Author Archives: jennifer mckay

Module 2 – Post 5 – Mukurtu Content Management System (CMS)

The Mukurtu Content Management System is an open-source content management system for digital heritage in culturally relevant and ethical ways. It is designed around Indigenous community needs.

Though I see the platform as more of a virtual museum, it’s interesting that this CMS provides full administrative access, and that Indigenous groups or Organizations have used it in different ways.

Michael Shepard wrote a review of the platform in 2014 with his Coast Salish partners. He discussed how Mukurtu enables groups to control access to digital cultural resources (a pro), and how poorly it handled image, video, and audio uploads in contrast to print-based uploads.

Here is an example of Mukurtu in use via the First Nations Media History Archive.

Module 2 – Post 3 – OCAP Principles (data sovereignty)

The First Nations Principles of OCAP were created by the First Nations Information Governance Centre (FNIGC) and established how data belonging to First Nations will be collected, protected, used, or shared. The acronym stands for Ownership, Control, Access, and Possession.

The principles were created with the understanding that Indigenous Peoples understand their own needs and are in the best position to govern their own information. Data sovereignty is a crucial step toward Indigenous People’s self-determination.

When described on the FNIGC website, the principles are explicitly applicable to research and information governance, but I see potential to use them as a way to discuss data sovereignty in educational technology. For example, if you look at the Privacy Policy for the online engagement and brainstorming tool Padlet, they say:

“When you access or use the Service, you are deemed to consent to the collection, use, retention, transfer, structuring, manipulation, storage, transmission and/or disclosure (collectively, “processing”) of your information as described in this Policy and in accordance with applicable laws.”

So when we talk about the risks of educational technology, especially of online teaching tools or authoring applications, we must consider data sovereignty within our own principles of design. OCAP is one model that can start a discussion in this area.

Module 2 – Post 2 – Switching from Bloom to the Medicine Wheel

Journal Article: LaFever, M. (2016). Switching from Bloom to the medicine wheel: creating learning outcomes that support Indigenous ways of knowing in post-secondary education. Intercultural Education, 27(5), 409-424.

Though this article does not align with my aim to focus on Indigenous scholars, I still thought it was a fascinating way to reframe and expand upon Bloom’s Taxonomy, a framework referenced frequently in education and instructional design, using the medicine wheel.

The author uses the spiritual quadrant as an example and mirrors the pyramid we typically see representing Bloom’s taxonomy.

Overall I thought this article showed a great exercise in rethinking an instructional design theory with an Indigenous lens, even if it is not the personal lens of the author.

Module 2 – Post 1 – Indigenous Education Holistic Lifelong Learning Framework

The Calgary Education board published a guide in 2022 called the Indigenous Education Holistic Lifelong Learning Framework with the extensive support of Elders and Knowledge Keepers of the Piikani, Kainai, Metis, Tsuut’ina, Stoney Nakoda, Kahkewistahaw, Muskoday and Siksika Nations.

The guide clearly states it is “not a how-to guide for Indigenous Education or a recipe for closing gaps” and instead is a foundation where we can “meaningfully position and deepen our individual and collective knowledge, decision, and actions to meet the holistic needs of all students.”

This guide is interesting to my research because the approach, though from a very high-level school board, is meant to adapt to include Indigenous students, but does not single them out. Instead, they use holism, and Indigenous worldview, to attend to all students’ spiritual, emotional, physical, and intellectual needs. They use the medicine wheel to visualize the framework.

Critical Reflections of Indigenous Research Methodologies (IRMs)

Module 1 – post 4

In our course discussion posts and research blogs, I have felt some discomfort because there are some significant differences in how we try to “objectively” talk about Indigenous ways of knowing, education, and technology in academia, versus how I’ve been discussing these topics with fellow Indigenous family, friends, and peers. When reading the research papers and academic articles, even when it is an Indigenous author, I feel like they are talking outwards, away from the Indigenous community, and to an audience that doesn’t know our ways, or the way we must exist in a western world.

I found an amazing article by Joseph P. Gone that describes some of my discomforts when discussing “Indigenous Research Methodologies“, and I’m sure I will think about their paper throughout the rest of this course.

This particular quote (which I split into two paragraphs for easier reading) stood out to me:

“I worry that the way we practice IRMs insulates inquiry in the name of Indigeneity from skeptical interrogation. The hallmark of academic knowledge production is that it gets critiqued by your peers, people who know your field, who are experts in your specialization… And until you can answer them, or rebut what they have to say, you’re not going to go forward in being able to publish what you say, for example, or what you think. And so, one concern I have is by saying that “this is IRMs,” what we’re really saying is “and you White people don’t know this. This is ours. And so, you White people aren’t allowed to critique it because you wouldn’t know anyway. It’s for us to decide and critique and say what’s right.” And what that can translate into is actually no one critiques it because we have a stake in celebrating these things.

And I’d say in traditional communication styles, especially around knowledge translation and transmission, you don’t critique people. That’s the heart of rudeness, right? You’re not going to sit there and tell an elder, “Well, I think . . .,” if you’re getting the usual monologue, right? That’s not how it works. So, the danger here is that we’re withdrawing all the things that we most care about and are invested in from the usual processes of critique. And that deprives us of the opportunity to refine what we’re doing in ways that can be really important. And, of course, beyond that it completely excludes us from academia. Almost everyone in academia says, “If you’re not willing to play this game, fine, go do your own thing. See ya.” And you become [that which] happens to many Native American Studies programs is you’re really, really marginal in the academy.” (p. 50-51)

Gone, J. P. (2019). Considering Indigenous research methodologies: Critical reflections by an Indigenous knower. Qualitative Inquiry, 25(1), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/107780041878754

Kapapamahchakwew – Wandering Spirit School

Module 1 – Post 3

I would like to showcase the Wandering Spirit School located in Toronto, Ontario. When searching for Indigenous education made for and by Indigenous communities, I was surprised to see the Indigenous-led school my nieces currently attend and love.

Wandering Spirit School, which started in the late 1970’s, has a very beginning. The Toronto District School Board was resistant to recognizing the institution as a legitimate school, and the urban Indigenous community had complex responses as they saw potential conflict in acknowledging their dual identities in a time when it wasn’t safe (and you could argue, still isn’t safe).

Today the school is a vibrant place my nieces love. They learn the Ojibway language, eat traditional foods and learn to prepare them, practice horticulture, and learn other subjects that support their dual life in an urban center. In reading more about their school, especially in Berg’s 2016 article below, I’ve come to realize they are a pioneer in uplifting and implementing Indigenous Knowledge in an urban setting.

Further academic reading on the school:

Berg, S. (2017). The Name Unspoken: Wandering Spirit Survival School. In: Bascia, N., Fine, E., Levin, M. (eds) Alternative Schooling and Student Engagement. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-54259-1_15

The school’s description on the Toronto District Schoolboard’s webpage.

First Nations Technology Council

Module 1 – Post 2

The First Nations Technology Council (FNTC) is an Indigenous-led organization in British Columbia aiming to provide equitable access to equipment, training, and support to Indigenous communities to further nationhood goals and self-determination. The skills training they provide links directly with the vision, goals, and needs of Indigenous nations.

Their Indigenous Digital Equity Strategy is particularly interesting. Here is an excerpt, but I would recommend reading the entire project plan.

“We know digital equity is more than just access to computers and the internet, it is about influence over the trajectory of technology and its impacts on society. Digital equity is a prerequisite for innovation, self-governance, entrepreneurship, education, economic and cultural wellbeing, and nearly all aspects of rights implementation in the digital age.” – FNTC

From the organization’s YouTube channel, they highlight that Indigenous peoples have always been technical, and that progression into digital or tech innovation is more of an extension of who they already are. I think this perspective should be explored more when we talk about educational technologies.

A fun personal note is that my partner took the FNTC’s Drone Stewardship Program a few years ago and has been an incredible contributor to his Nation’s community projects. Here is drone footage he and his colleagues produced for the Musqueam Canoe Races.

Indigenous Ways of Knowing Course Design

Module 1 – Blog Post 1

In my search for digital artifacts around Indigenous Instructional Design, I travelled to the University of Calgary’s Taylor Institute for Teaching and Learning, where Dr. Gabrielle Lindstrom, Ph.D., and Lorelei Anselmo have authored the guide: Indigenous Ways of Knowing Course Design.

The site addresses WHAT Indigenous ways of knowing are, PRINCIPLES to consider when integrating these practices with your course design, along with the WHYS and HOWS of using them. The webpage has a user-friendly design, featuring drop-down menus to explore specific areas of interest, and a list of further resources to explore.

Of special interest are these sections that focus on our accountability in sharing and integrating Indigenous Ways of Knowing:

Checking back with the community
Giving back to the community
Assessing the quality of Indigenous print and web-based design sources

Though I wish there was a reference to the technology aspect of course design, this resource is a great start in understanding what you can and should do.