Latest news with #non-Indigenous
Winnipeg Free Press
12 hours ago
- Health
- Winnipeg Free Press
Sponsored Content Honouring Indigenous Children in Hospital
Every year 140,000 kids need care and treatment at HSC Children's Hospital. At any given time, 60 per cent of them are Indigenous. Many of them come from remote and northern communities, travelling hundreds of kilometres away from their homes, their families and their cultural supports. Some may stay in the hospital for weeks or even months. That's why we're supporting the development of the Indigenous Community Healing Space. It is needed for young patients and their families, and is a priority of the HSC Children's reconciliation initiatives. In Manitoba, Indigenous children are three to five times more likely to be affected by disease and health conditions when compared to non-Indigenous children. It's a grim statistic that points to systemic challenges Indigenous populations face. This is why everyone at the Children's Hospital Foundation of Manitoba, the health care heroes at HSC Children's Hospital and the researchers at the Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba are committed to ReconciliACTION, and improving health outcomes for all kids who need care at Manitoba's only children's hospital. National Indigenous History month is a time to honour the unique experiences, cultures, achievements and stories of First Nations, Inuit and Métis peoples – like Janessa. In 2024, Children's Hospital Foundation announced Janessa as the first Champion Child from a Northern remote First Nations community. Janessa's home is in Pukatawagan and her healing journey highlights the challenges children in Manitoba's remote and isolated communities face to get specialized pediatric care. For kids like Janessa, the 2,000-sq.- ft. Indigenous Community Healing Space will include an area for traditional ceremonies, a library with Indigenous children's books and a place for visiting Elders, healers and Knowledge Keepers to share stories and help comfort kids and their families. Wednesdays Sent weekly from the heart of Turtle Island, an exploration of Indigenous voices, perspectives and experiences. The space is fully Indigenous, led by Dr. Melanie Morris along with Elders, Knowledge Keepers, other Indigenous community members as well as Indigenous leaders in our medical community. When complete, it will provide families with a culturally safe space for healing. Its design will offer a place where children and families can connect with each other and nurture their whole selves – physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. In that same spirit, that's why we wanted Indigenous community members to truly see themselves at the Teddy Bears' Picnic. Last year Picnic started with Indigenous drummers and special messages from Indigenous leaders. Throughout the day, First Nations dancers, Inuit throat singers and Métis fiddlers took centre stage to entertain and educate children and families. On top of this, Indigenous Elders offered teachings all day long inside a teepee, further bridging connections. We hope that the community joins us again for Picnic on September 7 at Assiniboine Park. To help us continue supporting areas of need like the Indigenous Community Healing Space, please donate at Learn more about our Reconciliation efforts at
The Advertiser
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Advertiser
We need to close the gap. But how? Some things need to happen first
There's an uncomfortable unease surrounding Indigenous affairs in Australia. You can tell that by watching people chatting. They're likely to pick their company before they say what they really think. It shouldn't be like that. The dream situation is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians can chat openly and freely about all the policy options. That's not generally feasible now. Things are sensitive and you'd pick your company before starting a conversation. We've always been a bit shy of these discussions. Evelyn Waugh's son Auberon fell in love with Australia. He said he loved the openness, the commitment to "let the other bloke have his say". He added that there was one exception to this openness, namely having open discussion about Aboriginal Australians. He said we just look uncomfortable and change the subject. Some people got mad with him because he pointed out the wheel hadn't been invented. He was right to sense that this is taken as an insult. In any event, that was in the 80s and we're a lot more sensitive now. The vast majority of Australians want Indigenous Australians to be given the respect they deserve. They also want policies that will close the gap. How, you might ask, do we achieve these two goals? Indigenous leader Pat Anderson recently called for younger leaders to be brought forward. It's insightful and frankly courageous to point out that your own generation needs to move on. It's a good thing. It's not just that intergenerational change is both important and long overdue. The current crop just hasn't delivered. They've been too aggressive and accusatorial. Going on the attack should always be a last resort. Publicity, self-aggrandisement or stupidity have led many to that path. It's been worse than ineffective. It has turned people of good heart and faith away. Anderson might have called, not just for younger leaders, but for more effective and conciliatory ones. In any encounter, you can choose to be the angry antagonist and maybe play the victim to boot. It won't go well. Nobody chooses at any event to sit next to the angry grump. Nobody wants to deal with them unless they have to. If you toss onto "angry victim" an aggressive, accusatory tone, then nastiness ensues. You can't effectively argue for reconciliation if you don't have more than a few grams of conciliatory in your personality. People who aren't racist do not warm to being labelled that way. Aboriginal people need solutions-focused leaders. Take a look at Denise Bowden at the Yothu Yindi Foundation for some inspiration. While you're up that way, look at what the Gumatj clan are doing in mining and forestry. There'd be others - people getting the job done. We need more of them. As well as some fresh leadership, the varied debate around welcome to and acknowledgment of country needs to be sorted out. We just can't keep walking around with this annoying pebble in our shoe. There's no disagreement that welcome to country was never universal and, in fact, as a ceremonial event Australia-wide, it's only decades old. The extreme variation in performance of the welcome leads to uncertainty. Will the welcomer be gracious and welcoming or will the welcomed get a healthy reminder of how badly Indigenous Australians have been treated and walk away feeling chastised more than welcomed? There are two other issues with the welcome. Where it was practised, it was to welcome other clans passing through. Non-Indigenous Australians don't see themselves as passing through the land on which they live, and, for many, on which their forebears have lived for well over 100 years or more. The other is the fee charged for the welcome. Somehow, saying, "I'm welcoming you" as you sharpen your pencil and whip out an invoice pad from your back pocket seems the sort of stuff John Cleese or Ricky Gervais might have some fun with. The money, incidentally, doesn't go to some broad fund to help Indigenous Australia. Discard that notion. Think a select few on the gravy train. Personally, I'd just stop it. For all of the above reasons, it is simply causing too much negativity towards Indigenous Australia and for no gain. It's a no-brainer. Acknowledgment of country is different. It's not a bad thing to acknowledge traditional lands. The problem is at meetings and conferences, at which every person who opens their mouth starts with the breathless revelation that says, "I too acknowledge ...". It's ridiculous, and aggravates everyone else in the room. It sounds platitudinous and hollow, because it is. Largely because it's more about each person wanting to identify as a "good person". Conspicuous compassion is always popular. People get sick of it and feel annoyed. Oh, that we could have a decent acknowledgment at the beginning, and everyone just accept it's been done. The end. A test might be if, at the same time, we acknowledged two more things. First, the system of government that lets us live in arguably the most stable and peaceful country in the world. That's no small thing. Second, thank all those people from around the world who've helped make Australia what it is today. I think the three acknowledgments would sit together very well. There's more material for Cleese and Gervais in the meetings where an acknowledgment is rightly done but then looks comedic because the speaker chooses to read one out in whatever the local language was when no one in the room speaks that language. Ridiculous. MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Lastly, we will have to bite the bullet on how to qualify as Indigenous. The current test is too loose. It's allowing big companies and bureaucracies to tick the Indigenous box by employing or giving assistance or whatever to those whose indigeneity is some way back in their heritage. The consequence of that is that those Indigenous Australians and their offspring who either haven't started a family with non-Indigenous Australians or have only done so recently miss out. Bureaucracies will almost always go for low-hanging fruit. People in regional and remote communities are harder to engage and therefore miss out to someone who had an Indigenous great-grandparent and lives in a big city. It's just easier. If we can sort these things out, we've got a better chance of moving forward together in a very positive way. Keeping on doing stuff that makes Indigenous Australia the butt of jokes is the unkindest thing we could do. To do it because you want to look good is reprehensible. There's an uncomfortable unease surrounding Indigenous affairs in Australia. You can tell that by watching people chatting. They're likely to pick their company before they say what they really think. It shouldn't be like that. The dream situation is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians can chat openly and freely about all the policy options. That's not generally feasible now. Things are sensitive and you'd pick your company before starting a conversation. We've always been a bit shy of these discussions. Evelyn Waugh's son Auberon fell in love with Australia. He said he loved the openness, the commitment to "let the other bloke have his say". He added that there was one exception to this openness, namely having open discussion about Aboriginal Australians. He said we just look uncomfortable and change the subject. Some people got mad with him because he pointed out the wheel hadn't been invented. He was right to sense that this is taken as an insult. In any event, that was in the 80s and we're a lot more sensitive now. The vast majority of Australians want Indigenous Australians to be given the respect they deserve. They also want policies that will close the gap. How, you might ask, do we achieve these two goals? Indigenous leader Pat Anderson recently called for younger leaders to be brought forward. It's insightful and frankly courageous to point out that your own generation needs to move on. It's a good thing. It's not just that intergenerational change is both important and long overdue. The current crop just hasn't delivered. They've been too aggressive and accusatorial. Going on the attack should always be a last resort. Publicity, self-aggrandisement or stupidity have led many to that path. It's been worse than ineffective. It has turned people of good heart and faith away. Anderson might have called, not just for younger leaders, but for more effective and conciliatory ones. In any encounter, you can choose to be the angry antagonist and maybe play the victim to boot. It won't go well. Nobody chooses at any event to sit next to the angry grump. Nobody wants to deal with them unless they have to. If you toss onto "angry victim" an aggressive, accusatory tone, then nastiness ensues. You can't effectively argue for reconciliation if you don't have more than a few grams of conciliatory in your personality. People who aren't racist do not warm to being labelled that way. Aboriginal people need solutions-focused leaders. Take a look at Denise Bowden at the Yothu Yindi Foundation for some inspiration. While you're up that way, look at what the Gumatj clan are doing in mining and forestry. There'd be others - people getting the job done. We need more of them. As well as some fresh leadership, the varied debate around welcome to and acknowledgment of country needs to be sorted out. We just can't keep walking around with this annoying pebble in our shoe. There's no disagreement that welcome to country was never universal and, in fact, as a ceremonial event Australia-wide, it's only decades old. The extreme variation in performance of the welcome leads to uncertainty. Will the welcomer be gracious and welcoming or will the welcomed get a healthy reminder of how badly Indigenous Australians have been treated and walk away feeling chastised more than welcomed? There are two other issues with the welcome. Where it was practised, it was to welcome other clans passing through. Non-Indigenous Australians don't see themselves as passing through the land on which they live, and, for many, on which their forebears have lived for well over 100 years or more. The other is the fee charged for the welcome. Somehow, saying, "I'm welcoming you" as you sharpen your pencil and whip out an invoice pad from your back pocket seems the sort of stuff John Cleese or Ricky Gervais might have some fun with. The money, incidentally, doesn't go to some broad fund to help Indigenous Australia. Discard that notion. Think a select few on the gravy train. Personally, I'd just stop it. For all of the above reasons, it is simply causing too much negativity towards Indigenous Australia and for no gain. It's a no-brainer. Acknowledgment of country is different. It's not a bad thing to acknowledge traditional lands. The problem is at meetings and conferences, at which every person who opens their mouth starts with the breathless revelation that says, "I too acknowledge ...". It's ridiculous, and aggravates everyone else in the room. It sounds platitudinous and hollow, because it is. Largely because it's more about each person wanting to identify as a "good person". Conspicuous compassion is always popular. People get sick of it and feel annoyed. Oh, that we could have a decent acknowledgment at the beginning, and everyone just accept it's been done. The end. A test might be if, at the same time, we acknowledged two more things. First, the system of government that lets us live in arguably the most stable and peaceful country in the world. That's no small thing. Second, thank all those people from around the world who've helped make Australia what it is today. I think the three acknowledgments would sit together very well. There's more material for Cleese and Gervais in the meetings where an acknowledgment is rightly done but then looks comedic because the speaker chooses to read one out in whatever the local language was when no one in the room speaks that language. Ridiculous. MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Lastly, we will have to bite the bullet on how to qualify as Indigenous. The current test is too loose. It's allowing big companies and bureaucracies to tick the Indigenous box by employing or giving assistance or whatever to those whose indigeneity is some way back in their heritage. The consequence of that is that those Indigenous Australians and their offspring who either haven't started a family with non-Indigenous Australians or have only done so recently miss out. Bureaucracies will almost always go for low-hanging fruit. People in regional and remote communities are harder to engage and therefore miss out to someone who had an Indigenous great-grandparent and lives in a big city. It's just easier. If we can sort these things out, we've got a better chance of moving forward together in a very positive way. Keeping on doing stuff that makes Indigenous Australia the butt of jokes is the unkindest thing we could do. To do it because you want to look good is reprehensible. There's an uncomfortable unease surrounding Indigenous affairs in Australia. You can tell that by watching people chatting. They're likely to pick their company before they say what they really think. It shouldn't be like that. The dream situation is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians can chat openly and freely about all the policy options. That's not generally feasible now. Things are sensitive and you'd pick your company before starting a conversation. We've always been a bit shy of these discussions. Evelyn Waugh's son Auberon fell in love with Australia. He said he loved the openness, the commitment to "let the other bloke have his say". He added that there was one exception to this openness, namely having open discussion about Aboriginal Australians. He said we just look uncomfortable and change the subject. Some people got mad with him because he pointed out the wheel hadn't been invented. He was right to sense that this is taken as an insult. In any event, that was in the 80s and we're a lot more sensitive now. The vast majority of Australians want Indigenous Australians to be given the respect they deserve. They also want policies that will close the gap. How, you might ask, do we achieve these two goals? Indigenous leader Pat Anderson recently called for younger leaders to be brought forward. It's insightful and frankly courageous to point out that your own generation needs to move on. It's a good thing. It's not just that intergenerational change is both important and long overdue. The current crop just hasn't delivered. They've been too aggressive and accusatorial. Going on the attack should always be a last resort. Publicity, self-aggrandisement or stupidity have led many to that path. It's been worse than ineffective. It has turned people of good heart and faith away. Anderson might have called, not just for younger leaders, but for more effective and conciliatory ones. In any encounter, you can choose to be the angry antagonist and maybe play the victim to boot. It won't go well. Nobody chooses at any event to sit next to the angry grump. Nobody wants to deal with them unless they have to. If you toss onto "angry victim" an aggressive, accusatory tone, then nastiness ensues. You can't effectively argue for reconciliation if you don't have more than a few grams of conciliatory in your personality. People who aren't racist do not warm to being labelled that way. Aboriginal people need solutions-focused leaders. Take a look at Denise Bowden at the Yothu Yindi Foundation for some inspiration. While you're up that way, look at what the Gumatj clan are doing in mining and forestry. There'd be others - people getting the job done. We need more of them. As well as some fresh leadership, the varied debate around welcome to and acknowledgment of country needs to be sorted out. We just can't keep walking around with this annoying pebble in our shoe. There's no disagreement that welcome to country was never universal and, in fact, as a ceremonial event Australia-wide, it's only decades old. The extreme variation in performance of the welcome leads to uncertainty. Will the welcomer be gracious and welcoming or will the welcomed get a healthy reminder of how badly Indigenous Australians have been treated and walk away feeling chastised more than welcomed? There are two other issues with the welcome. Where it was practised, it was to welcome other clans passing through. Non-Indigenous Australians don't see themselves as passing through the land on which they live, and, for many, on which their forebears have lived for well over 100 years or more. The other is the fee charged for the welcome. Somehow, saying, "I'm welcoming you" as you sharpen your pencil and whip out an invoice pad from your back pocket seems the sort of stuff John Cleese or Ricky Gervais might have some fun with. The money, incidentally, doesn't go to some broad fund to help Indigenous Australia. Discard that notion. Think a select few on the gravy train. Personally, I'd just stop it. For all of the above reasons, it is simply causing too much negativity towards Indigenous Australia and for no gain. It's a no-brainer. Acknowledgment of country is different. It's not a bad thing to acknowledge traditional lands. The problem is at meetings and conferences, at which every person who opens their mouth starts with the breathless revelation that says, "I too acknowledge ...". It's ridiculous, and aggravates everyone else in the room. It sounds platitudinous and hollow, because it is. Largely because it's more about each person wanting to identify as a "good person". Conspicuous compassion is always popular. People get sick of it and feel annoyed. Oh, that we could have a decent acknowledgment at the beginning, and everyone just accept it's been done. The end. A test might be if, at the same time, we acknowledged two more things. First, the system of government that lets us live in arguably the most stable and peaceful country in the world. That's no small thing. Second, thank all those people from around the world who've helped make Australia what it is today. I think the three acknowledgments would sit together very well. There's more material for Cleese and Gervais in the meetings where an acknowledgment is rightly done but then looks comedic because the speaker chooses to read one out in whatever the local language was when no one in the room speaks that language. Ridiculous. MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Lastly, we will have to bite the bullet on how to qualify as Indigenous. The current test is too loose. It's allowing big companies and bureaucracies to tick the Indigenous box by employing or giving assistance or whatever to those whose indigeneity is some way back in their heritage. The consequence of that is that those Indigenous Australians and their offspring who either haven't started a family with non-Indigenous Australians or have only done so recently miss out. Bureaucracies will almost always go for low-hanging fruit. People in regional and remote communities are harder to engage and therefore miss out to someone who had an Indigenous great-grandparent and lives in a big city. It's just easier. If we can sort these things out, we've got a better chance of moving forward together in a very positive way. Keeping on doing stuff that makes Indigenous Australia the butt of jokes is the unkindest thing we could do. To do it because you want to look good is reprehensible. There's an uncomfortable unease surrounding Indigenous affairs in Australia. You can tell that by watching people chatting. They're likely to pick their company before they say what they really think. It shouldn't be like that. The dream situation is where Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians can chat openly and freely about all the policy options. That's not generally feasible now. Things are sensitive and you'd pick your company before starting a conversation. We've always been a bit shy of these discussions. Evelyn Waugh's son Auberon fell in love with Australia. He said he loved the openness, the commitment to "let the other bloke have his say". He added that there was one exception to this openness, namely having open discussion about Aboriginal Australians. He said we just look uncomfortable and change the subject. Some people got mad with him because he pointed out the wheel hadn't been invented. He was right to sense that this is taken as an insult. In any event, that was in the 80s and we're a lot more sensitive now. The vast majority of Australians want Indigenous Australians to be given the respect they deserve. They also want policies that will close the gap. How, you might ask, do we achieve these two goals? Indigenous leader Pat Anderson recently called for younger leaders to be brought forward. It's insightful and frankly courageous to point out that your own generation needs to move on. It's a good thing. It's not just that intergenerational change is both important and long overdue. The current crop just hasn't delivered. They've been too aggressive and accusatorial. Going on the attack should always be a last resort. Publicity, self-aggrandisement or stupidity have led many to that path. It's been worse than ineffective. It has turned people of good heart and faith away. Anderson might have called, not just for younger leaders, but for more effective and conciliatory ones. In any encounter, you can choose to be the angry antagonist and maybe play the victim to boot. It won't go well. Nobody chooses at any event to sit next to the angry grump. Nobody wants to deal with them unless they have to. If you toss onto "angry victim" an aggressive, accusatory tone, then nastiness ensues. You can't effectively argue for reconciliation if you don't have more than a few grams of conciliatory in your personality. People who aren't racist do not warm to being labelled that way. Aboriginal people need solutions-focused leaders. Take a look at Denise Bowden at the Yothu Yindi Foundation for some inspiration. While you're up that way, look at what the Gumatj clan are doing in mining and forestry. There'd be others - people getting the job done. We need more of them. As well as some fresh leadership, the varied debate around welcome to and acknowledgment of country needs to be sorted out. We just can't keep walking around with this annoying pebble in our shoe. There's no disagreement that welcome to country was never universal and, in fact, as a ceremonial event Australia-wide, it's only decades old. The extreme variation in performance of the welcome leads to uncertainty. Will the welcomer be gracious and welcoming or will the welcomed get a healthy reminder of how badly Indigenous Australians have been treated and walk away feeling chastised more than welcomed? There are two other issues with the welcome. Where it was practised, it was to welcome other clans passing through. Non-Indigenous Australians don't see themselves as passing through the land on which they live, and, for many, on which their forebears have lived for well over 100 years or more. The other is the fee charged for the welcome. Somehow, saying, "I'm welcoming you" as you sharpen your pencil and whip out an invoice pad from your back pocket seems the sort of stuff John Cleese or Ricky Gervais might have some fun with. The money, incidentally, doesn't go to some broad fund to help Indigenous Australia. Discard that notion. Think a select few on the gravy train. Personally, I'd just stop it. For all of the above reasons, it is simply causing too much negativity towards Indigenous Australia and for no gain. It's a no-brainer. Acknowledgment of country is different. It's not a bad thing to acknowledge traditional lands. The problem is at meetings and conferences, at which every person who opens their mouth starts with the breathless revelation that says, "I too acknowledge ...". It's ridiculous, and aggravates everyone else in the room. It sounds platitudinous and hollow, because it is. Largely because it's more about each person wanting to identify as a "good person". Conspicuous compassion is always popular. People get sick of it and feel annoyed. Oh, that we could have a decent acknowledgment at the beginning, and everyone just accept it's been done. The end. A test might be if, at the same time, we acknowledged two more things. First, the system of government that lets us live in arguably the most stable and peaceful country in the world. That's no small thing. Second, thank all those people from around the world who've helped make Australia what it is today. I think the three acknowledgments would sit together very well. There's more material for Cleese and Gervais in the meetings where an acknowledgment is rightly done but then looks comedic because the speaker chooses to read one out in whatever the local language was when no one in the room speaks that language. Ridiculous. MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Lastly, we will have to bite the bullet on how to qualify as Indigenous. The current test is too loose. It's allowing big companies and bureaucracies to tick the Indigenous box by employing or giving assistance or whatever to those whose indigeneity is some way back in their heritage. The consequence of that is that those Indigenous Australians and their offspring who either haven't started a family with non-Indigenous Australians or have only done so recently miss out. Bureaucracies will almost always go for low-hanging fruit. People in regional and remote communities are harder to engage and therefore miss out to someone who had an Indigenous great-grandparent and lives in a big city. It's just easier. If we can sort these things out, we've got a better chance of moving forward together in a very positive way. Keeping on doing stuff that makes Indigenous Australia the butt of jokes is the unkindest thing we could do. To do it because you want to look good is reprehensible.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 days ago
- Health
- Winnipeg Free Press
Indigenous, Black patients waiting longer to be seen in hospital
A preliminary analysis of race-based data collected from patients shows racism can be a factor affecting wait times and care provided in Manitoba emergency departments, the project's lead said Tuesday. Manitoba hospitals became the first in Canada to collect data about patients' race on May 11, 2023. Patients at hospitals and health centres were asked during registration if they wanted to declare their race. The information is voluntary. A report shows Indigenous and Black patients are waiting the longest to be seen, a pattern similar to other findings. 'Unfortunately, in a system under stress, it is often those who are the most marginalized and have the fewest resources who are impacted the most,' Dr. Marcia Anderson said in a Shared Health news release. 'While this might come as no surprise, the collection of this data is critical for accurately measuring and demonstrating specific health disparities.' Anderson also said Indigenous patients attend emergency departments with similar triage scores as white patients. A 'harmful narrative' that Indigenous people 'overuse' emergency departments and use them 'inappropriately' is not supported by data, she said. The news release was sent around the same time as Anderson held a news conference alongside Health Minister Uzoma Asagwara. 'The findings of this data are, unfortunately, not unique to Manitoba. The systemic failure to provide adequate care to an increasingly racially diverse population is a national issue, but our government is committed to addressing these gaps within our system,' Asagwara said in the release. The initiative is a response to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's Call to Action #19, which calls on governments to identify and close the gaps in health-care outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. A steering committee is helping design steps to eliminate racism in the health-case system. The data was collected by Shared Health in collaboration with the University of Manitoba's Ongomiizwin Indigenous Institute of Health and Healing and the U of M's George & Fay Yee Centre for Healthcare Innovation. fpcity@
Canada Standard
3 days ago
- Politics
- Canada Standard
Decolonizing history and social studies curricula has a long way to go in Canada
In June 2015, 10 years ago, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) called for curriculum on Indigenous histories and contemporary contributions to Canada to foster intercultural understanding, empathy and respect. This was the focus of calls to action Nos. 62 to 65. As education scholars, we are part of a project supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council called Thinking Historically for Canada's Future. This project involves researchers, educators and partner organizations from across Canada, including Indigenous and non-Indigenous team members. As part of this work, we examined Canadian history and social studies curricula in elementary, middle and secondary schools with the aim of understanding how they address - and may better address in future - the need for decolonization. We found that although steps have been made towards decolonizing history curricula in Canada, there is still a long way to go. These curricula must do far more to challenge dominant narratives, prompt students to critically reflect on their identities and value Indigenous world views. Read more: Looking for Indigenous history? 'Shekon Neechie' website recentres Indigenous perspectives As white settler scholars and educators, we acknowledge our responsibility to unlearn colonial ways of being and learn how to further decolonization in Canada. In approaching this study, we began by listening to Indigenous scholars, such as Cree scholar Dwayne Donald. Donald and other scholars call for reimagining curriculum through unlearning colonialism and renewing relationships. Read more: Leaked Alberta school curriculum in urgent need of guidance from Indigenous wisdom teachings The late education scholar Michael Marker, a member of the Lummi Nation, suggested that in history education, renewing relations involves learning from Indigenous understandings of the past, situated within local meanings of time and place. Curricula across Canada have been updated in the last 10 years to include teaching about treaties, Indian Residential Schools and the cultures, perspectives and experiences of Indigenous Peoples over time. Thanks primarily to the work of Indigenous scholars and educators, including Donald, Marker, Mi'kmaw educator Marie Battiste, Anishinaabe scholar Nicole Bell and others, some public school educators are attentive to land-based learning and the importance of oral history. But these teachings are, for the most part, ad hoc and not supported by provincial curriculum mandates. Our study revealed that most provincial history curricula are still focused on colonial narratives that centre settler histories and emphasize "progress" over time. Curricula are largely inattentive to critical understandings of white settler power and to Indigenous ways of knowing and being. Notably, we do not include the three territories in this statement. Most of the territorial history curricula have been co-created with local Indigenous communities, and stand out with regard to decolonization. For example, in Nunavut's Grade 5 curriculum, the importance of local knowledge tied to the land is highlighted throughout. There are learning expectations related to survival skills and ecological knowledge. Members of our broader research team are dedicated to analyzing curricula in Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and the Yukon. Their work may offer approaches to be adapted for other educational contexts. In contrast, we found that provincial curricula often reinforce dominant historical narratives, especially surrounding colonialism. Some documents use the term "the history," implying a singular history of Canada (for example, Manitoba's Grade 6 curriculum). Historical content, examples and guiding questions are predominantly written from a Euro-western perspective, while minimizing racialized identities and community histories. In particular, curricula often ignore illustrations of Indigenous agency and experience. Read more: Moving beyond Black history month towards inclusive histories in Quebec secondary schools Most curricula primarily situate Indigenous Peoples in the past, without substantial consideration for present-day implications of settler colonialism, as well as Indigenous agency and experiences today. For example, in British Columbia's Grade 4 curriculum, there are lengthy discussions of the harms of colonization in the past. Yet, there is no mention of the ongoing impacts of settler colonialism or the need to engage in decolonization today. To disrupt these dominant narratives, we recommend that history curricula should critically discuss the ongoing impacts of settler colonialism, while centring stories of Indigenous resistance and survival over time. There are also missed opportunities within history curricula when it comes to critical discussions around identity, including systemic marginalization or privilege. Who we are informs how we understand history, but curricula largely does not prompt student reflection in these ways, including around treaty relationships. In Saskatchewan's Grade 5 curriculum, students are expected to explain what treaties are and "affirm that all Saskatchewan residents are Treaty people." However, there is no mention of students considering how their own backgrounds, identities, values and experiences shape their understandings of and responsibilities for treaties. Yet these discussions are essential for engaging students in considering the legacies of colonialism and how they may act to redress those legacies. A key learning outcome could involve students becoming more aware of how their own personal and community histories inform their historical understandings and reconciliation commitments. History curricula generally ignore Indigenous ways of knowing and being. Most curricula are inattentive to Indigenous oral traditions, conceptions of time, local contexts and relationships with other species and the environment. Instead, these documents reflect Euro-western, settler colonial worldviews and educational values. For example, history curricula overwhelmingly ignore local meanings of time and place, while failing to encourage opportunities for land-based and experiential learning. In Prince Edward Island's Grade 12 curriculum, the documents expect that students will "demonstrate an understanding of the interactions among people, places and the environment." While this may seem promising, environmental histories in this curriculum and others uphold capitalist world views by focusing on resource extraction and economic progress. To disrupt settler colonial relationships with the land and empower youth as environmental stewards, we support reframing history curricula in ways that are attentive to Indigenous ways of knowing the past and relations with other people, beings and the land. Schools have been, and continue to be, harmful spaces for many Indigenous communities, and various aspects of our schooling beg questions about how well-served both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students are for meeting current and future challenges. If, as a society, we accept the premise that the transformation of current curricular expectations is possible for schools, then more substantive engagement is required in working toward decolonization. Decolonizing curricula is a long-term, challenging process that requires consideration of many things: who sits on curriculum writing teams; the resources allocated to supporting curricular reform; broader school or board-wide policies; and ways of teaching that support reconciliation. We encourage history curriculum writing teams to take up these recommendations as part of a broader commitment to reconciliation. While not exhaustive, recommendations for curricular reform are a critical step in the future redesign of history curricula. The goal is a history education committed to listening and learning from Indigenous communities to build more inclusive national stories of the past, and into the future.
Winnipeg Free Press
4 days ago
- General
- Winnipeg Free Press
Graduates far from home ‘grateful' for honour at school powwow
After being displaced for more than two weeks, Jonah Wavey found some hope in a Winnipeg graduation ceremony — and he's holding onto it until he can celebrate with his classmates back home. The Grade 12 Tataskweyak Cree Nation student was among several wildfire evacuees honoured Monday during a special celebration of Indigenous graduates at the University of Winnipeg's Duckworth Centre. The event, typically part of the Winnipeg School Division's annual outdoor powwow that draws more than 10,000 Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, was postponed last week due to poor air quality from wildfires in northern Manitoba. Ruth Bonneville / Free Press Jonah Wavey, a grade 12 graduate from Tataskweyak Cree Nation, with his mom, Abbie Garson-Wavey, at the special graduation ceremony held by Winnipeg School Division in partnership with Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs, for graduates from northern Manitoba communities evacuated due to wildfires. 'I'm grateful that they are doing this for us,' Wavey said, adding that he hasn't been in class since the wildfires around Tataskewyak forced 2,400 residents from their homes. 'I'm glad that I am part of this.' Wavey's mother, Abbie Garson-Wavey, a band councillor in Tataskewyak, said she was thrilled to get the invite. 'I totally appreciated it,' she said. 'We have (four) of our graduates (in Winnipeg), but unfortunately, a lot of them are separated because of the evacuation. '(My son) is so excited. We're so proud of him and all of the work he's done.' Garson-Wavey said the evacuation has taken a toll on the entire community, especially youth. 'I know the displacement has caused us all to split up into different communities, different cities,' she said. 'There's been a lot of mental health issues because of the separation and the displacement. We've been just trying to remind them, to ground them, that we're there for them and we support them.' Monday's smaller indoor event drew dozens of people and featured a grand entry, honour song, a prayer and teaching from divisional Kookum Marsha Missyabit, and a friendship dance that brought nearly everyone to the gymnasium floor, hand in hand and smiling. WSD partnered with the Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs to invite graduates affected by the wildfires. 'We express heartfelt gratitude to Winnipeg School Division for their generous and compassionate gesture in extending an invitation to Grade 12 graduates who have been evacuated from their home communities due to the wildfires,' said Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs Acting Grand Chief Gordon Bluesky in a release. 'This meaningful act ensures that these students are recognized and celebrated for their achievements despite the challenges they have faced. It is a powerful example of community solidarity and support for First Nations youth during a time of uncertainty.' Rob Riel, assistant superintendent of Indigenous education, said the division wanted to show they care during this difficult time. 'We've also opened the door for them, if they're still in Winnipeg, to walk the stage at any of our graduations next week,' Riel said. 'Every school said they would welcome it. 'It's an important time that you have to acknowledge, so we just want to ensure they got that experience.' For Keanu Kirkness, another Grade 12 student from Tataskweyak, the ceremony marked a special milestone. 'It's a great achievement, a bookmark in my life, and getting to do it with the people with me here,' he said, alongside his parents and cousins. 'It means a lot.' Kirkness and his family have been staying with his aunt in Winnipeg since being evacuated. 'It's been all right, having fun walking around (the city),' he said. 'But I miss (home) and being in class, it's my last year.' Winnipeg Jets Game Days On Winnipeg Jets game days, hockey writers Mike McIntyre and Ken Wiebe send news, notes and quotes from the morning skate, as well as injury updates and lineup decisions. Arrives a few hours prior to puck drop. He hopes the wildfires don't take away the chance to celebrate graduation back home. 'The photos, the people you're graduating with, you can always come back and look at them,' he said. Matt Henderson, superintendent of schools and CEO of the Winnipeg School Division, said the ceremony was a small but meaningful gesture. 'This was a way to honour WSD grads, and at the same time, give students an opportunity that may not get to walk across their stage, and a show of solidarity,' Henderson said. 'Kids are kids, and they want to be with each other, and that was the least we could do as a school division.' Scott BilleckReporter Scott Billeck is a general assignment reporter for the Free Press. A Creative Communications graduate from Red River College, Scott has more than a decade's worth of experience covering hockey, football and global pandemics. He joined the Free Press in 2024. Read more about Scott. Every piece of reporting Scott produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print — part of the Free Press's tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press's history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates. Our newsroom depends on a growing audience of readers to power our journalism. If you are not a paid reader, please consider becoming a subscriber. Our newsroom depends on its audience of readers to power our journalism. Thank you for your support.
