Abstract
This paper reports on findings from the Learning for Understanding through Culturally-Inclusive Imaginative Development project (LUCID). LUCID has been a 5-year (2004–2009) research and implementation endeavour and a partnership between Simon Fraser University (SFU) and three districts in British Columbia, Canada. Via emotionally engaging pedagogies and a culturally-inclusive curriculum, the project aimed at improving students’ educational experience, particularly First Nations learners. Using a combination of Actor Network Theory (Latour, 2005, in: Reassembling the social: an introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford) and Hermeneutic Phenomenology (Van Manen, 1990, in: Researching lived experience, The State University of New York, New York), site visits and interview data were examined with reference to the (f)actors influencing project objectives. Although each school district was unique, shared themes included: the importance of creating a community with shared intent; the role of executives as potential “change agents”; the problematic nature of emotionally-engaging teaching; and the complex influences of cultural and historical trauma. The latter theme is explored in particular, presenting the argument that language deficiency and a consequent lack of autonomy might be at the root of many problems experienced in First Nations communities.
Résumé
Traduction infidèle ? Repenser l’éducation des Premières nations avec les résultats du projet LUCID – Cet article présente les résultats du projet Apprendre pour comprendre via la projection inventive et interculturelle (Learning for Understanding through Culturally-Inclusive Imaginative Development, LUCID). LUCID était une action de recherche et de réalisation ainsi qu’un partenariat entre l’université Simon Fraser (SFU) et trois districts de Colombie britannique (Canada) pendant une période de cinq ans (2004–2009). Au moyen de pédagogies émotionnelles et d’un curriculum interculturel, le projet visait à améliorer l’expérience éducative des étudiants, en particulier ceux issus des Premières nations. Associant la théorie de l’acteur-réseau (Latour 2005) et la phénoménologie herméneutique (Van Manen 1990), nous avons analysé les visites de sites et les données d’interviews en fonction des (f)acteurs d’influence sur les objectifs du projet. Même si chaque district scolaire est unique, plusieurs thèmes sont collectifs : l’importance de créer une communauté dotée d’un dessein commun, le rôle des dirigeants en tant qu’ « agents potentiels du changement » , la nature problématique de l’enseignement engageant l’émotionnel, et les influences complexes des traumatismes culturels et historiques. Nous explorons particulièrement ce dernier thème, en présentant l’argument selon lequel les lacunes linguistiques entraînant un manque d’autonomie pourraient être la racine de nombreuses difficultés rencontrées par les communautés des Premières nations.
Zusammenfassung
Lost in Translation? LUCID-Ergebnisse führen zum Umdenken in der Bildung der First Nations – In diesem Bericht werden Ergebnisse des Projekts Learning for Understanding through Culturally-Inclusive Imaginative Development (LUCID) vorgestellt. LUCID war ein Forschungs- und Umsetzungsvorhaben von fünfjähriger Dauer (2004–2009) und ein Partnerschaftsprojekt zwischen der Simon Fraser University (SFU) und drei Regionaldistrikten in British Columbia, Kanada. Mittels emotional ansprechender pädagogischer Ansätze und einem auf kulturelle Inklusion abgestellten Lehrplan zielte das Projekt darauf ab, die Bildungserfahrungen von Schülerinnen und Schülern, insbesondere von Angehörigen der First Nations, zu verbessern. Mithilfe einer Kombination aus der Actor-Network-Theory (Latour 2005) und der Hermeneutischen Phänomenologie (Van Manen 1990) wurden Ortsbegehungen und Interview-Aufzeichnungen ausgewertet, um festzustellen, durch welche Faktoren und Akteure Projektziele beeinflusst werden. Trotz der Einzigartigkeit jedes Schulbezirks gab es Themen, die allen gemeinsam waren, unter anderem die Notwendigkeit, eine Gemeinschaft mit gemeinsamer Intention zu bilden, die Rolle von Führungskräften als möglichen „Akteuren des Wandels”, die Problematik eines emotional ansprechenden Unterrichts und die komplexen Einflüsse kultureller und historischer Traumata. Besonders das zuletzt genannte Thema wird ausgelotet. Dabei wird das Argument vorgebracht, dass sprachliche Defizite und ein daraus erwachsender Mangel an Autonomie ein tieferer Grund für viele Probleme sein könnten, mit denen sich die Gemeinschaften der First Nations auseinandersetzen müssen.
Resumen
Lost in Translation? Una reflexión sobre la educación de ciudadanos nativos a través de los conocimientos proporcionados por LUCID – Este trabajo informa sobre hallazgos hechos con el Proyecto LUCID (Learning for Understanding through Culturally-Inclusive Imaginative Development). LUCID ha sido una tarea de investigación e implementación de cinco años (2004–2009) y una cooperación entre la Simon Fraser University (SFU) y tres distritos en British Columbia, Canadá. Mediante pedagogías comprometidas emocionalmente y un currículo de inclusión cultural, el proyecto apuntaba a mejorar la experiencia educativa de los estudiantes y, en particular, de los estudiantes de naciones nativas. Aplicando una combinación de la Teoría del Actor-Red (Latour 2005) y de Fenomenología Hermenéutica (Van Manen 1990), se examinaron las visitas de campo y los datos de entrevistas con referencia a los factores y actores que influenciaban los objetivos del proyecto. Si bien cada distrito escolar era único en su clase, había temas comunes a todos, que incluían: la importancia de crear una comunidad con objetivos compartidos; el papel de ejecutivos como potenciales “agentes del cambio”; la naturaleza problemática de una enseñanza comprometida emocionalmente y las complejas influencias de traumas culturales e históricos. Este último tema ha recibido una atención especial, que ha derivado en la tesis de que las deficiencias en el lenguaje y la consiguiente falta de autonomía pueden constituir la raíz de muchos de los problemas que se viven en comunidades nativas.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Drawn from personal email correspondence with Dr. Affrica Taylor, a Senior Lecturer at the University of Canberra and expert on post-colonialism.
Many First Nation children were also sent to residential school against the family’s will, where they were prohibited to speak their mother tongue.
This is notwithstanding that traditional First Nation child rearing included frequent exposure to complex uses of language in oral narrative.
References
Atkinson, P., Coffey, A., & Delamont, S. (2001). Handbook of ethnography. London: Sage.
Baker, C. (2000). A parents’ and teachers’ guide to bilingualism (2nd ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Campell, K. (2005). Persistence and change: A history of the Ts’msyen Nation. Friesens: Prince Rupert.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Damasio, A. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow, and the feeling brain. Orlando, FL: Harcourt.
Davies, A. (1998). Thinking about ‘Narrative reasoning’ as a methodology: A response to ‘Narrative reasoning and teacher development: A longitudinal study’. Curriculum Inquiry, 28(4), 473–490.
Demmert, W. G. (2001). Improving academic performance among Native American students: a review of the research literature. www.ael.org/eric/demmert.htm.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Egan, K. (1997). The educated mind: How cognitive tools shape our understanding. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Egan, K. (2003). Start with what the student knows or what the student can imagine. Phi Delta Kappan, the Professional Journal for Education, 84(6), 443–445.
Egan, K. (2005). An imaginative approach to teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Eisner, E. W. (1998). The enlightened eye: Qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Merrill.
Fettes, M. (2005). Imaginative engagement in culturally diverse classrooms: changing teacher thinking and practice within a Community-University Research Alliance. In V. Stead (Ed.), International education dynamics—their influence and dynamics within the Canadian academy. Toronto: Canadian Society for Studies in Education. http://www.csse.ca/CCSE/CCSEProceedings11Fettes.pdf.
Frankfort-Nachmias, C., & Nachmias, D. (1992). Research methods in the social sciences. New York: St Martin’s Press.
Gatto, J. T. (1997). Why schools don’t educate. Nexus, 13–16, 81. Available online at http://www.naturalchild.org/guest/john_gatto.html.
Glazer, S. (1999). The heart of learning. New York: Penguin Putnam.
Goguen, J. (2000). CSE275: Social theories of technology and science. http://www.cs.ucsd.edu/users/goguen/courses/275/s6.html.
Gold, M., & Mann, D. W. (1984). Expelled to a friendlier place: A study of effective alternative schools. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Goleman, D. (1998). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books.
Hart, P. (2000). Requisite variety: The problem with generic guide-lines for diverse genres of inquiry. Environmental Education Research, 6(1), 37–44.
IFO—Instituttet For Opinionsanalyse (1995). Hvor Gaar de hen, Naar de gaar ud? (Where are they going, when they are leaving?). Odense: Odense Rudolf Steiner School.
James, K., Chavez, E., Beauvais, F., Edwards, R., & Oetting, G. (1995). School achievement and dropout among anglo and indian females and males: A comparative examination. American Indian Culture and Research Journal, 19(3), 181–206.
Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Leap, W. L. (1991). Pathways and barriers to Indian language literacy-building on the Northern Ute reservation. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 22(1), 21–41.
LeDoux, J. E. (1996). The emotional brain. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Lipka, J., & McCarty, T. L. (1994). Changing the culture of schooling: Navajo and Yup’ik Cases. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 25(3), 266–284.
Lips, E. (1986). Sie alle heissen Indianer (They are all Indians). Berlin: Der Kinderbuchverlag.
Miller, R. (1997). What are schools for? Brandon: Holistic Education Press.
National Aboriginal Health Organization (2007). Broader determinants of health in an Aboriginal context. www.naho.ca/publications/determinants.pdf.
National Indian Education Study (2006). Office of Indian education report. Available online at: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/nies/.
Neuman, W. L. (1997). Social research methods. Needham Heights: Allyn & Bacon.
Neville, B. (1989). Educating psyche: Emotion, imagination, and the unconscious in learning. Melbourne: Collins-Dove.
Nielsen, T. W. (2004). Rudolf Steiner’s pedagogy of imagination: A case study of holistic education. Bern: Peter Lang.
Nielsen, T. W. (2005). Values education through thinking, feeling and doing. The Social Educator, 23(2): 39–48. (Article is republished with permission on the Australian Government website: www.valueseducation.edu.au/values/val_articles,8884.html).
Nielsen, T. W. (2009). Imaginative and culturally inclusive first Nations education: Some LUCID insights. In S. Blenkinsop (Ed.), The imagination in education: extending the boundaries in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Norris, M. J. (2008). Aboriginal languages in Canada: Emerging trends and perspectives on second language acquisition. www.statcan.ca/english/freepub/11-008-XIE/2007001/11-008-XIE20070019628.htm.
Ogletree, E. J. (1996). The comparative status of the thinking ability of Waldorf education students: A survey. EDRS, [n.v.] pp. 1–12.
Oliver, D. (1989). Education, modernity, and fractured meaning: Towards a process theory of teaching and learning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Oppenheimer, T. (1999). Schooling the imagination. http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99sep/9909waldorf3.htm.
Orr, D. (1999). Reassembling the pieces: Architecture as pedagogy. In S. Glazer (Ed.), The heart of learning. New York: Penguin Putnam.
Palmer, P. (1999). The grace of great things: Reclaiming the sacred in knowing, teaching, learning. In S. Glazer (Ed.), The heart of learning. New York: Penguin Putnam.
Polkinghorne, D. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis. Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5–23.
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (1996). Gathering strength (Vol. 3) and Perspectives and Realities (Vol. 4). Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services, Canada.
Smilansky, S. (1990). Children’s play and learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Smith, D. C., Leake, D. W., & Kamekona, N. S. (1998). Effects of a culturally competent school-based intervention for at-risk Hawaiian students. Pacific Educational Research Journal, 9(1), 3–22.
Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Vaillant, J. (2005). The golden spruce. Toronto: Knopf Canada.
Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience. New York: The State University of New York.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1985). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. Press.
Willeto, A. A. A. (1999). Navajo culture and family influences on academic success: Traditionalism is not a significant predictor of achievement among Navajo youth. Journal of American Indian Education, 38(2), 1–24.
Woods, G. B. (1999). Creative teaching and qualitative research methods. Seminar given at La Trobe University in Bendigo, Victoria (Australia) on 3 and 15 November 1999.
Zeller, N. (1995). Narrative strategies for case reports. Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 25–35.
Acknowledgments
Special thanks goes to the LUCID participants who helped member-check this paper, to Julia Smith for editing the final draft of this paper—and finally, but not least, to the First Nations communities, schools, teachers and children who made me feel so very welcome in their communities.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Some sections in this paper, with more discussions on a number of the themes raised here, can also be accessed in: Nielsen (2009).
Appendix A
Appendix A
Standard questions for interviews and focus groups:
1 | In what ways are you, or have been, involved in the LUCID project? |
2 | What made you become part of LUCID? |
Mainly the FN inclusion part? | |
Mainly the IE part? | |
Combination of both? | |
3 | Has the involvement in LUCID changed or improved your own imaginative side of your personality (feelings/creativity/spirituality)? If so, how? |
4 | Has the involvement in LUCID changed or improved your feelings or attitudes with regard to First Nation inclusion? If so, how? |
5 | Has the involvement in LUCID changed or improved your current practices with respects to both imaginative education and First Nation inclusion? If so, how? |
6 | Who or what are the main elements or links supporting the LUCID project? |
7 | Who or what determines the processes of operation/teaching at your school? |
8 | Have other teachers become interested or wanting to get involved? Why/why not? |
9 | In your view, what are the most important roles played by teachers who work with First Nations students? |
10 | Can you identify what helps and what hinders the effectiveness of the LUCID project? |
11 | How successful is the LUCID project in supporting First Nations students via imaginative education? |
12 | What overall suggestions do you have for improving the way teachers support the learning of First Nations students? |
13 | What suggestions do you have for improving the way teachers can use imaginative and more engaging education to foster FN inclusion? |
14 | Where do you envision yourself after the LUCID project is over? |
15 | At the end of the LUCID project, how will you ensure a continuous positive trajectory with regards to teaching imaginatively and working with First Nation inclusion? |
16 | At the end of the LUCID project, and if so desired, how will you ensure continuous reflection and reciprocal learning in your professional practices with regard to FN inclusion and imaginative education? |
17 | Are there any other comments you would like to make about the LUCID project or your involvement? |
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nielsen, T.W. Lost in translation? Rethinking First Nation education via LUCID insights. Int Rev Educ 56, 411–433 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-010-9168-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11159-010-9168-6