Teacher beliefs about the place of Indigenous perspectives in Alberta's social studies program of study (Canada)

• In Event: Curricular representations of indigenous perspectives: examining stakeholder interactions within African, Asian, and North American contexts

Proposal

Starting in 2005, the Canadian province of Alberta introduced a social studies program of study, mandating that all K–12 teachers use the lens of First Nations, Metis, and Inuit perspectives and experiences while studying the past, as well as contemporary issues of concern. This presentation offers the first systematic examination of a range of data sources, including government reports, surveys, and peer-reviewed journal articles, which have documented Alberta social studies teachers’ beliefs about this curricular mandate.

Although this analysis found that many educators in Alberta support the teaching of Indigenous perspectives and experiences, over the course of an eighteen-year period –– from the pre- to post- implementation phases of this program –– educators in various stages of their careers (i.e., from pre-service teachers to veteran educators) consistently articulated three key arguments discharging themselves of their curricular responsibility to carry out this mandate. These beliefs can be summarized as follows: a) no perspectives can be identified due to the highly diverse nature of Aboriginal peoples and communities; b) only educators who are Indigenous can authentically offer insights into or teach Aboriginal perspectives; and c) Aboriginal perspectives should not be given special attention, because all cultural perspectives in Canada should be given equal treatment.

The fact that these arguments have remained constant across a wide range of data sources, from the beginning of the curriculum development process to the present, led the researchers to conclude that these beliefs are structural in nature and stem from acculturation into deeply rooted and longstanding interpretive frameworks, or what Wertsch (1998) referred to as “cultural tools” (p. 139). Guided by these insights stemming from socio-cultural theory, along with Donald’s (2009, 2012) work on ‘ethical relationality,’ this presentation traces the origins and reasons as to why it is so difficult for educators to meaningfully engage this mandate.

Author

• David Scott, Werklund School of Education, University of Calgary, Canada