Indigenous and Decolonizing Studies in Education

Mapping the Long View

Linda Tuhiwai Smith, Eve Tuck, K. Wayne Yang

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9780429998621
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Education
• Subtopic: Education General

Indigenous and decolonizing perspectives on education have long persisted alongside colonial models of education, yet too often have been subsumed within the fields of multiculturalism, critical race theory, and progressive education. Timely and compelling, Indigenous and Decolonizing Studies in Education features research, theory, and dynamic foundational readings for educators and educational researchers who are looking for possibilities beyond the limits of liberal democratic schooling. Featuring original chapters by authors at the forefront of theorizing, practice, research, and activism, this volume helps define and imagine the exciting interstices between Indigenous and decolonizing studies and education. Each chapter forwards Indigenous principles - such as Land as literacy and water as life - that are grounded in place-specific efforts of creating Indigenous universities and schools, community organizing and social movements, trans and Two Spirit practices, refusals of state policies, and land-based and water-based pedagogies.

1
Literacies of Land

Decolonizing Narratives, Storying, and Literature

Sandra Styres (Kanien’kehá:ka)

Introduction

Indigeneity¹ and working within Indigenous contexts is first and foremost about reciprocity and relationships. These relationships involve an acknowledgment and understanding of cultural positionalities and relations of place.² It is important that I locate myself both in terms of recognizing the traditional lands on which I stand and do this work as well as the background informing my perspectives. The land on which this paper was written is the shared territories of the Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nations and the Six Nations Confederacy (Mohawk, Oneida, Onondaga, Cayuga, Seneca, and Tuscarora) on A’nó:wara Tsi Kawè:note (Turtle Island), and more specifically on what is now known as Oniatari:io (Ontario). As an academic who is of Kanien’kehá:ka (Mohawk), English, and French ancestry, I reside on Six Nations of the Grand River Territory, a First Nations community located in Oniatari:io. Further, it is also important to acknowledge the complex and tangled histories of those on whose traditional lands the mainstream educational institution where I teach my courses is located—the Ouendat (Wyandot-Huron), Chonnonton (Neutral), Onondowahgah (Seneca-Hodenosaunee), and the Misi-zaagiing (Mississaugas-Anishinaabek) nations. It is the philosophies embedded in our places where land, learning, identity, and education intersect. Kovach (2009) writes that “we know what we know from where we stand” (p. 7).

Drawing upon instructor and student experiences from several courses but more particularly from a course I developed and taught over several terms called Literacies of Land: Narratives, Storying and Literature, this chapter focuses on the ways literacies of Land (capital “L”) are rooted in and informed by understandings of Land and self-in-relationship that open opportunities for decolonizing frameworks and praxis that critically trouble and disrupt colonial myths and stereotypical representations embedded in normalizing, hegemonic discourses and relations of power and privilege while exploring diverse Indigenous literacy contexts. I hope to offer some insights and practical examples of the ways decolonizing praxis can be actively incorporated into pedagogical practices to engage critical reflection and mindfully and purposefully explore the various tensions, challenges, and resistances of locating and positioning Land with a capital “L” within classrooms. Using First Voices in culturally aligned and place-conscious texts, stories, oral traditions, and symbolically rich themes that support literacies of Land as living and emergent, in this chapter I explore the ways these literacies can inform decolonizing frameworks for exploring the importance of understanding and acknowledging place in literacy education (having implications across all educational contexts) for the benefit of all learners. Emphasis is placed on the philosophical nature of Land in relation to critical literacies that include narratives, storying, and literature together with constructions of self in relation to educational contexts. Storying refers to the ways we describe, by means of stories, our experiences through personal, community, national, and global narratives. Both storying and literacy are social constructions combining orality and narratives to communicate not only among individuals but also between human beings and their world.

As we well know language is never neutral—it can teach us, inform us, entertain us, persuade us, and manipulate us—it can misguide and misdirect truths, thereby perpetuating colonial myths and stereotypical representations, or it can disrupt normalizing and hegemonic dominant discourses and liberate critical thought. Critical literacy encourages students to actively analyze and engage with meaning-making through a variety of texts, media, and popular culture looking for and exploring underlying messages and symbolic representations—in this case the ways Land is an articulation of ancient knowledges grounded in the experiences of self-in-relationship to place. Indigenous literacy is based on reading the cosmos—it is about reading all the things around us that are not necessarily the written word but nevertheless contain valuable information. Peter Kulchyski (2005) tells us that

land is a space that is somehow meaningfully organized and on the very point of speech, a kind of articulated thinking that fails to reach its ultimate translation in proposition or concepts, in messages … the various landscapes, from frozen inland wastes to the river and the coast itself, speak multiple languages … and emit a remarkable range of articulated messages.

(p. 189)

Armstrong (1998) tells us that,

all my Elders say that it is land that holds all knowledge of life and death and is a constant teacher … the land constantly speaks. It is constantly communicating. We survived and thrived by listening to its teachings—to its language—and then inventing human words to retell its stories to our succeeding generation.

(p. 178)

Musqua tells us that “everything in the universe is speaking to us. It’s a literacy in itself” (as cited in George, 2010, p. 4). Similarly, Hawaiian scholar Goodyear-Ka‘ōpua uses the term aloha‘äina to describe what she calls land-centered literacies that extend beyond the mainstream definition of literacies that focus solely on linguistic and social practices related to printed text. Aloha‘äina literally means to love and respect the land and is a central tenet of ancient Hawaiian thought. Aloha‘äina critically engages observational, interpretive, and expressive skills that read the cosmos, conduct and participate in ceremonies, as well as listen for and find meaning in the responses from their places (wind, rains, animals, trees, waterways, etc.)—aloha‘äina is about “writing themselves into the landscape” (2013, p. 34).

One of the main goals of critical literacy is to open up opportunities for learners to understand themselves first and, through critical self-reflection and to gain a better understanding of each other and the ways power, privilege, and colonial relations continue to inform our ways of knowing and being in the world. The concept of Land as a philosophical underpinning along with understandings of self-in-relationship draw upon deeply intimate, sacred, and ancient knowledges, thereby centering, legitimizing, and grounding teaching and learning within Land as the primary foundation of all our teachings. Ancient knowledges are (re)membered experiences that form deeply intimate and spiritual expressions of our connections to Land.

Land With a Capital “L”

Before attempting to articulate any understandings of Land (capital “L”), it is important to begin by examining some of the complex ideologies relating to space and place, as well as to explore some of the ways space and place may be connected to but are very specifically distinct from my conceptualizations of Land.

Space is a continuous area or expanse that is free, available, or unoccupied (Styres, 2017, p. 45). Space is empty and abstract, whereas place is concrete, sensed, and grounded in lived experiences and realities. Space, in its formal context, is primary, absolute, infinite, and empty, and place-making emerges from the vastness and existence of space (Styres, 2017, p. 46). Space requires the substance of culture and stories to render it placeful. Spatial scholars such as Bachelard (1994), Casey (1996), and Lefebvre (1991) assert that places “gather experiences and histories, even languages and thoughts … and the trajectories of inanimate things” (Casey, 1996, p. 24, 26). Feld’s (1996) notion of inter-sensory perception allows a culture-sharing group to “turn over” the surface to look “underneath or inside,” thereby revealing the subtleties, the “resonant depth” of meaning captured in place names, stories, songs, teachings (p. 98, 99)—ancient knowledges that are (re)membered and embodied experiences forming deeply intimate and spiritual expressions of our connections to Land. In this context, inter-sensory perception is essentially the study of the ways information from our various senses (sight, sound, touch, smell, self-motion [embodiment] and taste), are integrated by the nervous system. Inter-sensory perception enables us to have meaningful perceptual and embodied experiences of our places. Embodied or emplaced spaces, while always intimate, are never neutral.

Casey (1996) writes that we are never without “emplaced experiences … we are not only in places but of them” (p. 19). In other words we find our existence in the intimate and embodied expressions of place. Such knowledges are highly contextualized, soulful, (re)membered, and experienced. Soulfulness is deeply intense and emotional expressions of feeling; as such, place is storied, relational, and intimate. In this way we are in place as much as it is in us—every experience and expression of place is replete with multiple layers of memories, each informing the other in diverse and entangled ways (see also Styres, 2017, p. 47). These memories can be (re)membered through the (re)telling of stories and experiences of and in place. Space, then, is an empty generality (see also Styres, 2017, p. 47). By inhabiting spaces—by being present in those spaces, to occupy those spaces, to story those spaces, to (re)member and (re)cognize those spaces—they become placeful.

Place refers to physical geographic space and is defined by everything that is included in that space—also referred to as landscape, ecology, and/or environment—and is denoted as land (lower case “l”). Connected but distinct, Land (capital “L”) is more than physical geographic space. Land expresses a duality that refers not only to place as a physical geographic space but also to the underlying conceptual principles, philosophies, and ontologies of that space. This duality is not to be construed as dichotomous, oppositional, or binarial but rather expresses the ways Land embodies two simultaneously interconnected and interdependent conceptualizations. Land as an Indigenous philosophical construct is both space (abstract) and place/land (concrete); it is also conceptual, experiential, relational, and embodied (see also Styres, 2017, p. 49). Placefulness is not something independent from Land but exists within the nuanced contexts of Land. Land reaches boundaries of place by embodying the principles, philosophies, and ontologies that transcend the material geography of land and the making of place or placefulness.

With this understanding in mind, Land is more than the diaphanousness of inhabited memories; Land is spiritual, emotional, and relational; Land is experiential, (re)membered, and storied; Land is consciousness—Land is sentient (see also Styres, 2017, p. 93). Land refers to the ways we honor and respect her as a sentient and conscious being. Therefore, in acknowledgment of the fundamental being of Land I always capitalize Land. I have come to know Land both as a fundamental sentient being and as a philosophical construct (see Styres, 2017, p. 183).

Land, as a theoretical and philosophical concept, comprises storied and journeyed connections of self-in-relationship—to each other, to our places, and to all of creation—as a central model for interpretation and meaning-making.

Journeying Through Storied Landscapes

Storying is essentially the ways we narratively describe ourselves as Indigenous peoples locally, nationally, and globally. Land is at once storied and relational informing the social, spiritual, and systemic norms and practices of a particular culture-sharing group in relationship to their places. LaDuke (1999) writes that, as Indigenous people, “our leadership and direction emerge from the land up—our commitment and tenacity spring from our deep connection to the land” (p. 4). Indigenous people exist in deeply intimate and sacred relationships with Land—it is the relationship that comes before all else. Our first environment was water—we are born of water—water is the lifeblood of mother earth (Styres, 2017, p. 59). There is a Haida teaching that states “we do not inherit the land from our ancestors—we borrow it from our children.”

From the time we are born our stories intersect and connect with other stories as we walk this earth. The tracks of all our ancestors can be traced at varying levels, with the most recent ones evident on and near the surface of this land. Buried deeply are the first tracks—those of Indigenous people who have and continue to exist on this land since time immemorial; in other words, time before we can imagine time. Since those first tracks were made, there were many other tracks of those who walked at various times—overlapping—layers upon layers.

Storied Landscapes form spatial and temporal tracks left by our ancestors that can be read “with as much care as one reads the narratives of classical history” (Kulchyski, 2005, p. 18). Traditional knowledges were and continue to be transmitted through storying; shared values and beliefs; as well as land-centered activities, reflections, and observations—they are woven out of individual and collective experiences. Many Indigenous philosophers both across Turtle Island as well as across the great waters tell us that traditional knowledges are based on storying and ancestral teachings grounded in Land, the ideologies of rational thought, and the principles embedded in our sacred stories. Silko (1977) writes, “as long as you remember what you have seen, then nothing is gone. As long as you remember, it is part of this story we have together. Remember, she said, remember everything” (p. 231, 235). Storying through remembered and recognized knowledges are one of the ways that oral traditions may serve to disrupt dominant Western conceptualizations and re-tellings of the tangled histories of colonial relations.

Whether someone chooses to acknowledge it or not, we all exist in relationship to each other and to this land—a land that has and still does exist first and foremost in relationship to Indigenous people. Having said that, anyone can and should live in a reflexive relationship to their places, and they often do so without ever understanding or acknowledging the fundamental being and philosophical nature of Land or with the deeply intimate sacredness of the relationships Indigenous peoples have, not only with their places but also to Land. For those who want to live in deeply sacred and intimate relationship to Land must understand that it first and foremost requires a respectful and consistent acknowledgment of whose traditional lands we are on, a commitment to journeying—a seeking out and coming to an understanding of the stories and knowledges embedded in those lands, a conscious choosing to live in intimate, sacred, and storied relationships with those lands and not the least of which is an acknowledgment of the ways one is implicated in the networks and relations of power that comprise the tangled colonial history of the lands one is upon (see also Styres, 2017, p. 55).

Journeying is a process of coming to know. It is essentially learning through the chaos of moving from the familiar through to the unfamiliar while maintaining and observing a reflective frame of mind. It is as if the learner is on the bank of one side of a river—the side s/he is on is familiar and the learner feels comfortable there. However, the learner has to come to the edge of what s/he knows and what is familiar. A choice must be made—either the learner goes back the way s/he came or s/he sets out across these very treacherous-looking rapids and turbulent waters to reach the other side of knowing. Fear, anxiety, and uncertainty creep into the confidence the learner has previously placed in their knowing and is reflective of a very chaotic transitional period. Senses are overloaded with unfamiliar knowledges, thoughts, and reflections that disrupt a familiar and comfortable sense of being and knowing, but once in the middle we must press on through to the other side or be carried away by fear—the fear of myths and stereotypes that have, until now, informed how we have come to know. Trusting in the sacredness of the journeying process ensures that we will traverse the uncertain waters and arrive safely to the other side where we will find that what was once unfamiliar and uncertain territory is now filled with all that we can now know and connect to that serve to make this new place familiar to us. It is a place enriched with new knowledges and greater awareness and understandings because of this learning experience. Journeying is a place where our stories intersect and become interconnected with other stories—layers upon layers.

Mindful and purposeful praxis and course content is key to assisting learners in their individual and collective learning journeys across the turbulent waters to arrive unsettled and shaken up but safe on the storied landscape of Land. Land as a decolonizing praxis informs pedagogy through storied relationships. These stories are etched into the essence of every rock, tree, animal, p...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Artist Statement on the Cover Artwork
• Series Editors’ Introduction
• Acknowledgments
• Introduction
• 1 Literacies of Land: Decolonizing Narratives, Storying, and Literature
• 2 Haa Shageinyaa: “Point Your Canoe Downstream and Keep Your Head Up!”
• 3 Rez Ponies and Confronting Sacred Junctures in Decolonizing and Indigenous Education
• 4 River as Lifeblood, River as Border: The Irreconcilable Discrepancies of Colonial Occupation From/With/On/Of the Frontera
• 5 Indigenous Oceanic Futures: Challenging Settler Colonialisms and Militarization
• 6 The Ixil University and the Decolonization of Knowledge
• 7 Decolonizing Indigenous Education in the Postwar City: Native Women’s Activism from Southern California to the Motor City
• 8 Queering Indigenous Education
• 9 Colonial Conventions: Institutionalized Research Relationships and Decolonizing Research Ethics
• 10 Decolonization for the Masses? Grappling With Indigenous Content Requirements in the Changing Canadian Post-Secondary Environment
• 11 E Kore Au e Ngaro, He Kākano i Ruia mai i Rangiātea (I Will Never Be Lost, I Am a Seed Sown From Rangiātea): Te Wānanga o Raukawa as an Example of Educating for Indigenous Futures
• 12 Designing Futures of Identity: Navigating Agenda Collisions in Pacific Disability
• 13 Decolonizing Education Through Transdisciplinary Approaches to Climate Change Education
• 14 With Roots in the Water: Revitalizing Straits Salish Reef Net Fishing as Education for Well-Being and Sustainability
• 15 Wałyaʕasukʔi Naananiqsakqin: At the Home of Our Ancestors: Ancestral Continuity in Indigenous Land-Based Language Immersion
• Afterword: Meeting the Land(s) Where They Are At: A Conversation Between Erin Marie Konsmo (Métis) and Karyn Recollet (Urban Cree)
• List of Contributors
• Index