APRIL 19, 2017
2:21 PM

• Kevin expressed his gratitude for the invitation to speak with the group, and his regrets for
• We would never suggest that a University do what we did - we are in no place to make a recommendation
• I feel comfortable saying that Usask has a responsibility to contribute to reconciliation in whatever form that would take
• I am going to try to speak frankly with you about the experience
• I came into this role as Associate VP about 6-7 months, and I was not involved prior to that with the ICR.
• I also inherited our commitment to Indigenization. I really wrestled with that word, and I reached out to elders and knowledge-keepers. The message I received is that, "Whatever Indigenization is, it has to involve safety."
• Consider the dysfunction of the Indian Act, and the fact that being at home is not safe - neither is being away from home. At the very least, we need to consider safety: of physical safety, cultural expression, identity, and grieving.
• We also have to guarantee that if we want to confront racism directly, that our students do not bear the brunt of that. Student safety for indigenous students, non-indigenous students, instructors, and for the reputation of the University.
• To be clear, when I say safety, I do not mean that we avoid tough conversations.
• Safety of indigenous knowledge, artifacts on campus, and this perspective shapes everything we are doing.

• Our students were in a class, and an instructor asked an elder to come into the class, and students witnessed racism (rolling of the eyes). This led to a conversation about how the institution should react.
• Institutional scan: We had courses that already existed that already acknowledged this challenge in some way, shape, or form (speak to some aspect of the goal). At this time, the final TRC report was on its way.
• It was brought to the Senate level, and was almost shut down. Not because of racism, but because we tried to enforce something without consulting with the community. My predecessor pulled back and we did some consultations.
• We developed a method of approving courses, a strategy for how we were going to meet the demand - and to answer questions that should have been brought to the Senate the first time. Then, it was passed unanimously by the Senate.
• We have a menu of courses that come from across campus: Arts, Science (e.g. Physics), and one in the faculty of Business Economics.
• These courses go through a dual track process for approval: pathway through Senate (they hold all the cards and are the ultimate authority on whether they get approved). We have an Indigenous Advisory Circle that is made up of knowledge-keepers - the course goes through a subcommittee of the Indigenous Advisory Circle that works with the instructor to speak to pedagogy, resources, etc. It is framed as a collaboration. Feedback is given to instructors, but the Indigenous Studies department signs off on the course as well before it goes back to the Senate.
• This subcommittee has not had very clear direction on what type of feedback they should be provided.
• I have tried to make sure that the goals of the ICR are clearly: historical understanding, contemporary issues, and an appreciation for reconciliation (94 calls to action).
• We are sitting at 10,000 students and are scrambling to keep up with the demand. This is a huge thing.
• Indigenous studies is scrambling to keep up with the demand. Right now, we have pressure to ensure our students can graduate and also a pressure to get some of these courses approved. There is a real tension between approving courses and letting courses go through that would not meet the goal. There have definitely been some mistakes - some courses rejected by Senate even though they would meet the learning goal.
• What we are seeing: sometimes weak course proposals, and trying to work together to ensure there is no backlog. Perhaps more of hat work should be happening through the subcommittee? This is something we are looking at right now. We are also working on the communication between the Senate and that subcommittee, to ensure they are on the same page.
• In terms of the decision making, the line has not been clear. We are working on our approach right now to clarify the roles of each group.
• In my experience, a mandatory Aboriginal course can trigger some very different reactions from students - This is not always an academic environment. It is necessary to invite students to be vulnerable with their opinions in misunderstandings. This is a pedagogical art, and that may not be easy for an instructor who has not been trained much in pedagogy.
• Question: Is there training for instructors? How are you supporting them? Good question. The first thing I did was create ICR workshops. They are voluntary spaces where we provide some training, education on trauma, anti-racist, etc. It comes with a cost, but it comes with a good investment. This training is core to what we want to do.
• The other thing is approaching this with our Human Rights office. We have offered voluntary passages that our instructors can include, "We are going to ask tough questions, and here are the ground rules." There has been a very high number of instructors who have volunteered to take these workshops. Many instructors who had very comfortable careers, and had never seen this type of conflict in the past. Changing whether content is mandatory or not changes the dynamic. The workshop provides peer to peer best practises and share their experiences.
• Question: Can you explain the costing on this? Is there a limit on how many ICR courses you would like to see? That cost is managed out of my office, coming from the President's office. Significant when we bring in consultants and conflict-management backgrounds. I think it would be pretty onerous to ask a single faculty to manage this on their own. We are trying to think creatively about meeting the need right now - not enough.
• Right now, we have 46 approved courses on our ICR list: 42 Arts, 3 Science, 1 Economics. 2,662 seats have been provided. The courses were not full, so another challenge was trying to guide our advising staff to fill their requirement in the beginning (rather than waiting until later). We have 29 instructors currently teaching these courses. A lot of students are taking our Intro Indigenous Studies course. It is good because presumably this department is most capable of providing a well-rounded experience of the Indigenous experience.
• This has been a huge threat to the safety of Indigenous students (these courses used to be very safe spaces). Now imagine a new northern student coming to a University with a higher population. It can be brutal for these students. We have robbed a lot of those Indigenous students of that safe space. We are still trying to figure this out. Indigenous studies must play a role, but we don't want them to be burdened by it.
• Who gets to teach these courses? If we are teaching traditional Indigenous practices, it should always, without fail, be an Indigenous person instructing. However, we should be able to use our allies to help meet the ICR as well.
• E.g. Mary Young - teaching this course was a brutal experience for her. The racism, sexism, and disrespect. She was a residential school survivor, in class with people scoffing at the experience. We would ask an ally to be there and then invite Mary in instead. There is a very good role for allies to play in this experience. In the ability for non-indigenous people to challenge other non-indigenous people. Every single one of us should play a role in Indigenization.
• Bad press: at Lakehead, students were challenging who could teach Indigenous content.
• I am very clear that if it is Indigenous knowledge, it should only be an Indigenous instructor. There should be a voice of lived experience - we created a Speaker's Bureau - funded through my office - a community of people who are willing to share their stories as resources to the instructors. We facilitate putting instructors in contact with individuals who are willing to share those stories. Trying to wrap in as much of an opportunity for collaboration as possible.
• Question: I really like the focus on safety. I think that the oversight of this group is really important. I wonder, how have the students reacted? We have a SSRC grant that is evaluating this experience. We are trying to get a baseline of student understanding coming into the course. Unfortunately, we were not able
• Anecdotally, we have not gotten bad press (and our media was looking). I suspect there is a range of student experiences, and some are unmoved. There are some instructors who have not engaged in the workshop. What I am focusing on is that 2-3 non-indigenous students a week asking me, "Why didn't anyone tell me about this any sooner?" That makes everything worth it. We are making a contribution.
• We are starting to look at what's next. We have students who want part of their career to be about reconciliation. How do we work to facilitate that? A really interesting development.
• We have a really interesting finding about environmental sustainability. The ICR was seen as having the weakest connection to sustainability out of all the things we are doing. Maybe we want to add another perspective relating to the
• Even those instructors who had a hard experience said it was rewarding.
• We expected instructors teaching these mandatory courses to take a hit. How do we manage that? We don't want instructors' advancement to be crippled by the ICR. Something we are working on.
• Question: Do you have a sense of the enrollment numbers in your 46 courses? For Indigenous studies intro courses, seats are capped at 80, and now they are overflowing.
• Question: Do you have any strategies for making sure you get enough students through the requirement, so there is no bottle-neck at graduation? We have an educational tool called Indigenous Insights. It is our goal that everyone on campus receive that training, to ensure Indigenization is embraced by everyone (including student services). Once we have the buy-in, the plan is to workshop and get advisors to guide students into the courses they should be in. We are currently looking at this.
• Question: Have you noticed or had a way to measure whether or not white students are 'taking the path of least resistance' and taking courses that are more comfortable? No, we need to think about that more. In the first term last fall, one of the courses that had a waiting list was about the history of residential schools - I would like to think that people are recognize the need for this. Perhaps hiding in the larger courses, the intro Indigenous studies courses?
• Question: Do you have a plan for supporting Indigenous students? I had a plan in place for every counsellor and support person on campus to have trauma awareness through a post-colonial lens. I was going for a top-down approach because we were met with some resistance from the counsellors. I always wanted a space on campus for students to smudge and retreat to, and to develop a model for peer support. Some of this fell through due to a positional change, but these are still goals in place. We also have elders on campus, we want a sweat lodge (partnerships).
• Group can follow up by email if there are any questions.

• Starting this fall, the University of Winnipeg has implemented a requirement that every student must choose from among 60 courses to meet their Indigenous Course Requirement (ICR). The ICR was unanimously accepted by their Senate (like our University Council).
• Kevin emphasized the importance of working within existing institutional regulations and structures, and consulting widely. At UWinnipeg, a small group of staff and faculty initially came up with a plan for the ICR without consulting widely and without engaging with their Senate Curriculum Committee, but it was turned back by their Senate and the initiative nearly died on the table at that point.
• They have now developed a process for vetting courses that are proposed as part of the ICR. They have a set of criteria for the courses (must offer a historical perspective, must deal with modern issues, must address issues of trauma, etc.). Departments propose courses, typically championed by the faculty member who will teach the course. The proposals go first to the Department of Indigenous Studies, who do not have the power to accept or reject the course, but can provide comments and feedback. The faculty member can choose to revise the course based on that feedback. Then the proposal goes to their Indigenous Advisory Board, comprised of internal and external Indigenous stakeholders, who also provide feedback, and there is another opportunity for revision. And finally, the proposal goes to their Senate Curriculum Committee, along with all feedback, and that committee can accept or reject the course as part of the ICR. (The process is charted here: http://uwinnipeg.ca/indigenous-course-requirement/ICR-Course-Approval-Process.pdf)
• He emphasized the importance of creating a positive community around this requirement, where faculty feel encouraged and supported rather than judged or excluded. They are trying to use the ICR as a learning opportunity for interested faculty, connecting them to Indigenous community organizations and resources as they develop their courses. They are also putting a strong emphasis on excellent pedagogy and pedagogical training to try to ensure that students have positive experiences with the ICR.
• Even with 60 ICR courses for 10 000 students, they are having trouble with capacity. They are considering developing an online course that would meet the ICR, but Kevin emphasized that it would have to be excellent, with high production values, and an intellectual and emotional component (he compared it to the CBC’s 8th Fire series). Students in the online course would also have a chance to meet in person, discuss, debrief, and heal. They are also considering allowing students to meet the ICR with community-based learning or experiential learning.
• Because the ICR may force students to deal with issues that are difficult or even traumatic for them, they have placed a strong emphasis on creating a “safe” classroom, especially for Indigenous students. They are working to ensure that students in every ICR course know that they have access to counselors and elders through their Aboriginal Student Centre or Student Health Centre.
• I asked if departments are clamouring to create new Indigenous courses in an attempt to capitalize on the ICR (this has been raised as a concern here). He said that they have received proposals from every department on campus! But he said that he saw this as a good thing if it creates genuine interest in Indigenization within departments. And he feels that superficial or hasty proposals will be weeded out in the vetting process.
• I also asked if they have had any issues with course being proposed by experts in the field, but then taught by non-experts (also raised as a concern here). He said that that had not happened yet, as the ICR has just been implemented. But he said that he thinks that they will deal with these challenges as they arise, that their process is not perfect, but that he feels that there is genuine wide-spread buy-in and that people see themselves as engaged in a learning process together and that they will improve over time.
• Kevin would be very interested in visiting our College to talk about the University of Winnipeg experience with the ICR.
• Overall, I think that we can learn a lot from the University of Winnipeg and can probably borrow some of their ideas. What I found most useful was Kevin’s emphasis on creating widespread buy-in for the ICR, from students, faculty, Senate, student services, community groups, etc. He felt that this has created a sense of ownership of the ICR, and a desire to get involved, rather than factionalism and resistance.

APRIL 19, 2017
3:45 PM

• • Dennis McPherson, Associate Professor in Dep’t of Indigenous Learning
  • We are joined by Joshua, a graduating student and going into Law next year
  • The Indigenous requirement at Lakehead University: my history goes back to the 90s and incorporating Native knowledge into our institution, which evolved into a Native Studies Department in 1992. Changed the name to Indigenous Learning department.
  • We have a 3 year BA in Indigenous learning and a 4 year Honours in Indigenous learning.
  • The ICR is a relatively new phenomenon, and was only instituted in the University this past fall, where students have been required to take a course with Indigenous content.
  • There is some controversy – one of the things the University failed to do (and I spoke to this) is to make a determination on the definition of Indigenous content.
  • Students are somewhat disgruntled toward what they are actually achieving in this process.
  • I think this is a very serious matter and deserves serious attention.
  • What are the social and legal relationships between indigenous and non-indigenous people? People are surprised that there are two laws in this country. We are celebrating 150 years, and for all 150 years we have been living with two sets of laws.
  • Question: Has the University given a definition of what is Indigenous content? No, that is part of the problem.
  • The ICR requirement is 50% of a course containing Indigenous content. Can lead to a Professor with no Indigenous background, students leaving with vague impressions about what this is all about, and other students who are concerned with, “Why do we have to learn this?”
  • All students coming in this year have to take a course that has the ICR requirement (50% Indigenous content). It is up to the Professor in the classroom to deliver the course.
  • How many students are there on the books that can meet this objective? They did an audit of all courses available and put together a list. In our Department, we offer 35 courses that all meet the requirement. Other departments: Anthropology, Political Studies.
  • I would have a concern with Anthropology teaching this course requirement.

• • Question for Joshua: What do people think of this requirement? I missed the ICR requirement, but I have witnessed Professors giving incorrect information and misrepresented my culture (and know of many other cases where this has happened as well). Non-indigenous students are not positive or favourable toward this ICR. I question what would a course look like for Indigenous content in Biology or Engineering?
  • Follow-up: Are these Professors trying to bring in Indigenous content because this ICR exists? I can’t say for certain because I did not question their intention, but the courses were intro classes.
  • Follow-up: Given these bad experiences, do you support this requirement? I have had conversations with many students about this. Through that dialogue I have recognized a few themes:
  • In my opinion, stories, legends, myths: metaphysics go over non-indigenous’ people’s heads. A lot of students are not interested in the anthropologic type of into (wigwams, etc.). What does capture students’ attention is hearing about the truth of residential schools, pieces of oppressive legislation that are applied to indigenous people.
  • Question: Have you ever been in a situation where a Professor said something that was good in this way? Most of the time when I have challenged Professors, we have basically just agreed to settle things. I do not have authority. I wish the Professors would take the time to understand Indigenous issues and history. I’m not here to pick battles and I am here to learn.

• Question for Dennis: Is anyone addressing these concerns at the faculty level? I understand that we are hiring an Indigenous content specialist on Jul 1, 2017. I’m not sure at this point what the result will be.
• There are problems with courses including material that is unhelpful and we need to recognize the philosophical position of Native peoples.
• In Thunder Bay, we have a large problem with racism.
• Question: I know this is the first year, but have you seen an increase in enrollment in your courses? It is kind of a mixed blessing. On the one hand, I hold to the principle of Indigenous Learning (but we only have 4 faculty members in our department) so we would not be able to deliver that content with 4 members. Our complement has only gone up by 1 in 30 years. I haven’t seen the commitment by the University to expand (like we have seen at other Universities).
• Question for Joshua: I want to ask you about that student that came to you in the parking lot. How are those students feeling overall? Is it a positive experience in the end, or not? The student who cried on my shoulder and then had gone on to do her Master’s degree. I think it depends on the individual. Some students felt as though the struggle had made them stronger. In my opinion, that strength comes from the Indigenous studies department here, teaching us to have that strength. I haven’t heard of anyone dropping out.
• Dennis: I go through box after box of tissue. If you are going to address the issues in society, you have to understand that this is what society is all about.
• Joshua: One of the questions that came up out of the ICR was about Indigenous content. Non-indigenous people did not necessarily participate in residential schools. It is uncomforting to hear a non-indigenous Professor tell us about the hardships we have gone through.
• Dennis: We have Aboriginal initiatives, support counselling, elders on campus, and other support for Aboriginal students.
• Joshua: There was an instance where a student had shared their residential school experience and the individual shared a nervous laugh (that sometimes comes out). It was perceived by the Indigenous student that this was inappropriate. Maybe something to take note of, with body language.

• Starting this fall, every Lakehead student will have to take at least 18 hours of Indigenous education as part of their degree. Each program has been required to work the 18 hours into their existing courses and requirements.
• Each department did a self-assessment of where they were teaching Indigenous content, and then worked to incorporate Indigenous content into their programs in relevant ways. This was easier for some departments than others. For example, English simply required that some Indigenous literature be taught in their mandatory classes. Engineering struggled more, but were able to bring the topic of Indigenous communities into their community impact course. Similarly, Business decided to work Indigenous case studies into their courses.
• Their initiative started with the Vice-Provost Aboriginal Initiatives. They then did a student survey to gauge student reaction, took it to the Senate (like our University Council), and worked it into their Strategic Plan. It took four years from idea to implementation.
• They did encounter faculty resistance, particularly from departments who did not initially see a way to connect their curriculum to Indigenous education. However, they focussed on providing resources to faculty and departments. The Aboriginal Initiatives office hosted “lunch and learn” events for faculty to discuss how they might Indigenize their curriculum. The Aboriginal Affairs office also assisted by researching curriculum from other universities.
• A committee of faculty who have expertise in Indigenous Studies review and approve the curriculum from each program, as well as provide feedback and suggestions.
• They have not faced a lot of questions about who has the expertise to teach Indigenous content because they are just asking faculty to make modest changes to courses within their discipline. Programs can also bring in guest speakers to help meet the 18-hour requirement, if they do not feel comfortable covering material themselves. Cynthia also pointed out that they are not asking faculty to necessarily cover sensitive or spiritual matters.
• Cynthia says that they have received no complaints from students, probably because the requirement is built into their existing programs, and is not seen as “extra”.
• Cynthia feels it is important to be flexible in how the Indigenous Requirement is implemented, letting programs find a way that works for them. She also says that she wants students to see this learning as useful to them and to their future careers.
• She said that, in her view, you can’t ask every student to have an attitude shift or to address racism, since not everyone is ready for that and it just will turn them off. She also emphasized that Indigenous people are “not just about tragedy,” and that not everyone is ready to talk about, for example, the abuse in residential schools. She prefers a more positive approach that celebrates Indigenous contributions to various disciplines and professions.