Search
On-Site Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Room
Browse By Unit
Browse By Session Type
Search Tips
Change Preferences / Time Zone
Sign In
X (Twitter)
Objectives/Purposes. Presentation 2 addresses the heart of the study: ethnographic case studies with eight ILI Partner Schools. Whereas the National Survey (Presentation 1) provides breadth, the case studies provide ethnographic depth, examining ILI up-close, in practice. How is ILI implemented in diverse regional, linguistic, and cultural contexts? What are the learning opportunities in these programs? What are the programs’ academic, linguistic, and cultural outcomes? What challenges do ILI programs and educators face, and how are those challenges addressed? Perspectives/Theoretical Framework. We anchor this presentation within a larger body of research on culturally revitalizing and sustaining pedagogy and Indigenous de/anticolonial education movements (see, e.g., Eagle Shield et al., 2020; Hermes & Kawai‘ae’a, 2014; Paris & Alim, 2017; W.H. Wilson & Kamanā, 2011). Within this overarching framework, we focus on two key constructs: opportunities to learn (OTL) and outcomes, locally defined. OTL is often operationalized as the relationship between what takes place in classrooms and what students encounter on tests. This study requires a broader understanding of both OTL and outcomes. We adapted Boykin and Noguera’s (2011) OTL schema to include student engagement, support structures and teaching practices, and student and teacher assets, and expanded the notion of outcomes to reflect a holistic suite of goals, including relationships between ILI schools, parents, and communities. Methods/Modes of Inquiry. This was a deeply relational research process in which mutual respect and trust have been paramount, exemplifying Cree scholar Shawn Wilson’s (2008) notion that relationality and relational accountability constitute “the shared aspect of an Indigenous ontology and epistemology” (p. 7). All Partner Schools have an established history of at least 10 years and provide 50-100% of instruction in the Indigenous language. Four Indigenous languages, grades pre-K—12, and public, public charter, Tribal, and family-/community-run schools are represented. At the classroom level, our approach was microethnographic, documenting OTL with precision to identify the processes through which locally desired outcomes are fostered. Observations were inscribed in fieldnotes and elaborated in field reports amenable to analysis. We constructed narrative profiles of each Partner School, situating programs within local contexts and the larger power dynamics in which ILI programs operate. Data Sources and Data-Sharing. Data gathering included 32 site visits; 100 classroom observations; teacher log-diaries; virtual meetings; in-depth phenomenological interviews (Seidman, 2019) with 160 teachers, program leaders, elders, parents, and youth; and extensive photo, video, audio, and document collection. Data were analyzed through team workshops, paired coding and theming using NVivo software, and participant validation via ongoing data-sharing. Findings/Significance. We present selected themes that illuminate the relational quality of these programs and their focus on students’ holistic wellbeing. Across the varied Partner School settings, themes of belonging, family and community, sense of place, identity, and relations with the more-than-human world are interconnected through the decolonial-relational project of ILI schooling. These practices of multifaceted relationality have compelling implications for schooling more generally. We close by considering these implications and the possibilities they raise for decolonial-racial justice in Indigenous/minoritized schooling.