Month: February 2019

Dear whom it may concern, 

Education of such a thing like treaty education is a task that is associated with many obstacles. Personally, I think that people who do not believe in treaty education are simply not willing to learn about anything that may oppose their own beliefs. Social Studies 30 – a class that revolves around Canadian history – is something that is heavily influenced by the treaties. Due to this, I think that treaty education is something that should be a priority in Canadian education. The fact that your students, who are presumably all at an age where the understanding of why treaties were put in place and the lasting effects of them, do not comprehend why education like this is important is astonishing. In my own opinion, the purpose of treaty education is to ensure that society is educated about the lasting effects of the treaties, and how they have shaped Canada today. When remarks about relevancy are said, I find it difficult to understand why it is not important. Students and teachers alike experience the positive or negative effects of treaties every day, as the people of Canada are all treaty people. This means that as a person living in Canada, everyone inherits the outcomes of treaties. I would recommend that you emphasize this to both your students and coop teacher. If this does not work, I would also like to recommend showing them actual stories from people who have to live with the negative outcomes of treaties, and how it shapes the world they live in. One way I think you could do this would be through an activity where students can write a mock letter to someone who has had these negative experiences. I feel this allows students to connect with a real person, which hopefully triggers consideration of some sort.  I also have attached some resources that I have used to develop my own understanding of why treaty education is so important. 

Good luck in the future,

Dan Manson

• We are all Treaty People.
• “On What Terms Can we Speak?”
• Claire Kreuger’s blog here
• Claire Introduction
• Mike & Claire 

1. List some of the ways that you see reinhabitation and decolonization happening throughout the narrative.

            There are many examples of reinhabitation and decolonization in the reading. The first opens in the title of the first paragraph, A Return to Traditional Mushkegowuk Ways of Knowing. Through colonization, indigenous culture has been stripped as a result of assimilation conducted by European settlers. By reintegrating indigenous ways of knowing, such as that of the Mushkegowuk Cree peoples, those with a background that they cannot fully identify with are given an opportunity to do so. I also found the research components of the paper very insightful. The author incorporates research in order to show how colonialism resulted in the stripping of culture for indigenous peoples, by asking how indigenous communities perceive some of the Mushkegowuk Cree ways of knowing. One other evident piece that demonstrates decolonization and reinhabitation is the reasons included on why they chose to teach many different generations together to talk about the issues of land and water rights. By incorporating indigenous ways of knowing and talking about how such resources are consumed allows for a shift in their minds from ‘dominant ideas’ to ideas that are individual and are based on what one deems moral, rather than what society does.

 2. How might you adapt these ideas towards considering place in your own subject areas and teaching?

            My major is biology, and I would want to allow for students to explore the curriculum with a more individualistic approach. Students may have different beliefs, but I feel that theories should be explored. I would want students to feel welcomed to express their culture, but also be open to learning about theories that are a part of the curriculum. I think that many students may feel as if their beliefs are disregarded in science classrooms, due to teachers teaching theory as a fact rather than what it is – a theory. 

            My minor is physical education, and to incorporate ideas that consider place, I would like to allow students to explore how physical education is taught around the world, and the many ways that cultures within Canada teach as well. Physical education can be looked at from many perspectives, and I think the knowledge that can be taken is beneficial to every student. 

Before Reading:

            I think the original idea behind creating curriculum was to industrialize education. Since education serves such a large role in forming intelligence, traits, skills and so on, I think that its sole purpose was to fulfill this role in order to conform to what those in power want. This would mean creating ‘cookie-cutter’ citizens though the education industry. As time progressed, I think the curriculum slowly evolved to not only relay information deemed as useful to society, but also reflect national agendas and serves to create political presence.

After Reading:

            School curricula now looks to be an array of what is needed to be known in order to succeed. The majority of career paths that one may take influence all sectors, allowing for a well-rounded experience for students. This, however, is perceived by me as an ideal rather than a reality. The creation of curriculum is made up of effort to give the best education, while maintaining a balance of the wide spectrum of paths that one may choose. With this knowledge, I think that the influence of demographics plays a huge role in what is put into curriculum, as well as political climate. In order to enact changes to curriculum, government must produce compromises, which is not only difficult among representatives between competing parties, but with the public also. Therefore, curriculum is created and implemented on the basis that majorities still control what is put into curriculum, in order to either stay in power, appeal to society and create education opportunities that are considered to be ‘proper’ (which is whatever curriculum creators deem it to be).

            After reading this document, my understanding of mediation in regards to how curriculum is created has grown much deeper. Previously, I knew that people’s differences of opinion disrupt the implementation of new ideas, but not to the extent that they actually have. Time is a huge factor in today’s world, as new ideas and adaptions must be put forth by educators to ensure that curriculum, both formal and hidden, is being taught in a way that suits all students. However, with clashing ideologies about how curriculum is created, time passes at a rate that leaves creators almost always one step behind what is current and developing. 

            Something that concerns me after reading this document is the balance – or lack thereof – within the creation of curriculum. As governments are the primary implementors of curriculum, they are the ones who get to flip the switch in order to allow for change. School is as much of a learning environment as a political platform, which allows for students to be susceptible to change that appeases the majority, but limits individual experience. One quote from the reading I really liked and exemplifies this is in the conclusion. It reads “Curriculum decisions are often part of a much larger public debate that often extends beyond education to larger questions of public goods.” Since political decisions are never neutral, that would mean creation of curriculum involuntarily puts restrictions on those who do not confine within that of the majority. I mainly find this concerning because although people want what is best for them, they say that they want what will appeal to everyone. I think that this can be viewed as misleading and unclear, and may halt the implementation for real changes that need to be made. 

To be a good student in today’s society, one must conform to commonsense. Commonsense defines a good student as someone is a good listener, approachable and imaginative. I feel as if these aspects of being a good student are a part of the modern system of education. Looking back at my high school experience, I feel as if my peers that were most successful had traits similar, and also had good work ethic and were accountable for their work. I also think that for younger students, being imaginative and approachable allow for good teachers to use different methods of teaching to ensure that an individual is getting the best form of education for them. 

Students are privileged by this definition of commonsense because those who have not developed the traits are looked at as lesser in terms of intelligence. When observing others teach in previous courses, I have developed the opinion that children are all imaginative, but some lack approachability when it comes to work, discipline and respect. I think this privileges those who have developed such characteristics because everyone progresses differently, both intellectually and personally. When characterizing two students, teachers would be inclined to teach the student who is approachable compared to the one who is not. This creates an imbalance within the classroom and creates inequitable opportunity. 

I think perceiving commonsense as an idea rather than directive allows me to see the societal norms it creates. Previously, I believed commonsense to be a regular aspect of life, but lacked in seeing the marginalization that is associated with it. Now I can fully comprehend how commonsense only benefits the majority, and anything that doesn’t qualify as ‘normal’ is limited. From my own point of view, I see simple things as normal that other cultures would see as extraordinary, while things they do seem completely foreign to me.