degree to recognize the impor-
tant differences. For instance, such a program would need to be grounded in: (1)
language proficiency building, (2) Indigenous values, teachings, worldviews and
pedagogies and (3) explicitly include knowledge and training about additional lan-
guage learning and teaching in a language that the children are learning at the
same time (similarly to French immersion programs in western Canada).
202 O. McIvor et al.
Alternatively, UVic is currently exploring what might be an even better option—a
4-year Indigenous language proficiency degree. Such a degree would prioritize
language learning and could be followed by a shorted post-degree professional
program that leads to teacher certification. This may offer us the best way forward
with language at the forefront of our program design and development, in addition
to attracting new language warriors.
Summary
This chapter elaborated on the power of partnerships between educational and
Indigenous communities, and provides important policy and practice exemplars
for others engaged or interested in language revitalization work. We highlighted
the challenges and successes of creating and launching this kind of work within
and alongside a mainstream institution. We also set out our goals for revising our
approaches to make our programs responsive to the passion of our communities—
to revitalize their languages, and to take back their educational systems. At the
heart of all of this are our languages, and our language warriors who will lift them
up and ensure life breathes through them once again. Our hope is that together
with our community partners, we are one small part of lighting the fire needed to
sustain Indigenous languages for the benefit of our children, Indigenous peoples
themselves and the betterment of a whole and just society.
References
Archibald, J., Glickman, V., & McKinnon, J. (2005). Tracking education career path and employ-
ment status of BC teachers of Aboriginal ancestry report. Vancouver: Edudata Canada.
Archibald, J., & La Rochelle, J. (2017). Raven’s response to teacher education: NITEP, an
Indigenous story. In P. Whitinui, C. Rodriguez de France & O. McIvor (Eds.), Promising
practices in Indigenous teacher education (pp. 00–00). Singapore: Springer.
Assembly of First Nations (1992). Towards rebirth of First Nations languages. Ottawa: Author.
Ball, J., & McIvor, O. (2013). Canada’s big chill: Indigenous languages in education. In C. Benson
& K. Kosonen (Eds.), Language issues in Comparative Education: Inclusive teaching and
learning in non-dominant languages and cultures (pp. 19–38). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.
Bear Nicholas, A. (2009). Linguistic decline and the educational gap: A single solution is possi-
ble in the education of Indigenous people. Ottawa: Assembly of First Nations.
BC Ministry of Education (2012). Summary of key information. https://www.bced.gov.bc.ca/
reporting/docs/SoK_2012.pdf.
Blair, H. A., Pelly, L., & Starr, R. (2017). Connecting Indigenous language policy, programs,
and practices. In P. Whitinui, C. Rodriguez de France & O. McIvor (Eds.), Promising prac-
tices in Indigenous teacher education (pp. 00–00). Singapore: Springer.
British Columbia Teachers’ Federation (2015). Employment equity for Aboriginal teachers.
http://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/public/AboutUs/ServicesHandbook/5EmploymentEquity.pdf.
First Peoples’ Cultural Council (FPCC) (2014). B.C. First Nations Languages 2014. Brentwood
Bay, BC: Author.
Hinton, L. (Ed.) (2013). Bringing our languages home: Language revitalization for families.
Berkley, CA: Heyday Books.
14 Lighting a Fire … 203
MacPherson, J. (1991). Tradition and education: Towards a vision of our future. Ottawa:
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development.
McIvor, O. (2015). Adult Indigenous language learning in Western Canada: What is holding us
back? In K. Michel, P. Walton, E. Bourassa & J. Miller (Eds.), Our living languages: Papers
from the 19th stabilizing Indigenous languages symposium (pp. 37–49). New York: Linus
Learning.
McIvor, O., & McCarty, T. L. (2016). Bilingual and immersion education in Canada and the US.
In O. García, A. Lin & S. May (Eds.), Bilingual and multilingual education, encyclopedia of
language and education (pp. 1–17). Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-02324-3_34-1.
National Indian Brotherhood (1972). Indian control of Indian education. Ottawa: Author.
Ryan, J., Pollock, K., & Antonelli, F. (2007). Teacher and administrator diversity in Canada:
Leaky pipelines, bottlenecks and glass ceilings. In Paper prepared for the Annual Conference
of the Society for the Study of Education. Saskatoon, SK.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and reconciliation commission of
Canada: Calls to action. http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/Findings/Calls_
to_Action_English2.pdf.
Wilson, S. (2007). Guest editorial: What is an indigenist research paradigm? Canadian Journal
of Native Education, 30(2), 193.
Part III
Indigenous-led Teacher
Education Programmes
Raven’s Response to Teacher Education:
NITEP, an Indigenous Story
Jo-ann Archibald – Q’um Q’um Xiiem and Jessica La Rochelle – Lhkwemiya
Introduction
The authors of this chapter, Jo-ann Archibald and Jessica La Rochelle follow
Indigenous protocol practiced in British Columbia (BC), Canada, where we
acknowledge that the University of British Columbia (UBC) Vancouver campus is
situated on the traditional, ancestral and unceded lands of the Musqueam First
Nation. The xʷməθkʷəy̓əm, Musqueam, are People of the River Grass, who never
gave up their traditional lands nor do they have a modern-day treaty.1 We are
grateful visitors who work and study at the UBC Vancouver campus where the
main office of the Native Indian Teacher Education Program (NITEP) is situated.
We also acknowledge and thank the various First Nations communities throughout
BC that have hosted NITEP since it began in 1974. The majority of their lands are
also unceded. Another part of Indigenous protocol that we practice is to introduce
ourselves so that readers will know a little about us.2
Jo-ann Archibald—I am also known as Q’um Q’um Xiiem, which means, strong
clear water. I was also given a Musqueam name to carry out in my former role as
associate dean for Indigenous education: çeçəwətən sni„stənəq, which means a
helper who passes teachings on to others. This name is not a personal one, but one
1See Musqueam First Nation website for historical and current information http://www.
musqueam.bc.ca. Accessed April 26, 2016.
2Italics will be used to distinguish the authors’ personal stories.
J.-a. Archibald (✉) · J. La Rochelle 207
Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada
e-mail: [email protected]
J. La Rochelle
e-mail: [email protected]
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018
P. Whitinui (eds.), Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-6400-5_15
208 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
that guides the work of the associate dean position within the Office of Indigenous
Education in the Faculty of Education at UBC. I am also the former director of
NITEP and am currently a professor in the Department of Educational Studies. I
have both Stó:lo¯ and St'át’imc ancestry; however, I grew up in Stó:lo¯ territory on
the Soowahlie reserve. Teaching at various educational levels from K-12, under-
graduate and graduate contexts has been a highlight of my educational career. My
work with NITEP began in 1981 where I was introduced to NITEP students through
the courses that I taught at its regional centres in BC. I have also served as a regio-
nal field centre coordinator and the director of the program. I have worked with
NITEP for 19 years. Even though I did not graduate from NITEP, I feel like a family
member of this wonderful Indigenous teacher education program; sometimes, I
leave to do other things, but I return to it for good family feelings of belonging, sus-
tenance and purpose. I keep coming back to NITEP because it is a program and a
learning place that both comforts and challenges me to do the best that I can for
Indigenous education. I keep coming back because the NITEP students inspire me.
Jessica La Rochelle—I share my traditional name, Lhkwemiya, with my mother.
My great-grandfather gave my mother the name and it was passed on to me by my
maternal grandparents. There is a set of mountains known as the three sisters near
my home territory; my name refers to the third sister. My name grounds me and
relates me to my land, to my mother and to my family. I am Stó:lo¯, Okanagan, and
also have Trinidadian ancestry on my father’s side. My grandmother is a NITEP
graduate and I have been the NITEP assistant director for 6 years. I am also cur-
rently a graduate student in the Faculty of Education at UBC. As I think about my
grandmother’s experience with education and my aunt’s role as a teacher in our
community school, I see how their experiences informed mine. My aunt and uncle
raised me in our home community of Sts’ailes. My aunt’s role as a teacher meant
that I spent more time at the school than most children and was included in field
trips and events with other students. I attribute my love of reading to her, as it was
our tradition when I was younger to read at least two books (she would read to me,
then I would read to her) before bedtime. That early and constant positive experi-
ence with education and learning led me to NITEP where I continue to be motivated
by the future teachers and leaders in our program, and to provide an engaging and
positive learning experience, evoking positive change in Indigenous education.
Background
The NITEP3 was established in 1974 as a Bachelor of Education degree (BEd)
program at the UBC’s Faculty of Education. NITEP is for Canadian people of
First Nations, Métis and Inuit ancestry. NITEP students may select an Elementary,
3Terms such as Native, Aboriginal, Indian and Indigenous will be used in this chapter. The terms
Native and Indian will be used to signify a particular time period when each term was predomi-
nantly used. Aboriginal and Indigenous will be used interchangeably.
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 209
Middle Years or Secondary school learning option. This BEd degree is of a
concurrent nature in which arts/science university transfer courses are taken along
with education courses throughout this 4-year plus4 degree program. The NITEP
founding group members were mainly Indigenous educators who were among the
very few certified Indigenous teachers in BC in the 1970s who in fact made up
0.11% of the total teaching population (Archibald, 1986). One of these, the late
Robert Sterling was a highly respected educational leader who in 1983 related
NITEP’s success to involvement and decision-making by Indian people who
created an Indian-based program:
Programs in which Native people have been actively involved in the planning and
throughout the developmental phases have shown the greatest success. Among these, our
Native Indian Teacher Education Program, NITEP, stands at the forefront of our suc-
cesses. The program is an Indian idea, is Indian-controlled and its philosophy is Indian,
although the program falls under the jurisdiction of the University of British Columbia.
(cited in Archibald, 1986, p. 33)
The founding group chose the program logo of Raven holding the sun in its beak
to symbolize a traditional Indigenous story that provides guidance and vision to the
work of NITEP (see Fig. 1). In Indigenous traditional stories, Raven is a trickster
character that often gets into trouble because Raven does not follow good cultural
teachings, but occasionally does something to help others. In the NITEP story,
Raven pitied the people who were living in darkness and decided that he would find the
sun for them, so that they could have a better life. Raven went on a journey and after lots
of effort and trickery, found a hole in the sky, and captured the sun. Raven brought the
sun back to the people of the earth.5
Fig. 1 NITEP logo
(Reprinted with permission
from NITEP)
4An additional term is needed to complete the degree requirements if students enter the program
with no university transfer credits.
5This story was told orally and then used in many of NITEP’s promotional materials over the
years; therefore, it does not have an official source and date for a citation. There are many ver-
sions of Raven and Sun throughout the westcoast of British Columbia.
210 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
NITEP is like the sun in Raven’s beak that has the potential to improve peo-
ple’s lives. The NITEP founders wanted NITEP to improve people’s lives through
good quality education. They developed NITEP because the existing Euro-western
based teacher education programs were not culturally responsive or accessible to
people who did not meet rigid university admission criteria in the 1970s. The very
low numbers of certified Indigenous teachers in the 1970s reinforces this point.
The founding group ensured that NITEP was not a ‘carbon copy’ of the main-
stream institutional programs or courses, with the only distinguishing feature being
the Indigenous students who enroled (Kirkness, 1998). NITEP distinguishing fea-
tures will be highlighted later in this chapter.
The Raven and Sun story encourages, reminds and at times challenges the
faculty, students, educators and community members associated with NITEP to
sustain and re-imagine good quality teaching and learning based in Indigenous
knowledge systems and other pertinent educational knowledge, skills and practices
for K-12 educational contexts. Throughout this chapter, we will return to the
Raven and Sun story for other teachings or educational understandings.
The NITEP founders were also like the Raven, demonstrating commitment,
persistence, sometimes using trickery to establish an Indigenous program that was
questioned and opposed by many within the university (More, 2015). These
Ravens also established a First Nations Education Council (FNEC) to guide
NITEP’s program and curriculum policies and other pertinent program matters.
This Council has continued to make important decisions about the program, some
of which will be discussed later. The FNEC is made up of community representa-
tives from the regional centres, a Musqueam Elder, alumni, representatives from
province-wide Indigenous professional educational associations—including, the
First Nations Schools Association and the British Columbia Teacher’s Federation,
student representatives from each cohort group, the associate dean for Teacher
Education, the director of Ts‘’kel graduate studies and the associate director of the
First Nations House of Learning.
Seven principles have contributed to the continuing development of NITEP
over its 40+ years. The NITEP principles are also its values. The challenge is to
ensure that program policies and practices address the principles despite various
internal and external contextual issues. Internal considerations include university
and Faculty of Education actions that relate to funding cuts, degree requirement
changes and strategic priorities. External matters focus on educational national,
provincial and local priorities regarding curriculum changes, partnership opportu-
nities and labour market demands. The seven principles include: regional access,
cohort based/family approach, Indigenous education focus, enhanced educational
experiences, community ties, partnerships and holistic student support. For the
purposes of this chapter, the principles6 have been grouped into one of the NITEP
6The discussion of the principles is limited to NITEP’s governance and programmatic delivery.
Much more could be discussed about each principle. Over NITEP’s 41-year history, many pro-
grammatic changes have occurred. This chapter includes programmatic components that have
been a strength of NITEP and examples of new projects are introduced.
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 211
holistic realms of physical, intellectual, emotional and spiritual in order to address
one of this book’s thematic areas: Indigenous governed and delivered teacher edu-
cation programs. NITEP’s holistic model shapes its theoretical and pedagogical
approaches as well as its delivery. The principles can apply to other realms and
often do in practice. Place is an important component of Indigenous knowledge
systems; therefore, we start with the role of place for and within NITEP.
Physical: Regional Access, Partnerships, & Community Ties
A fundamental principle and practice of NITEP that has endured since its incep-
tion is the regional field centre that provides localized opportunities for access to a
Bachelor of Education degree. Over its 41 years of operation, NITEP has had 19
field centres located in both rural and urban areas of BC (see Fig. 2). The centres
have been housed in Aboriginal cultural, educational, and health centres, schools,
and post-secondary institutes.
Fig. 2 NITEP field centres
212 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
In 2016–17, there are three regional NITEP field centres and a fourth one may
be added in September 2017.7 Now, each centre, except for the urban campus
location, remains at a community site for a 4-year period, after which time, a cen-
tre in a new location opens. A ‘Call for Proposals’ for a new centre is sent
throughout BC. The criteria emphasize partnerships, potential student enrolment,
community resources for students and educational placement opportunities.
An Aboriginal community/organization must be the primary partner, with
cooperation of other partner organizations such as school district, post-secondary
institution or other educational organization. The Aboriginal community partner
identifies the potential pool of Indigenous applicants and is involved in various
staffing, program delivery and student service decisions. Based on the concurrent
nature of NITEP, arts and sciences university transfer courses must be provided
by a partner post-secondary institute. Educational placements at public, First
Nation, independent schools or educational organizations are also needed.
The FNEC in consultation with the NITEP leadership decide on the location of
the regional field centres. The FNEC considers the commitment and strength of
the Aboriginal community host/partner, whether the region has had a centre pre-
viously, and the various partnership resources that are available for students. Their
decision is respected and accepted by the Faculty of Education’s Teacher
Education Office (TEO) and Dean’s Office. The regional field centre ensures that
students begin their teacher education program close to their home or in a location
that has strong Aboriginal community support and relationships.
Partnerships
The previous section emphasized the importance of partnerships with Aboriginal
communities, schools and post-secondary institutes. It takes continuous effort to
ensure that partnerships continue to work effectively. With some field centres that
were in a region for many years, the nature of the relationship and partnerships
changed, when leaders left their positions or when priorities and funding changed,
which resulted in lower student enrolment, changing physical locations, and diffi-
culties with educational placements. In the past the FNEC was forced to make
decisions about closing centres. The main reasons were low student enrolment as
well as the high cost of operating the regional field centre. Closing a regional cen-
tre is very difficult emotionally for students, staff and others, especially when a
centre has been in a location for many years. Therefore, more recently the FNEC
decided that new regional field centres would be limited to a 4-year period with an
emphasis on partnerships, through a revised program structure that is called,
7The centres are located at Lillooet in the BC interior, Agassiz/Seabrid Island in the Fraser
Valley, and at the Vancouver UBC campus, called the Urban NITEP Centre.
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 213
NITEP 2.0.8 These partnerships will facilitate student success through combined
student support services, ensuring access to a variety of educational placements,
master teacher mentorship and other initiatives that will be discussed later.
Community Ties
Developing and maintaining NITEP-community linkages and relationships is a
major responsibility of the NITEP staff and coordinators. Indigenous Elders and
resource people are invited to participate in the students’ learning, social and cul-
tural activities. A part-time Elders-in-Residence program is part of each NITEP
cohort. NITEP alumni who teach in First Nations and public schools are invited to
be guest speakers for various courses. A Master Teacher Mentoring Program is in
planning stages that will involve NITEP and other teachers who will be teaching
mentors for the NITEP students while they are in the field centres. This mentoring
program is another way to facilitate learning linkages to professional school com-
munities. NITEP coordinators often organize lunches/dinners for community and
family members. It is essential for NITEP to have a community presence, which is
developed and maintained through the aforementioned examples.
Throughout the program, students are encouraged to think about, plan and dis-
cuss ways that they will create and maintain family and community linkages and
relationships with their future students. The NITEP students are also encouraged
to learn more about their own Indigenous family and community histories, issues
and current projects through their coursework. Family and extended family rela-
tionships and support are important to NITEP’s holistic approach.
Emotional: Cohort Based/Family Approach
… As a student within the NITEP program, my experience has been one of inclusiveness,
equity, and understanding. The faculty, students, and alumni form more than a program.
They form a family. (NITEP student, personal communication, 2015)
The NITEP cohort becomes an extended family, which is formed at the regio-
nal field centre and expanded when they move to the Vancouver university cam-
pus and merge with other NITEP cohorts. Although not related by kinship, the
NITEP students develop family feelings for cohort members based on the common
learning experiences in NITEP. The family/cohort approach that is emphasized at
both regional and on-campus settings results in feelings of belonging to a family
8NITEP 2.0 includes moving from full face to face instruction for NITEP courses to blended deliv-
ery with some courses online and others face to face. The coordinator’s responsibilities have been
reduced along with their appointment, which is now 40%. The partners take on more recruitment
and student support services along with the on-campus NITEP office staff and coordinators.
214 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
group and safety. This personal story told by Jessica, assistant director, exempli-
fies these emotions:
My grandmother, a NITEP alumna, recalls her time in NITEP fondly and encouraged me
to pursue post-secondary education because of those positive memories. She talked about
how two of her cohort members adopted her as an auntie. They would walk to and from
classes with her and they would often have dinners together with other NITEP students.
She still tells me stories about the old NITEP ‘huts’ at the Vancouver campus and how,
because of her fellow students, the huts became her home away from home. In fact, it was
conversations that I had with her about NITEP that encouraged me to apply for its assis-
tant director position and pursue a career in Indigenous education.
The NITEP education courses facilitate the inclusion of Aboriginal cultural prac-
tices such as ceremony, talking circles and cultural gatherings. Elders and cultural
resource speakers share their teachings with the students. The students also take
field trips to local Aboriginal community gatherings and NITEP graduates also
speak at the NITEP courses and student gatherings thereby continuing the extended
family learning and intergenerational learning processes. The students note that dur-
ing their NITEP classes they have a safe and comfortable learning environment in
which they do not have to defend inclusion or practice of Aboriginal culture to
others. They can talk about the importance of such matters as Aboriginal spirituality
and learn more about it without fear of ridicule or skepticism from non-Aboriginal
students. They also appreciate the family feeling that they experience with their
classmates. Jo-ann recounts a 2015 teaching experience with NITEP students.
This past year, I taught an Indigenous curriculum course for NITEP students. They were
in their third year, with most moving from a regional centre to the Vancouver campus. I
would often tell Indigenous stories to use as a catalyst for dialogue. In addition to discus-
sion about the course topics, the students often talked about the difficult transitions they
experienced moving from rural areas to the city, the loneliness, the added expenses, and
lack of extended family members to help with their children. They also expressed appre-
ciation for being in a class of NITEP students who understood what they were experien-
cing. They felt relieved to be in a smaller class of Indigenous students compared to the
large university classes where they were in the minority. They also talked about the family
feeling and caring that they received from each other, the safe space to talk about what
really mattered to them, and to think deeply about Indigenous education.
Intellectual: Indigenous Education Focus
Two or three Indigenous education courses are taken in each year of the 4 years of
NITEP, for which NITEP has a major decision-making role over the course content,
delivery and selection of Indigenous faculty to teach its courses. These courses con-
stitute a concentration in Indigenous Education and include an introductory course
on Indigenous history and issues in Canada and BC, an Indigenous educational his-
tory and policy course, an Indigenous curriculum course, and an advanced examina-
tion of current critical issues in Indigenous education. NITEP also offers educational
seminars and educational placements in the first 3 years in which Indigenous educa-
tional content, professional teaching expectations, the use of digital technology,
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 215
holistic personal development, current Indigenous educational trends and lesson
planning are addressed. During these courses, NITEP students have opportunities to
explore and develop their cultural identities; to understand better the intergenera-
tional trauma caused by the impact of residential schooling and assimilation of the
public system and to develop educational understandings/competencies that are
based in Indigenous knowledges.
The NITEP holistic model noted below (Fig. 3) is part of the students’ course
learning. They learn to understand the dimensions of the model and they are chal-
lenged to apply it to their everyday living and to use it for their learning and teach-
ing. To demonstrate this point, a fourth year NITEP student shared these thoughts:
My [kinship] family is an integral part of who I am as an Indigenous student and who I am
as an Indigenous educator…My NITEP family recognized me as a holistic student. NITEP
has always been structured in a holistic way that recognizes students as whole people.
When I needed support because of a [kinship] family issue I was not left on my own, I was
lifted up [by the NITEP family]. (NITEP student, personal communication, 2015)
NITEP students benefit from various types of Indigenous educational mentor-
ing that range from: Indigenous instructors who teach the NITEP courses; NITEP
centre and on campus coordinators who teach, provide student services and ensure
learning connections to community members; NITEP leadership who have contin-
uous engagement with the students; Elders and cultural knowledge holders who
also teach the students; and NITEP alumni who are guest speakers and workshop
presenters. This intergenerational mentoring helps students begin a decolonization
process where they can learn about systemic power issues that are prevalent in
Fig. 3 NITEP Holistic model (Reprinted with permissions from NITEP)
216 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
school systems, how Indigenous educators have attempted to make policy and cur-
riculum changes, and how Indigeneity can prevail despite racism, indifference and
competing demands. Most importantly, these mentors who ‘have been there’ and
who strive to make a difference often provide inspiration to NITEP students.
Raven reminds us about important outcomes of NITEP: to create more
Indigenous educators, provide students with a safe space to question Euro-western
education and ideals, and examine their own Indigenous identities and world-
views. In addition to not having to defend Indigenous epistemologies, ontologies
and pedagogies, NITEP students can question issues about their community lea-
dership and Indigenous schooling, which they may not disclose in a mixed
Indigenous and non-Indigenous group.
It is essential that NITEP students know and understand the history of
Indigenous education; especially the genocide inflicted by residential schools and
the assimilationist policies of public school systems. NITEP students need to be
prepared to have difficult conversations about this history and they need to hear
Indigenous personal stories to better prepare them to teach students and future pro-
fessional colleagues who may be ignorant of this history. They need to be able to
present Indigenous history, in fact Canadian history, in a way that acknowledges
the negative intergenerational impact while also presenting opportunities for
reconciliation and understanding. As Greg Lowan-Trudeau indicated in a keynote
presentation at the Canadian Symposium on Indigenous Teacher Education on 7
April 2016, ‘we need to seek balance through stories of resistance and hope’.
Enhanced Educational Experiences
During the program, NITEP students complete more practicals than the basic teacher
education program. They complete 10 days in each of 3 years in various educational
settings, many of these are in Aboriginal schools and Aboriginal education contexts
such as cultural centres, friendship centres, adult learning programs and early learning
sites. Some of the educational placement experiences include experiential cultural
activities such as cedar bark weaving and drum-making; attending Indigenous educa-
tion conferences; mentoring K-12 school students during noon hour or after school;
speaking to school students about becoming a teacher, and learning from Elders.
Field trips also incorporate Aboriginal ways of place-based knowing.
Of the 10 days, 5 consecutive days are completed in K-12 classrooms. It is a
short amount of time but NITEP students return from these experiences enthused
about their future teaching career, motivated to complete their academic program,
and inspired by the teachers and/or K-12 students. They now have a frame of
reference or experience about K-12 education upon which to draw for their teacher
education learning. Not all educational placements are positive. For some, they
question teaching approaches, or they may realize that teaching is not for them.
These early years are also important for developing professional teacher conduct
and ethical behaviour.
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 217
Spiritual: Holistic Support
The holistic learning model is another cultural philosophical framework for
NITEP (see Fig. 3). Holistic learning involves developing the spiritual, emotional,
physical and intellectual aspects of our human development. Because Indigenous
knowledge is often relational and inter-dependent, the aforementioned four realms
are addressed both as distinct entities and in relation to each other. The principle
of inter-relatedness extends to the circles of responsibility and interaction that
embrace oneself, one’s family, one’s community and the wider world.
The inter-related nature of NITEP’s Holistic Model is discussed in this section
about the spiritual realm. The spiritual dimension is certainly subjective, culturally
specific and could also be considered secular in nature. For NITEP, opportunities
are provided for students, Elders, faculty, staff and community members to engage
in cultural ceremonies that may be part of or associated with NITEP courses, to
learn about their own or other Indigenous cultures’ concepts of spirituality, and to
develop their own sense of ‘spirit’ or Indigenous ‘being’ as an individual, family/
community member and professional educator. Having students in the program
for 4 years provides many of these spiritually oriented growth opportunities, which
makes it a pleasure to witness the NITEP students’ graduation ceremonies. At the
same time, we can recall the various difficulties that they faced throughout their
program where their spirit was challenged. For those who work with the program,
we take a long-range view of personal and professional growth that begins when
they enter the program.
Once students are admitted to the Program, the NITEP program advisor/on
campus coordinator provides academic advising about the arts/science courses stu-
dents need to take at the local college or university and the UBC education
courses. If students have difficulties with the academic work, tutors are arranged
and paid for by NITEP. If students have social, emotional or personal difficulties,
the coordinators provide a safe ‘listening ear’ and refer the students to appropriate
university or community resources. They also help students with completing bur-
sary or student loan applications and housing applications. At times, the coordina-
tors are a critical liaison between the student and the university instructor,
especially when students have unexpected personal crisis situations. There are
many family tragedies such as death, attempted suicides and other losses each
year. The UBC Faculty of Education, TEO supports NITEP student success
through cooperative discussions, problem solving and planning sessions held
between the NITEP coordinators, NITEP assistant director and TEO program
advisors and coordinators. The aforementioned student issues and needs illustrate
the need for holistic or comprehensive approaches.
NITEP continues to further develop holistic well-being as an important factor in
achieving and maintaining student success. Students are also encouraged to con-
sider how they would deal with spiritual, emotional, social, mental and physical
development of the K-12 students whom they will teach in the future. Jessica
speaks about the development of a university student initiative that was created
218 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
when Aboriginal considerations were omitted for a new university student mental
health project.
In the spring of 2015, I attended the UBC Advising Conference where I participated in a
workshop about the student mental health resources and Wellness Student Peers. I asked if
there was a Wellness Peer designated for Aboriginal students. When I was informed there
was not, I followed up with the staff who organized the session to inquire about developing
a program modeled on what was already in place, but would incorporate Indigenous
knowledges and perspectives, making the program more culturally relevant for our stu-
dents. The staff was very willing to work with me and NITEP to develop such resources.
In the fall of 2015, NITEP launched the Mental Health and Wellness Program
(MHWP) with support from the UBC student services office that developed the well-
ness resources. Jessica began with using the NITEP Holistic Model and developed a
workshop for students to identify personal and cultural examples of various compo-
nents of holism as noted in Fig. 3. The MHWP is in the infancy stages and we are
excited to continue working with university and community partners in the future.
Conclusion: Raven’s Perspectives
[NITEP] is an Indian idea, is Indian-controlled and its philosophy is Indian, although the
program falls under the jurisdiction of the University of British Columbia. (Robert
Sterling cited in Archibald, 1986, p. 33)
The late Robert Sterling’s comments are repeated above because our conclud-
ing remarks relate to his points. Despite being under the jurisdiction of UBC, and
the limitations of that form of governance for Indigenous programs, NITEP con-
tinues to be an Indigenous idea, is Indigenous-controlled, and has an Indigenous
philosophy. We also return to the Raven and Sun story to give Raven almost the
last word. In 2016, at the time of writing this chapter, Raven is still as vibrant,
mischievous and well-meaning as ever.
Raven remembers the story about the small group of Indigenous educators who worked
with Faculty of Education allies to create an Indigenous teacher education program that
provided a way for Indigenous people to access this program within their communities.
This group showed self-determination in their actions: they knew that more Indigenous
teachers were needed so they created a way for that to happen at a university. Raven
wonders what trickery they needed for that program to be approved at a time when
Indigenous programs and curriculum were not appreciated or recommended, unlike now,
where national associations such as The Council of Ministers of Education, Canada,9 and
the Association of Canadian Deans of Education10 have indicated that Aboriginal teachers
and Aboriginal curriculum are priorities, or where these same actions are recommended in
the 2015 Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada Final Report.11
9See http://www.cmec.ca/53/Programs-and-Initiatives/Aboriginal-Education/Overview/index.html.
Accessed April 29, 2016.
10See Accord on Indigenous Education (2010), http://www.csse-scee.ca/docs/acde/acde_accord_
indigenousresearch_en.pdf. Accessed April 29, 2016.
11http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/index.php?p=890. Accessed April 29, 2016.
15 Raven’s Response to Teacher Education … 219
Raven appreciates that Indigenous educators make policy and programmatic decisions
through a First Nations Education Council and that the majority of NITEP’s leadership
and teaching positions continue to be staffed by Indigenous educators who work with an
‘Indigenous heart and mind.’ Raven sometimes thinks that they are Ravens too because
they have to keep helping the university to adjust their ways to be more respectful and
responsive to Indigenous students.
Raven is proud to be the logo for NITEP, being the center of attention, so that people
remember the reason the Sun was brought to them: to have a better life through educa-
tion. Raven doesn’t mind sharing attention with the image that NITEP calls its holistic
approach, which has become stronger throughout the program over the years. Raven has
even learned to be a better Raven through spiritual, emotional, physical, and intellectual
growth. Remembering responsibilities to family, community, and the teaching profession
is not easy but must be carried out. Imagine 41 years … a lot more stories to tell about
changes, challenges, and opportunities … for another time.
Over more than four decades, those who govern, work for and study within
NITEP have continued to examine its purpose, structure, courses and policies in
order to ensure that it is relevant and beneficial to its Indigenous learners,
Indigenous communities and Indigenous education in general. The Indigenous
decision-making mechanisms, field centre approach and Indigenous knowledge
aspects of NITEP are its strengths. NITEP graduates are loyal to this program
because for many it helped them to recognize their internal gifts and to develop a
sustained network of educator-friends to draw upon once they are out in the field.
Students have compared the program to a canoe journey; the more they pull
together, the easier it becomes.
NITEP continues to balance the Indigenous aspect of its teacher education pro-
gram with that of the initial teacher education program within the UBC Faculty of
Education in order to fulfil the Bachelor of Education degree requirements. There
have been at least three major programmatic changes to the UBC BEd degree since
the inception of NITEP. Each time, NITEP has had to negotiate and adjust its
Indigenous components. Each time that we make these changes, we need to ensure
that the program remains Indigenous in philosophy and in practice. Students need to
experience a learning program that is both Indigenous and of good quality, negating
the racism of Indigenous programs being inferior to those of a mainstream nature.
Students should not need to sacrifice their Indigenous identity in order to fit in to
Euro-western academia. Their Indigenous identity can enhance their understanding
of the world and help them to be open to different ways of knowing and thinking.
NITEP, along with other Indigenous Teacher Education Programs across
Canada and elsewhere have contributed immensely to advancing Indigenous edu-
cation and making space for Indigenous knowledges and pedagogies in academia.
The graduates of Indigenous teacher education programs are often the leaders who
challenge systemic forms of racism and who work to make pertinent changes.
Indigenous educators, Indigenous community members and non-Indigenous allies
need to continue working together to provide good quality Indigenous teacher
education that includes meaningful governance involvement of Indigenous people
and that delivers programs that are truly Indigenous. We wonder what Raven’s
next journey will bring to the people.
220 J.-a. Archibald and J. La Rochelle
References
Archibald, J. (1986). Completing a vision: The native Indian teacher education program at the
University of British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 13(1), 33–46.
Association of Canadian Deans of Education (2010). Accord on Indigenous education. Delta:
Author.
Kirkness, V. J. (1998). Our peoples’ education: Cut the shackles; cut the crap; cut the mustard.
Canadian Journal of Native Education, 22(1), 10–15. http://ezproxy.library.ubc.ca/login?
url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/230308310?accountid=14656.
More, A. (2015). Building NITEP: The native Indian teacher education program at the University
of British Columbia, 1960–1974. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 38(1), 21–38.
Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015). Truth and reconciliation commission of
Canada: Calls to action. Retrieved from http://www.trc.ca/websites/trcinstitution/File/2015/
Findings/Calls_to_Action_English2.pdf.
‘Hold Strongly to One Another’: The
Development of an Indigenous Teacher
Preparation and Professional Development
Program
Lee Francis IV, Cheryl A. Torrez and Marjori Krebs
Introduction
Hold strongly to one another’ is our reality-based metaphor for helping each other to sur-
vive challenges, share knowledge, and strengthen each other in all relations is embedded
in our prayers since time immemorial. The phrase ‘hon e:beya tsu:ma, e:yakna tho’o’’
means ‘to hold strongly to each other so we may grow in our relations and collective
strength now, and for the future.
This hope and instruction is depicted on the walls of the Grand Canyon. As the Pueblo
emerged from the fourth world there is a depiction of two human Pueblo figures. One is
on the surface with hand extended grasping the hand of another and pulling him/her to
the surface and into the present world. As Pueblo people, we must learn to practice this
in all areas of life and relations. If we embed this into the [PETAC] program, then we
can overcome negative relations and imposed challenges to improve teaching and learn-
ing for all Pueblo children and their families. (personal communication, PSD
Superintendent, May 2015).
The ‘emergence from the fourth world’ is part of the Pueblo Creation stories,
and refers to the journey, or the emergence, of the People into this present world
and state that they occupy. The Pueblo Engaging Teachers and Community
L. Francis IV (✉)
Director for Wordcraft Circle of Native Writers and Storytellers, and CEO Native Realties,
Albuquerque, NM, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
C.A. Torrez · M. Krebs
Department of Teacher Education, Educational Leadership and Policy, College of Education,
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Krebs
e-mail: [email protected]
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018 221
P. Whitinui (eds.), Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-6400-5_16
222 L. Francis IV et al.
(PETAC) project is a collaboration between a university in the South Western
United States and a Pueblo School District (PSD) with funding from the W. K.
Kellogg Foundation. As a progressive and dynamic attempt to redefine the nature
of teacher preparation within Indigenous communities, PETAC invited the Pueblo
community to serve as a model for the ways in which necessary collaboration can
yield strong student educational attainment. A focus on Pueblo language, history
and culture, as well as solidifying community engagement in the educational pro-
cess was key to building the program. Tribal education with, to, and for their chil-
dren involved storytelling and mentorship in aspects of daily life, and necessary
community skills. Once colonialism began, first with the Spanish followed by the
Mexicans, Indigenous children were educated by Franciscan friars in the Catholic
doctrine. In the 1800s, the U.S. government created the Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIE), which placed children in boarding schools. The goal of these boarding
schools was to remove the children from their Indigenous homes, and to assimilate
Indigenous children into the ‘American’ culture. These boarding schools had, and
continue to have, damaging effects on many families and their children (Mondragon
& Stapleton, 2005; Pewewardy, 2005). Extensions of these assimilationist practices
exist in the current school-based assessment systems, which often favour Western
knowledge over Pueblo cultural values and community practices.
At the inception PETAC, an Advisory Council was established to provide a
foundation and general oversight of the work. It composed of four Indigenous
scholars from the university, alongside the Advisory Council that provided critical
expertize in the continued development of the Indigenized project. Moreover, the
Advisory Council helped to maintain the Indigenous traditions underpinning the
project; and speaks to the strategic efforts taken to ensure a sustainable project.
Traditionally, marginalized communities are often wary of professional develop-
ment strategies that come from outside interventions (Anuik & Gillies, 2012;
Kitchen & Raynor, 2013). This is especially true in Indigenous communities where
historical trauma and conscriptive ethnocide was implemented through school sys-
tems as a means of decimating cultural and kinship structures (Cerecer, 2013;
Szasz, 2005; Tenorio, 2011). While many Indigenous scholars have evidenced that
strong cultural engagement leads to more positive student outcomes for Indigenous
students (Akee & Yazzie-Mintz, 2011; Sutherland & Swayze, 2012; Webster &
Yanez, 2007), many Indigenous educators either are not supported by the school
leadership or educational system when they seek to implement culturally responsive
and culturally sustainable curriculum. In this way, PETAC is an empowering model
for culturally sustainable professional development (Cerecer, 2013; Sobel,
Gutierrez, Zion, & Blanchett, 2011; Sutherland & Swayze, 2012).
In this chapter we highlight and describe the work of a strong partnership
between an Indigenous school district and a university. These two institutions
have collaborated to develop a professional development strategy that can nurture
the learning and well-being of every student (Goodlad, 1987, 1994). The emphasis
is on preparing teachers to engage in cultural sustainability and revitalization
(McCarty & Lee, 2014). We believe this kind of partnership also emphasizes local
control, community empowerment and collaborative leadership.
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 223
The Pueblo School District
The PSD is located within a rural Pueblo Indigenous community in the
Southwestern United States. This community encompasses approximately 450,000
acres of land across counties in two states, where the Indigenous tribe has lived
for thousands of years. The current population of the Pueblo is approximately
12,097, and 32% of its residents live below the poverty line (Public School
Review, 2014). The PSD is located approximately 160 miles from the main cam-
pus of the university, and takes three hours to travel there by car. The PSD was
also established to help assert local autonomy of education for the benefit of
Pueblo children. This public school system operates under the laws of the state;
with five schools serving a total of 1,300 students (Zuni Public Schools, 1979).
What Is PETAC? Developing the Project
PETAC began in 2013 with funding from the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. The
PSD invited the university to provide support, technical assistance and profes-
sional development for its teachers, while at the same time recruiting and support-
ing students to earn degrees to become teachers. The inclusion of these
understandings helped to draw focus on the collaborative nature of PETAC.
Goals of PETAC
PETAC includes a blended approach towards professional development by ground-
ing the instruction in culturally sustainable pedagogy (McCarty & Lee, 2014) and
balancing the local Indigenous culture with the wider need for Western knowledge
and skills. To this end, PETAC established five key goals: (a) Provide a social and
cultural orientation for current and future teachers in the Pueblo; (b) Re-establish a
sense of empowerment among principals and teachers; (c) Facilitate collegial and
collaborative work across the district; (d) Recruit current Pueblo students to become
teachers and (e) Provide educational opportunities through tuition support for tea-
chers, and future teachers to obtain graduate and undergraduate degrees. The hope
of the project has been to cultivate teachers committed to serving as a foundation
for the long-term development of the Pueblo schools, and the Pueblo itself.
PETAC Goals in Action
An important strategic pillar concerning PETAC is to integrate Pueblo culture,
language and history into PK-12 education. Workshops occur two weeks each
summer with additional week-long follow up sessions three times during the
school year. The focus of these workshops has been to adopt a Project-Based
224 L. Francis IV et al.
Fig. 1 The eight essential elements of project based learning
Learning (PBL) opportunities to strengthen the use of Pueblo language and cul-
ture. PBL is a fitting strategy to incorporate Pueblo language and culture into the
classroom because of its focus on facilitating learning in community-based set-
tings with authentic audiences; where students do the work of real people, while
incorporating specific curricular standards throughout the project (Buck Institute,
2016). The major components of PBL (see Fig. 1) incorporate teaching the curri-
culum using inquiry methods, employing student voice, choice, reflection and cri-
tique, and finally, producing a public product that speaks to the authentic issues
concerning the Pueblo people, and their communities (Mergendoller, 2015).
This figure illustrates the aspects of Project Based Learning and their
intersections.
Provide a social and cultural orientation for current and future teachers in
the Pueblo. Pueblo community members, the cultural advisory committee PBL
trainers, lead PETAC workshops. This has resulted in numerous PK-12 classroom
PBL activities. For example, a high school geology teacher has developed an
extensive field and classroom-based unit whereby the students sample, and test
rocks and minerals from across the Pueblo. A Pueblo community member who, in
the tribal language, teaches the high school students the cultural and historical
importance of the geological formations as well as, the religious or sacred impor-
tance of the sites accompanies these field-trip excursions. Finally, the students
learn how to carve native fetishes from tribal fetish carvers. A third-grade teacher
has led her students in creating a Pueblo language photo dictionary. The students
used digital cameras to photograph Pueblo objects, wrote the words in both
Pueblo and English, and used each word in a sentence written in both languages.
These hard cover books are now available in libraries at all five district schools,
the Pueblo public library, and the university library.
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 225
Re-establish a sense of empowerment among principals and teachers.
Monthly professional development sessions with principals and teachers from the
five schools in the PSD are conducted using a cross-grade level collaboration
approach. This involves including PBL project sharing, the redevelopment of the
Tribal Language Curriculum, and curriculum development. When third graders
accompanied sophomores on a science field trip, the sophomores taught the third
graders how to conduct water quality testing and how to identify native plants; as
well as name them using the Pueblo language.
Facilitate collegial and collaborative work across the district. Interwoven
throughout PETAC has been a focus on the Pueblo core values. As PK-12 teachers,
educational assistants, and community members jointly participate in the PETAC ses-
sions, and as a result, collaboration across schools within the district has increased.
Recruit current Pueblo students to become teachers. The university has
hosted a total of over 200 middle school and high school Pueblo students on cam-
pus, facilitating sessions involving advising, financial aid and American Indian
Student Services. Students are also introduced to campus life by touring dormi-
tories, cafeterias, and attending football and basketball games.
Provide educational opportunities through support for teachers and future
teachers to obtain graduate and undergraduate degrees. Currently 38 students
are enrolled in coursework in the College of Education at the graduate and under-
graduate levels. With grant support for tuition, books, course fees and transporta-
tion, students have persisted in their programs of study and are achieving their
goals of being educational professionals. In conclusion, this university–district
partnership has made a positive impact on the community and its educational sys-
tem overall. The following section highlights the importance of cultural theorizing
as an approach to culturally sustainable revitalization.
Importance of Cultural Theorizing in Methodology
As aforementioned, developing strong teachers goes beyond cultural relevance to
culturally sustainable revitalization (McCarty & Lee, 2014). Simultaneously, there
must be an emphasis on creating a synthesis of knowledge, as communities do not
exist in isolation. Teachers must strive to create curriculum and lessons that can
situate Western knowledge in an Indigenous context. Primarily PETAC has
engaged the participants in a dynamic way that has allowed for the formation of a
generative process rooted in the importance of cultural values, attitudes and under-
standings. For new projects that take place within an Indigenous community, espe-
cially those communities who have strong traditional roots, such as the Pueblo,
there can be tensions when seeking to create a new paradigm. Issues of race and
power will always be present when shifting Indigenous knowledge from the mar-
gins to the centre (Howe, 1999). As such, efforts have been made to approach the
project from an Indigenous perspective. Therefore, analysis of the project has pri-
marily been through an Indigenous framework which stresses the relational aspect
226 L. Francis IV et al.
of the interactions and observations from the researchers. An external evaluator, in
collaboration with the project leadership (project directors and superintendent of the
PSD), developed the majority of the PETAC analysis. The external evaluator is one
of the authors of this chapter and is of Pueblo Indigenous ethnic background.
Indigenous Framework
Drawing upon the work of Kovach (2009), and LaFrance and Nichols (2008), the
evaluation aligns with the principles established by their work. Ultimately, through
this evaluative process one is tasked with creating a bridge of understanding
between the Indigenous framework and the Western academic methods of data
collection and analysis. With this understanding in mind, objective evaluation has
been combined with intentional and relational observation of PETAC. As
LaFrance and Nichols (2008) note, ‘these discussions of Indigenous knowledge
stress the relevance of wisdom accumulated over the ages, the importance of keen
observation of phenomena using multiple ways of knowing, and the value of
understanding relationships that exist within all that we experience’ (p. 26).
LaFrance and Nichols (2008) also define several important practices in the
Indigenous evaluation process based on their work with the American Indian
Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC). The core values of the AIHEC are the
following: (a) focus on Indigenous knowledge within context, (b) evaluate the
People of a Place, (c) recognize gifts is part of personal sovereignty, (d) consider
the centrality of community and family, and (e) recognize Tribal sovereignty.
Context and an Indigenous Framework
Context is critical in understanding the way PETAC has been implemented. Issues
of historical trauma and marginalization are prevalent throughout the history of
the Pueblo community and the education system. The local experience is an exten-
sion of the history of Indigenous education in the United States, which under-
scores how students and communities were, at worst, subjects of ethnocide and at
best, marginalized in their educational experiences. By employing a Pueblo
Indigenous framework, which we have observed and worked to qualify our find-
ings, the analysis of PETAC was further narrowed. This framework is not a set of
standard principles but rather one that is still evolving and extends and localizes
Indigenous philosophy and epistemology. Although there may not be sharp con-
trasts between an Indigenous framework and a Pueblo Indigenous framework, the
localization is key to understanding the values of the community and framing the
work in such a way as to reflect those values. Furthermore, by narrowing the fra-
mework, we are able to portray the community as unique and sovereign rather
than pan-Indigenous, which helps maintain the cultural integrity of the work and
the findings.
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 227
The Pueblo framework also draws upon Pueblo scholarship and asserts several
assumptions when approaching the work. First, Pueblo scholar Mary Eunice
Romero (1994) articulated the concept of giftedness. In her work, she describes
giftedness among Keresan (Pueblo) students and how its manifestations are
embedded in deep cultural understandings. In aligning our work, we utilize this
guiding concept as a way to focus on the individual agency of the participants and
of the community. Second, we are guided by the concept of relationship. Pueblo
scholar Greg Cajete (1994) discusses this concept of relation among all individuals
and objects in the physical world. Relationship is an important understanding
among Pueblo people and highlights how participants interact with the one
another, the project team, the community, and all of Creation. Finally, the concept
of reciprocity/generosity, as previously referenced in this document, is told
through the Creation/Emergence story of the Pueblo people, which outlines how
reciprocity/generosity are necessary for the survival and evolution of the People.
This core value is maintained throughout the project as the team sought to find
ways to enable and empower participants to further their educational goals. Being
active in the research process, and assisting other participants and community
members by sharing their knowledge were also important considerations.
Ultimately, the Pueblo Indigenous framework is built upon the nuances of these
broad cultural concepts as practised by Pueblo people. The PETAC project direc-
tors and evaluator have built upon these concepts of giftedness, relationships and
reciprocity/generosity with the administration, teachers and staff at PSD, along
with various community members who have been engaged in the project.
Throughout the evaluation, we were conscious of the PETAC goals, although we
were guided by the reflections of the PSD Superintendent.
Data Collection with Indigenous Approach
As project directors and evaluator, we use the term ‘observations’ rather than ‘data
collection’ to underscore our Indigenous approach to the evaluation and research.
We are certainly aware that the concept of observation is a method of data collec-
tion. The concept of collecting is loaded with colonial overtones that reinforce
Western hegemony of knowledge acquisition and ownership (Beider, 2000;
Bruchac, 2007; Bruchac, Hart, & Wobst, 2010; Tsosie, 2007). By shifting the ter-
minology, we distinctly move away from the standard Western concepts in
research that were often devastating to Indigenous communities. As such, the
practice of observing has also been used in Western research in similar ways.
However, our articulation of the term and concept is one that takes into considera-
tion the positionality of the observer (being Indigenous) as an integral part of the
work and the research. From our Indigenous framework, the term observation
does not separate the researchers from the work but rather draws them closer as all
the senses are being utilized to gather information (Marshall & Rossman, 1995).
In this way, the researcher is now someone who is a part of the narrative due, in
228 L. Francis IV et al.
part, to the breakdown of colonial constructs as well as an understanding of the
local Indigenous epistemology. Rather than conducting research for the sake of
research itself, the findings become a narrative whereby the researcher serves
more so as a knowledge keeper and storyteller.
Observations came from several surveys, numerous interviews, conversational
responses, as well as field notes from the evaluator. This method aligns with in the
areas of prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation and member-
checking (Lincoln & Guba, 2000). We used a dissembling coding method (Yin,
2011) that focuses on the obvious themes that emerge and allows the coding process
to occur more holistically and organically. This was coupled with Castellano’s
(2000) revealed knowledge, which focuses on the intuited nature of knowledge and
aligns with the Indigenous methodology upon which this research rests. Observation
methods also draw upon the work of Kovach (2009) who stresses relationship as the
primary means by which Indigenous research is ethically enacted.
Findings
PETAC has had a significant impact in several key areas: identity development,
sharing and articulating new knowledge, creative transformation and teacher
effectiveness.
Initial Observations
In our observations, interviews, conversations and surveys, the participant experi-
ences in PETAC were positive, and demonstrated success in each area. Participants
also felt inspired and expressed a desire for further professional development. As a
vehicle for engaging students and community, PBL has provided an exceptional
platform in which to promote and explore more authentically Pueblo language, cul-
ture and community understandings. Participant-student needs are being met
through a combination of institutional changes at both the university level and
within the PSD. For example, project directors negotiated with the university book-
store to stay open an extra hour a day so that PETAC participants could travel the
50 min to purchase their books without having to take time off from work.
After three years, it is important to note the efforts by each of the collaborators
that speak to a unique bond that has been developed and nurtured. Specifically,
the efforts of the project directors, both of whom serve on faculty at the university,
in accommodating and supporting students who are attending the university to
earn degrees and teaching credentials along with the cultural development of tea-
chers at PSD, as well as creating a safe environment for teachers to express their
cultural understandings, and develop their class curricula. In many ways, this is
the crux of the work. Within Indigenous communities, these types of relationships
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 229
take a good deal of time to mature as there are often issues with trust and under-
standing due to the fact that the community has faced historical oppression of their
culture, language, and knowledge systems for many years.
PETAC is no different. Yet, the deliberate collaboration and intentionality of the
dialogue in addressing these issues provides insight into how PETAC can serve as
a model for other relationships in creating Indigenous professional development
systems. Most important to note has been the purposeful relationship building,
which serves as the basis for any successful endeavours within Indigenous com-
munities. Among these successes include the recruiting trips to campus taken by
middle and high school students; gas cards distributed to participants to drive
to-and-from the college campus and professional development workshops; credits
to purchase textbooks; assistance with online course fees; advising and financial aid
support from the university; meaningful and educational PBL projects implemented
in PK-12 classrooms; participant engagement and knowledge development in Pueblo
language, culture, and history; student-to-community engagement; and strong,
sustained participant engagement over time.
Identity Development
Based on surveys and conversations, the PETAC core participants are growing
stronger and are finding a shared identity, due primarily to the consistent meetings
and experiential learning opportunities throughout the project. Yearly week-long
trainings, bi-monthly meetings, and travel opportunities have allowed PETAC to
begin to develop into its own unique identifier. All participants explained how
PETAC has helped them personally and how glad they feel being part of the
work. This identity component is critical for sustainability and highlights how the
ongoing meetings and relationships are yielding success in empowering partici-
pants, providing social and cultural orientation within an educational context; and
creating a collegial, empowering and collaborative space across the district.
Sharing and Articulating
We have seen a remarkable shift in the comfort level of the participants’ willing-
ness to share their culture through PBL projects. In the first year, participants were
hesitant and unsure of how to proceed with PBL. Although they understood the
value of PBL and could speak to the quality of its delivery and the importance of
hands-on, community-based educational experiences for students, the majority of
participants could not quite articulate concrete ways in which PBL could work in
their own classrooms. This reaction was coupled with a similar reticence of imple-
menting Pueblo culture as a major part of the curriculum. Many participants stated
the importance of Pueblo culture and Pueblo knowledge, but were initially unable
230 L. Francis IV et al.
to draw connections between how this knowledge could be implemented beyond
language introduction. By the second year, participants were more fully able to
articulate the ways in which they could use PBL as a framework for Pueblo knowl-
edge and culture integration in their lesson plans, while still maintaining a connec-
tion to Common Core State Standards (2016). Some of the PBL projects
implemented in classrooms included (a) preschoolers planting, harvesting, and pre-
serving Pueblo heritage seeds; (b) third graders creating an Indigenous language
alphabet book; (c) fifth graders planting a community garden, using Indigenous gar-
dening techniques such as waffle gardening; (d) freshman geology students collect-
ing and testing mineral and rock samples, then creating Indigenous fetish carvings
and (e) sophomores testing the water quality at Pueblo ancestral sites.
As mentioned previously, issues of historical trauma were certainly present dur-
ing the first year of the project, as many Pueblo participants were unwilling to
share their culture for fear of being marginalized, as had often happened in the
past based on conversations with staff and the superintendent. Further, based on
interviews and survey data, it was the strong relationship building efforts on the
part of the university professional development team that enabled the transforma-
tion to occur. These consistent, sustainable, respectful, professional relationships
empowered teachers and educational assistants to implement culturally relevant
PBL projects in their classrooms.
Creative Transformation
Perhaps the single greatest indicator of PETAC success was the response by parti-
cipants on the second-year survey of their willingness to experiment with lessons
and learning in their classrooms. This indicator points directly towards the sustain-
ability of PETAC in terms of long-term impact. As teachers are more willing to
take risks around learning, student are the beneficiaries of these efforts. When
these efforts are coupled with culturally sustaining and culturally revitalizing curri-
culum and lesson plans, we have the foundational elements for systemic and sus-
tainable change. By the end of year two the local PSD teachers led professional
development presentations for other teachers in the district on PBL and their pro-
jects, encouraging others to implement PBL. This type of local leadership is one
of the major keys to sustainability.
Effectiveness
The positive feelings towards PETAC are much higher than the Pueblo district as a
whole. At the urging of the Superintendent, the evaluator conducted a district-wide
survey of teachers and staff regarding their perceptions of district professional
development opportunities. This points to the quality of PETAC and to the
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 231
relationships developed. One of the key aspects of PETAC is the necessity for tea-
chers to be able to include Pueblo culture and knowledge in a way that aligned with
Common Core State Standards (2016). As shown in the previous PBL project
examples teachers and educational assistants have embraced this type of culturally
relevant and sustaining teaching, coupled with hands-on, engaged student learning.
Critical Reflections
It is critical to present the voices of the participants in way that honours their contri-
butions. Rather than scatter their reflections throughout the chapter, we present their
responses in a single section in order to create a more Indigenous presentation of the
work, wherein their knowledge is presented as a whole rather than dissected and ana-
lyzed. We had also included reflections from the Project Team as a way of creating a
synthesis of the work and reinforcing Indigenous methodology. Following these
reflections, we will present our synthesis of what has been observed and lived in a
way that aligns with the Indigenous framework central to this chapter.
My knowledge of [Pueblo] history and culture was very limited when I first started working
as an Educational Assistant. I sort of went into the position naturally with many struggles
at first. However, I took it upon myself to learn more about history by utilizing available
resources to get general information taught to our students. With the recent PETAC team-
ing up with PCRAT [a Pueblo cultural research team] to give us a better insight of our ori-
gin and history really empowered me to want to teach students their [Pueblo] history and
culture. We are all [Pueblo] People in one way or another and I feel it’s time for no
excuses and to tell students this is where we will end up. Even as I progress towards want-
ing to be a regular classroom teacher, I would still rather be the individual who teaches
my students about the [Pueblo] history and culture, since I took the time to learn about it,
and since I am now aware of where some more resources are available.
For me, it has helped me rethink educational strategies and to understand the importance
of incorporating [Pueblo] practices of dance and music into instruction. As [Ms. W.]
shared, dancing will help with fighting childhood obesity and give students a healthy phy-
sical activity that enriches them physically and spiritually.
I believe I have a sense of my belonging in the [Pueblo] History, it has been overwhelm-
ing to hear see and converse with the experts about our history. I very well understand
where I came from and will now on tell to my group of young adults.
Well there has been so much I have learned, I think what really sticks to me is teaching
[Pueblo] culture in the classroom. I have written ideas down on for future references so
when I am in a classroom I can look back on my notes. I know who I would go to if I
wanted a guest speaker for [Pueblo] History or pictures.
I am happy to see invitations to be more conscious of the [Pueblo] language and culture.
When I first started teaching in [the Pueblo], I felt that as a white person I was not ‘sup-
posed’ to know much about [Pueblo] culture. I was invited to observe the dances, but not
supposed to ask questions or learn about the meanings of the various activities. I think
this is starting to change and I don’t feel so isolated from the community as before. I try
to build bridges by asking community members to come into my classroom and speak
about how the content is relevant to their lives. I also welcome student examples of how
232 L. Francis IV et al.
content is relevant. For example, when we were discussing human uses of plants (for biol-
ogy class), a student mentioned religious uses and asked if that was okay to add to the
list. They were surprise I agreed that was an authentic use because ‘other teachers said
religion doesn’t count’. I hope my classroom will never be a place where the Pueblo cul-
ture and beliefs ‘don’t count’!
Starting with my students, then colleagues, school administration, and finishing with the
support from the school district I have never felt as much of a shared sense of purpose at
[Pueblo] High School as I do this year. I don’t think it can all be due to the PETAC pro-
gram and I am aware of my own contributions to this phenomenon. It is enough for me
that it exists. I warm and inspire myself in its energy.
It means that we as [Pueblos] can and should lean on each other for support and to be
the ‘main bridge’ for our children and our students. You create bridges by being there for
the students and by listening to the students when they need someone to talk to. The pur-
pose for the [Pueblo] education is to make the children be aware of what is expected of
them within reason and how they should keep the language alive by learning to speak it
and learning to write it since most tribes have said that they have lost their use of their
language because the children refuse to learn it and the children are relying only on the
English language. If we keep teaching the children the language then we can say that our
language will still be around and will still be used in the future.
Project Team Observations
I came on as the lead evaluator at the request of the Superintendent. What he wanted was
a perspective grounded in Indigenous epistemology when evaluating the success and
direction of the project. From my perspective, the work of the project was not simply to
gain classroom skills but rather as a decolonizing strategy that used a Western method of
instruction (PBL) to be a bridge for cultural developmental concepts and ways of knowl-
edge formation to flourish in the PSD classrooms (or at least those classrooms that had
PETAC participants). What has been so striking to see has been the transformation of the
Pueblo participants who have moved from passive to active participants. I saw this
clearly during a year-two professional development convening when the participants
were clearly excited to share their projects. Compare this to the training sessions during
the first year when many of the participants were hesitant to speak or share their projects.
This to me is the value of an Indigenous approach that focuses on relationship develop-
ment as a prime component of the project, not simply a knowledge transfer (from provider
to participant). This reciprocal relationship is consistent with Indigenous values and cre-
ates a stronger program. (Francis, Krebs, & Torrez, 2015)
As part of a previously published self-study (Torrez & Krebs, 2014), the project
directors were asked to reflect on what changes they have made in their work as
teacher educators as a result of their PETAC experiences? They responded with
the following:
As teacher educators, we teach our university students to meet the needs of their K-12 stu-
dents, yet we found ourselves confronting numerous situations in which institutional
norms had caused us to deviate from the very practices we espouse such as planning,
communication, transparency; all Western values. Additional changes were across a con-
tinuum of obvious to sublime; our knowledge of a culture increased, our advocacy
increased, substantive changes were made to the programs within the department (i.e.
course offerings, advising, greater support for non-main campus sites), and the branch
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 233
campus (increased hours to the bookstore and library), and our values were re-examined
and self-analyzed and clarified.
One project director commented, ‘I pay much closer attention to ‘place.’ I seek to under-
stand the balance between the need for good teachers, as measured by Western standards
(higher grade point averages, higher teacher test scores, etc.) and teachers from the area
who teach the children’.
The second project director noted, ‘I have come to wonder if too many Western values
have oozed their way into my work-life and wonder if I have become too rigid and
focused on outcomes rather than a balance between outcomes and processes’.
Programmatically and institutionally, we have instituted distance education courses to the
branch campus on the Pueblo. ‘This never would have happened had we not been work-
ing in this project’. We have hosted tribal students on campus, and ‘this has increased
our communication with American Indian Student Services and other support organiza-
tions on main campus. This has opened up the world of higher education to the students
from the Pueblo’. These changes and activities have provided additional educational sup-
port and vision, which are part of the goals of PETAC.
Conclusions
The relationship between the PETAC participants and directors may be considered
a symbiotic relationship (Goodlad, 1987) with a view towards simultaneous
renewal. We hope our work with PETAC might serve as a model for future
Indigenous-university partnerships. One of the primary concerns in creating cultu-
rally sustainable revitalization systems for Indigenous schools is how to maintain
the cultural integrity related to Pueblo cultural knowledge development while con-
currently establishing strong bridges between Western knowledge systems. In
developing the PETAC project, this began a process of cultural transference back
to the Pueblo people. Rather than relying on outside professionals to provide
answers, PETAC is an exercise in sovereign collaboration resulting in the tribal
community gaining the capacity and control over teacher preparation and profes-
sional development. Furthermore, in understanding how to implement culturally
revitalizing projects, PETAC has created a defining structure for how to conduct
collaborative community research and development. This type of engagement
showcases the power of Indigenous transformation, and the role culture can play
in defining positive relationships for learning in teacher education.
References
Akee, R. Q., & Yazzie-Mintz, T. (2011). Counting experience among the least counted: role of
cultural and community engagement on educational outcomes for American Indian, Alaska
Native, and Native Hawaiian students. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 35(3),
119–150.
Anuik, J., & Gilles, C. J. (2012). Indigenous knowledge in post-secondary educators’ practices:
Nourishing the learning spirit. Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 42(1), 63–79.
234 L. Francis IV et al.
Bieder, R. E. (2000). The representation of Indian bodies in nineteenth-century American anthro-
pology. In D. Mihesuah (Ed.), Repatriation reader: who owns Native American Indian
remains (pp. 19–36). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
Bruchac, M. M. (2007). Historical erasure and cultural recovery: Indigenous people in the
Connecticut River Valley. Doctoral dissertation. University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Retrieved from http://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations/AAI3275817.
Bruchac, M. M., Hart, S. M., & Wobst, H. M. (2010). Indigenous archaeologies: A reader on
decolonization. Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
Buck Institute for Education. (2016). Project-based learning. Buck Institute for Education.
Retrieved from www.bie.org.
Cajete, G. (1994). Look to the mountain: an ecology of Indigenous education. Durango: Kivakí.
Castellano, M. (2000). Updating aboriginal traditions of knowledge. In G. Dei, B. Hall & D.
Rosenberg (Eds.), Indigenous knowledges in global contexts: multiple readings of our world
(pp. 21–36). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Cerecer, O. (2013). The policing of Native bodies and minds: perspectives on schooling from
American Indian youth. American Journal of Education, 111(4), 591–616.
Common Core State Standards Initiative (2016). Common core state standards. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org.
Francis, L., Krebs, M., & Torrez, C. (2015). Year 2 PETAC evaluation. Albuquerque: University
of New Mexico.
Goodlad, J. I. (1987). Linking schools and universities: Symbiotic partnerships. Institute for
the Study of Educational Policy. Retrieved from http://www.ieiseattle.org/Publications/
OccasionalPapers.htm.
Goodlad, J. I. (1994). Educational renewal: better teachers, better schools. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Howe, L. (1999). Tribalography: the power of Native stories. Journal of Dramatic Theory and
Criticism, 14(1), 117–125.
Kitchen, J., & Raynor, M. (2013). Indigenizing teacher education: an action research project.
Canadian Journal of Action Research, 14(3), 40–58.
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous methodologies: Characteristics, conversations and contexts.
Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
LaFrance, J., & Nichols, R. (2008). Reframing evaluation: defining an Indigenous evaluation fra-
mework. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 23(2), 13–31.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (2000). Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging
confluences. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research
(pp. 163–188). Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1995). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park: Sage.
McCarty, T. L., & Lee, T. S. (2014). Critical culturally sustaining/revitalizing pedagogy in
Indigenous education sovereignty. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 101–124.
Mergendoller, J. R. (2015). Why we changed our model of the “8 essential elements of PBL”.
Buck Institute for Education. Retrieved from http://bie.org/blog/why_we_changed_our_model_
of_the_8_essential_elements_of_pbl.
Mondragon, J. B., & Stapleton, E. S. (2005). Public education in New Mexico. University of
New Mexico Press: Albuquerque.
Pewewardy, C. (2005). Ideology, power, and the miseducation of Indigenous Peoples in the
United States. In W. A. Wilson & M. Yellow Bird (Eds.), For Indigenous eyes only: A deco-
lonization handbook (pp. 139–156). Santa Fe: School of American Research.
Public School Review (2014). Zuni public schools. Retrieved from http://www.publicschoolre-
view.com.
Romero, M. E. (1994). Identifying giftedness among Keresan Pueblo Indians: the Keres study.
Journal of American Indian Education, 34(1), 35–58.
Smith, T. L. (2012). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. London:
Zed Books.
16 Hold Strongly to One Another … 235
Sobel, D., Gutierrez, C., Zion, S., & Blanchett, W. (2011). Deepening culturally responsive
understandings within a teacher preparation program: it’s a process. Teacher Development,
15, 435–452.
Sutherland, D., & Swayze, N. (2012). The importance of place in Indigenous science education.
Cultural Studies of Science Education, 7, 83–92.
Szasz, M. C. (2005). “I knew how to be moderate. And I knew how to obey”: the commonality
of American Indian boarding school experiences, 1750s–1920s. American Indian Culture and
Research Journal, 29(4), 75–94.
Tenorio, M. T. (2011). Community based leadership and the exercise of tribal sovereignty in
public school education (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). School of Education: Lewis &
Clark College, Portland, Oregon.
Torrez, C., & Krebs, M. (2014, August). PETAC: A self-study analysis of work in an Indigenous
community. Presented at the Castle Self-Study International Conference, London, England.
Tsosie, R. (2007). Cultural challenges to biotechnology: Native American genetic resources and
the concept of cultural harm. Journal of Law, Medicine, & Ethics, 35(3), 396–411.
Webster, J. P., & Yanez, E. (2007). Qanemcikarluni tekitnarqelartuq [One must arrive with a
story to tell]: traditional Alaska Native Yup’ik Eskimo stories in a culturally based math cur-
riculum. Journal of American Indian Education, 46(3), 116–132.
Yin, R. K. (2011). Qualitative research from start to finish. New York: The Guilford Press.
Zuni Public Schools. (1979). How our district was formed. Retrieved from http://www.zpsd.org.
Looking at the Evolution of University of
Nuhelot’ine Thaiyots’I Nistamêyimâkanak Blue
Quills Language Programmes
Kevin Lewis, Marilyn Shirt and Jesse Sylvestre
Ownership and Self-Determination
In the 1970s, long before the Truth and Reconciliation (TRC) Calls to Action,
First Nations continued to exercise their rights to self-determination. The emerging
First Nations institutions of higher learning and on-reserve K-12 Schools recog-
nized the need for Indigenous language programs, and therefore began offering
classes. Teachers took ownership and developed curriculum and language
resources with minimal funding. This has been a continuous responsibility man-
dated by our Elders, reminding us again, of our roles, rights and responsibilities
under the signing of Treaty 6 in 1876.
Fairly recently, we were reminded again by population statistics about the
importance of our educational needs. First Nations are one of the fastest growing
populations in Canada for example, between 1996 and 2006 the Aboriginal popu-
lation increased by 232,385 people, or 20% between 2006 and 2011, compared
with 5% for the non-Aboriginal population (Statistics Canada, 2011). This is one
example of statistics that were made available to the public by provincial and fed-
eral governments that started to get the attention of the prairie provinces to start
working towards proactive steps for this population increase. With this rapid popu-
lation growth, there is a need for First Nation content in the curricula to be taught
K. Lewis (✉) 237
University of Saskatchewan, Ministikwan Lake Cree Nation, Saskatchewan, Canada
e-mail: [email protected]
M. Shirt · J. Sylvestre
University of Blue Quills, Alberta, Canada
e-mail: [email protected]
J. Sylvestre
e-mail: [email protected]
© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018
P. Whitinui (eds.), Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education,
DOI 10.1007/978-981-10-6400-5_17
The words you are searching are inside this book. To get more targeted content, please make full-text search by clicking here.
Home
Explore
ebook_Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education by Paul Whitinui,Carmen Rodriguez de France,Onowa McIvor (eds.) (z-lib.org)
View in Fullscreen
ebook_Promising Practices in Indigenous Teacher Education by Paul Whitinui,Carmen Rodriguez de France,Onowa McIvor (eds.) (z-lib.org)
Discover the best professional documents and content resources in AnyFlip Document Base.
Search