1
Annotated Bibliography
Bilingual Education
Frances Abele and Katherine Graham
March 23, 2010
Agbo, Seth A. “Decentralization of First Nations Education in Canada: Perspectives on Ideals and
Realities on Indian Control of Indian Education.” Interchange 33.3 (2002): 281
Agbo’s article contends schools for Aboriginal children will remain ‘mediocre’ in quality unless there is devolution
that entails the empowerment of First Nations communities to provide education suited to each community. In
addition, decentralization needs to meet three conditions. First, resolution of constraints/contradictions internal to
decentralization, second, Aboriginal scholars and First Nations school authorities need to enable change through
frameworks of local control, and third, First Nations communities and federal authorities need to identify the key
symbolic and structural characteristics of decentralizing First Nations schools. Agbo offers a set of interrelated
focus points that examine the effects of local control, lack of clarity in devolution procedures, and unclear
educational pedagogies within Aboriginal frameworks. Agbo posits that local control must empower Aboriginal
students by intricately linking school governance with pedagogy (Goddard & Shields, 1997), and that under current
practices, devolution does not fully benefit most Aboriginal communities. The article offers an overview of policy
that led to local control. It also offers a concise presentation of the features of decentralization of education,
including the importance of parental influence and the school’s responsiveness to student needs. He provides a
thoughtful analysis on cultures of learning, providing references to additional articles on the importance of culture,
language and heritage teachings, and value differences for/of First Nations children, questioning its efficacy in
situations where a majority of teachers are non-native teachers of First Nations (Ontario),and concluding that to
meet the needs of First Nations, traditional and technological learning should be balanced by examining how
communal bonds of Aboriginal identities, shaped by communal language, ethnicity, and culture affect knowledge
and learning. Agbo analyzes the reality of local control through a review of research – devolution has resulted in a
transfer of power, but not a change in orientation of the management of power: most First Nations communities
retained the governance, administrative and curricular practices of the federal government. Advocates for the
politicization of decentralization, Abgo argues, overlooked or undervalued its educational impact on Aboriginal
students. The lack of transfer of knowledge, with power, the vulnerability of schools to local politics, the need for
accountability and efficiency within the administration of the school, and inconsistency in quality of staff, all have
effect on the educational framework, and student success. Agbo briefly details policy implications for
decentralization; among many recommendations in his conclusion, he argues that if devolution is to benefit
teaching and learning, then band councils need a systematic approach to collaborative decision making that allows
appropriate participation of parents, teachers and students, that objectives concerning education (curriculum,
achievement, standards and policy formulation/implementation) need to be determined by politicians, policy
makers and First Nations people. In addition, First Nations com munities should be able to clearly identify
their management tasks and be able to develop a way to relate how resources are distributed to student learning
priorities. Communities need to be aware of an underlying philosophy of education, and be able to manage
control in the context of the expansion of the philosophy.
Andersen, Catharyn and Alana Johns. “Labrador Inuit: speaking into the Future.” Inuit Studies 29:1-2
(2005)
This paper discusses the issue of language loss in northern Labrador Inuttitut. Like many communities
across northern Canada, Labrador is facing the possible complete loss of Inuktitut, demonstrated by the
1
2
fact that almost no children speak it as a first language any longer. In this paper we outline a number of
linguistic properties which make Labrador Inuttitut and a related dialect spoken in Rigolet distinct from
neighbouring dialects of Inuktitut. We also report on a number of initiatives taken up by community
organizations, school and individuals in their growing efforts to reverse language shift. These include a
language survey, dictionaries, youth camps, a language nest, etc.
Anonby, S.J. “Reversing Language Shift: Can Kwak’wala Be Revived?” Master’s Thesis, University of
North Dakota, 1997.
Anonby’s thesis is an examination of reversing language shift (language revival) of the Kwak’wala language, which
is a common language between 12 Indigenous tribes in coastal British Columbia. Anonby gives an overview of the
Kwak’wala history and contact with white settlers; he identifies reasons for language decline: variation in dialect,
colonisation and marginalization by English, and perceptions that English offered social mobility and economic
opportunities. These factors led to linguistic and social suicide as a decision to enable personal survival for their
children and themselves. He situates the Kwak’wala people in their current reality – many located in urban centres,
as well as in more remote and smaller communities on Vancouver Island -- and argues that the Kwak’wala are in
the midst of a profound social change, including language shift from Kwak’wala to English. Anonby focuses on key
Kwak’wala communities, and efforts to reverse the effects of language shift, but his research indicates that despite
programs of language education, and the perception that it is important for continuation of culture, the language
is declining. Anonby directs his research toward language projects that were or are similarly positioned to
Kwak’wala, and offers some conclusions regarding essential components of language projects. Elements to
observe when evaluating projects are numbers (increases in number of people who use the language, or are
persuaded back to it), expansion of ‘domain’ of use (household, work, religion, government, education), and a
combination of numerical increases and domain, which results in ‘language spread’ (the more using it, the more
domains the language will be used in). Anonby provides an interesting and useful examination of a variety of
cultures that were experiencing cultural and/or linguistic decline. In all cases where their language revival was
successful, these cultures shared the features of population (large language/population base), ethnic strength
(“we” vs. “them”), promoted literacy in the language, provided immersion classes for children, and used the
language in the media. In addition, notes Anonby, language projects are most successful when they are consistent
with the direction in which social forces are guiding language behavior. He applies these findings to proposal for
the revival of Kwak’wala, and divides the proposal into the categories of community and education, focusing on
roles and how to implement the features of population, ethnicity, literacy, immersion, and media. He uses stages
seven to 4 of Joshua Fishman’s study of reversing language shift (1991) as relevant to the Kwak’wala, and cautions
that they need to be approached in an order and phasing that will allow maximum possibilities of success. First,
the majority of Kwak’wala speakers are socially integrated and ethnolinguistically active (and beyond child-bearing
age). Second, it is crucial that youth, family neighbourhood and community are linked. Third, the establishment of
voluntary Kwak’wala literacy schools. Fourth, Kwak’wala in the regular school system. To move toward language
revitalization, Anonby identifies that the Kwak’wala must have a common vision, which includes clear reasons for
reversing language shift (economic, identity, rewards/initiatives) and a clear plan about how to do it. He outlines
carefully how and in what order the community, families, and schools could work on the 5 essential elements of
successful language revival, concluding that:
1) the majority of the Kwakwaka’wakw population must feel a strong sense of ethnicity and solidarity; this must
be a community, not educational, endeavour. The work and price necessary to achieve this must be done
willingly by the Kwakwaka’wakw families.
2) An immersion environment is also community based, and begins by establishing Kwak’wala-only zones
(homes, neighbourhood). Only after students have received immersion support in their homes will it be
possible to begin immersion in the schools.
3) The stabilization of immersion environments will enable schools and literacy groups to focus on immersion as
well, creating an environment where reading and writing Kwak’wala can be done regularly. The community
supports this by continuing to create opportunities for Kwak’wala use in all aspects of daily life.
2
3
4) Books must be available for the newly literate population to read, and would give Kwak’wala prestige to be in
the media. The community plays the central role, as it will consume and produce the material; teachers and
students would use and produce material in a school setting.
Chapter 4 of Anonby’s thesis outlines the implementation of his ideas in a Kwak’wala community (Alert Bay). It is a
narrative approach that records community responses, at all levels, to his ideas, and the strategies that the
community and education system adopted, or did not adopt, to enable language revival.
Auditor General of Canada. Chapter 4 in Report to the House of Commons: Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada: Elementary and Secondary Education. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government
Services Canada, 2000.
The Auditor General’s report addresses three main issues. First, that INAC cannot demonstrate it has met its main
objectives to assist First Nations individuals on reserve to meet their educational needs and goals. As a linked
point, there is no assurance that First Nations students are receiving culturally appropriate material, closing the
‘education gap’ of First Nations students has been slow, and parity in educational achievement with other
Canadians set back. Second, INAC’s role in education and frameworks of accountability need articulation;
additionally, it needs to take into greater account socioeconomic factors and cultural and special needs of First
Nations children as factors that can affect success in education. Third, education will be impacted by pressures of
technology, population increases on reserves and changes in technology and provincial education programs; INAC
needs to address the complexity and urgency of the situation and respond to issues with action.
Bainbridge, John. Canadian Journal of Education 31(3) 2008: 761-766
Bainbridge comments on Gallagher-Mackay ‘s review of T. Berger (2006) arguing that Gallagher-Mackay
took too narrow a view in her piece critiquing Berger’s 2006 report. Berger, Bainbridge argues, was
advocating for bilingualism, not as a “facet of a larger school program,” but “because it would inevitably
place the schools in the hands of Inuit and this solution would profoundly change the whole culture of the
education system.” Bainbridge points out that the system is not currently culturally relevant and that by
dropping out students are “voting with their feet.” Bainbridge stresses that Berger built his argument on
previous reports Qulliq Quvvariarlugu and Aajiiqatigiingiq. Moreover, the purpose of Berger’s report was
to break down the federal government’s defense that they had no jurisdiction (and thus no responsibility)
over social and education policies in Nunavut and that focusing on bilingualism was a way to do this.
Berger’s strategy, Bainbridge suggests, was to show that the Government of Canada had a moral
responsibility to support bilingual education like it did for the French majority in Quebec. Bainbridge
agrees with Gallagher-Mackay that the GN lacks the political will to address the core problems in the
education system; the Department of Education’s biggest failure, he argues, is that it has opposed
community involvement in education – “local control…is at least as important as the language of
instruction in transforming the culture of the schools.” The author also stresses that while poverty may be
a factor affecting student success, we should not underestimate the power of a strong sense of self-worth
and goals for the future in this regard. Increasing the number of Inuit teachers will help to improve
students’ sense of self worth. The necessary increase in Inuit teachers to achieve the objectives of
bilingual education will require changes to the current training system, including changing the leadership
in the training organizations and associated bodies.
Barnhardt, Ray. “Creating a Place for Indigenous Knowledge in Education: The Alaska Native
Knowledge Network.” in David A. Gruenwald and Gregory A. Smith, eds. Place-Based Education in the
Global Age: Local Diversity. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 2008.
Barnhardt examines the reintegration of Native knowledge systems into the school curriculum as a way to link
student’s school learning with life learning out of school. The intention has been to restore a ‘traditional sense of
3
4
place’ while deepening the educational experience for all students. What has been developed is a ‘pedagogy of
place’ that teaches through culture, rather than about culture; students learn about the immediate places they
inhabit, and their connection to the larger world. The Alaskan Rural Systemic Initiative is a long term educational
restoration initiative developed by Alaska Federation of Natives, in collaboration with the University of Alaska
Fairbanks and with funding from the National Science Foundation. Its aim is to document, through initiatives, the
Indigenous knowledge systems of Alaska Native people, and develop curriculum and pedagogy that appropriately
uses local knowledge and ways of knowing for incorporation into the formal education system. The central
component of AKRSI has been to find common ground and connection between interdependent and disparate
systems: the Indigenous knowledge systems (local) and the formal education system (imported). The overall goal is
to use the strengths of each system to boost the quality of education and improve the academic performance of
students. Barndhart offers a list of initiatives that have bolstered student success, and details the development of
the Alaska Native Knowledge Network as a necessary addition to, and key element of, the AKRSI program. It acts as
a framework for documentation, analysis, dissemination and application of information about Indigenous
knowledge systems and their relevance in the contemporary world. It consists of a curriculum database, an
extensive web site and listserv, and a publication production and distribution facility. Barnhardt describes various
initiatives of the ANKN, including science camps and fairs, a clearinghouse and database of curriculum resources
applicable to Indigenous settings, and cultural atlases and training toward implementing a cultural atlas. The
training involves a CD-ROM/web site development project in which students research any aspect of their
culture/community/region and assemble the information in a multimedia format through the use of technology).
Barnhardt discusses, in relation to AKRSI, the emphasis and importance of creating stability and continuity in
school professionals and personnel. He describes how this has been done – in part through the preparation of
qualified Alaska Native teachers and administrators, and engaging local, Native, expertise in the educational
process. He outlines how this has led to capacity building, and the development of Alaska Standards for Culturally
Responsive Schools, which includes standards for students, educators, curriculum, schools and communities, and
which guides schools and communities in appropriately integrating indigenous knowledge across all areas. It
emphasizes student experiences in and out of school by offering opportunities for students to engage in in-depth
experiential learning in real world contexts.
Berger, Paul. “Some Thoughts on Qallunaat Teacher Caring in Nunavut.” Journal of Teaching and
Learning. 4.2 (2007).
The article is predicated on defining what constitutes ‘caring’ behavior of Qallunaat teachers in the context of
working with Inuit, and given differences in ‘caring’ across cultures. Berger contends that ‘true caring’ can only
occur when the education system is informed by Inuit, and the teacher is committed to, and an advocate for, Inuit.
Author posits a move from a colonial, Qallunaat-based education system to an education system controlled by
Inuit, and offers some historical perspective on the imposition of Qallunaat schooling, replacing Inuit traditional
ways, negative social and community effects, and attempts to reform the educational system to include Inuit
values (IQ), culture, language, and community input. Berger argues that in the current context, true caring is
impossible; he offers some ideas for teachers to be ‘caring’, and that true caring will occur after systemic change.
His ideas include: advocating for the values of Inuit (becoming un-neutral) as a way of de-colonizing, questioning
curriculum and designing materials that enable the expression of Inuit values/culture/language (breaking rules),
understanding cultural values that are tied to teaching methods, and adopting (after observation and
consideration) more Inuit-centred teaching approaches (accepting learning role in different cultural environment),
and studying Inuktitut and learning about Inuit culture and how it is demonstrated in the classroom. These ideas
are offered also as policy directions for change at a systemic level.
Berger, Paul. “Urgent Need for More Inuktitut Instruction in Nunavut Schools.” Proceedings of the 15 th
Inuit Studies Conference, Orality (Paris 2006).
Using observations from 2 years teaching in a community on Baffin Island, time observing in schools and research
that involved interviewing a range of individuals representing a cross-section of the community about what they
4
5
liked about schooling and what they’d like to see changed, (74 participants), Berger argues for stronger Inuktitut
instruction in Nunavut schools, as well as greater emphasis on Inuit culture and way of being (IQ) to foster
substantial bilingualism. His findings indicate that community members fear the loss of Inuktitut and Inuit culture
and are observing this loss in the education of a younger generation who are taught primarily in English (after Gr.
5), or speak a ‘mix’ of English and Inuktitut, or who have incomplete knowledge of traditional Inuit ‘ways’. Tied to
the community’s concerns, however, is the fact that English is valuable for success in educational endeavours and
a professional life; its ubiquity is accepted but at the expense of strong foundational knowledge of Inuktitut and
Inuit ways. The article offers some counter perspectives such as increased English instruction in early grades, initial
English instruction that leads to a greater emphasis on Inuktitut in high school, teachers who speak Inuktitut who
can bridge language differences, and the inclusion of elders in school to teach language through traditional skills as
a way of connecting youth with elders and preventing the loss of specific Inuktitut words that are directly related
to Inuit ways (relationship to land and other core experiential/cultural activities). Berger argues for implementing
the Bilingual Education Strategy (2004), early and greater exposure to English as a Second Language program,
moving Inuktitut instruction into high school, and improving bilingual curriculum and resources, thus positively
affecting teacher support and training.
Berger, Thomas. Conciliator’s Final Report March 1, 2006 ‘The Nunavut Project’: Nunavut.
Vancouver: Craig E. Jones, Counsel to the Concilliator, 2006.
Motivated by long-standing disagreements over the implementation of the Nunavut land claim, the
parties to the claim appointed Thomas Berger to:
1. Review the background, current status and outstanding issues related to the update of the
Contract; and
2. Make recommendations to the parties on possible approaches, which could be taken to
resolve the current impasse.
The stalled negotiations created particular uncertainty around two issues: funding levels for the
Institutions of Public Government, and Canada’s responsibility with respect to Article 23, relating to Inuit
levels of employment in the territorial public service. Berger and his staffs met and consulted with a wide
variety of stakeholders across Nunavut, in Ottawa and elsewhere in the country. Berger’s interim report
focused mainly on the issue of funding; the Implementation Panel’s final decisions were in line with the
interim report and the issues of funding for IPGs has been resolved.
The final report focuses on the second issue – Inuit employment as per Article 23 of the land claim. Berger
notes that even though it may be “remarkable” that in only six years, 45% of public service employees are
Inuit, this number falls far short of the 85% goal; and, he argues, the current figures are misleading. If
employment, by ethnicity, is broken down by position it is possible to see that Inuit hold the majority of
administrative support positions, a large number of senior management positions and about half the
executive positions; however, there are very few (about 25%) in the “professional” positions – the ones
which inform policy making. The report opens with a tailored overview of Eastern Arctic history, stressing
the rapid changes and continued colonization experienced in the region during the post-war period
leading up to the 1970s when “Inuit nationalism” sparked the journey toward the Nunavut Land Claims
Agreement (NLCA). Berger also provides a brief summary of the NLCA process, highlighting in particular
the roles and responsibilities of the parties to the claim, as determined by the Agreement. Berger outlines
the clauses of Article 23, noting the international attention they received, concluding that in essence the
Article is “an equity clause for a majority.” Achieving a fully representative public service in Nunavut has
proven to be a challenge. Berger offers a demographic profile of Nunavut, touching on some of the major
socio-economic challenges, including housing, health, the mixed economy, and education. Notably, Berger
ties the commitment in Article 23 to the issue of language and education, stating that:
Achieving the objective of Article 23 means that the Inuit must over time occupy 85 per
cent of the positions in all occupational groupings and at all grade levels in the public
service, and this necessarily implies that Inuktitut must be the principal language of the
workplace and that government services must be provided in Inuktitut.
The parties to the claim, therefore, cannot fulfill their obligations as set out in the claim, without also
5
6
addressing the broader issues of language and education. A new approach to implementation by the
parties is necessary, according to Berger. Berger’s recommendation is clear: a long-term plan to enhance
bilingual education, as a way toward fulfilling Article 23, must be supported by the parties.
Bilingual Education
Both English and Inuktitut are essential for Nunavut Inuit and to attaining the objectives of Article 23. In
the case of English, as noted earlier, few Inuit occupy the professional positions on the government since
most of these positions require post-secondary education. Berger argues first that Nunavut needs a
generation of professionals and it is unlikely that Inuit will receive this kind of education in the territory.
Secondly, given the scientific and technical nature of these positions, contact with other governments and
with other professionals across Canada and elsewhere will be important. Both of these realities
necessitate proficiency in English. In the case of Inuktitut, Berger stresses the importance of a strong first
language foundation for academic success, including learning a second language. Morover, since a
segment of the population in Nunavut is unilingual, it is vital that the government offer services in
Inuktitut as well as English. Finally, language remains an important part of the preservation of Inuit
culture; English, although viewed as important for working, is still viewed by some as the language of
colonialism.
The Government of Nunavut’s 2000 Bathurst Mandate confirms its commitment to a bilingual society in
Nunavut. Berger summarizes several previous studies in bilingualism in Nunavut, namely Martin’s
discussion paper on education, which criticizes the transition from Inuktitut to English as the language of
instruction at the Grade 4 level (the so-called “early exit immersion” model) stunting a child’s ability to
master either language. This model Berger argues is outdated and was inherited from the NWT. Berger
proposes two new models:
1. Students are taught in both languages all the way through (the common European model)
2. The immersion model, in which students are taught almost exclusively in their second language
for a substantial period of time.
At present, the human resources and curriculum requirements of either of these models do not exist.
Ultimately, Berger suggests that gradual introduction of English and longer retention of Inuktitut is
necessary for strong bilingual education. A commitment to bilingual education must exist at all levels
starting in daycare and preschool all the way up to adult education. Critical to the success of a new system
is an increase in Inuit (and bilingual) teachers. A commitment must also be made by families and
communities to use Inuktitut at home.
Binda, K. P. and Calliou, Sharilyn. Aboriginal Education in Canada. Mississagua: Canadian Educators’
Press. 2001.
The purpose of this volume is to provide an introductory discussion of self-determination, devolution,
self-representation and decolonization in education (of First Nations people) within a broader
contemporary discourse about residential school and human rights. The editor notes that First Nations
people are experiencing a transformative journey from “schooling as temporary foreign imprisonment to
schooling as self-liberation”. Each chapter examines different elements of the decolonization process
drawing extensively on historical (although, she cautions not “researched”) events. Calliou differentiates
between decolonization theory and practice: theory is the “researched deconstruction of the
institutionalized ideologies and structures… that sustain the unequal relationship between indigenous and
non-indigenous peoples”; practice is the “researching, restaging and reclaiming of uniquely indigenous
protocols, philosophies, ceremonies, ways of life...” recognizing that these are fluid and contextualized.
Chapter 1 presents a historical overview of colonization the associated forces and structures predicated
on the belief that liberation from these structures is not possible if one cannot “identify, name, and
discuss” them. The author questions whether and how to generate authentic indigenous education within
existing “foreign” government frameworks and institutions.
6
7
Chapter 2 argues for a locally controlled education system for First Nations people, recognizing that
community-based decision-making has shown to be most successful and is critical for sustained positive
outcomes. As evidence, the author looks at traditional models of governance in indigenous communities.
Chapter 3 focuses on the funding arrangements for First Nations schools in Canada and the asymmetrical
power relations built into the fiscal relationship between First Nations governments and the Government
of Canada. Calls for more autonomy from government, yet more federal funding at the same time.
Chapter 4 challenges the Eurocentric curricular foundation and proposes instead an holistic framework;
recognizes that this will require major reform as the Euro and indigenous approaches are vastly different.
i.e. Indigenous circular model (built on Medicine Wheel) does not fit with the European linear model.
Offers five recommendations to guide curricular reform: infuse curriculum with spirituality; recognize time
and space; emphasize emotional growth; study relational dynamics; explore material and spiritual worlds.
Chapter 5 focuses on language preservation as a basis for decolonization: “the public, active practice of
languages is necessary for decolonization.” Must counteract the attack on Aboriginal languages and
linguistic culture from residential school by improving language curriculum in today’s schools.
Chapter 6 offers an argument for the reconsideration of the role of teachers as agents of dominant
cultural reproduction and thus mutation of local knowledge. Looks at different teaching programs over
time and their relative successes and challenges. Lessons for both indigenous and non-indigenous
educators.
Chapter 7 provides a description of Euro-western counseling models and their impact on some First
Nations clients. Argues that counseling must be holistic rather than rooted in the Euro-western health
dichotomy. Offers 4 areas for decolonizing counseling.
Chapter 8 focuses on early childhood education and early intervention for decolonization of the next
generation. A strong cultural and linguistic foundation is fundamental. ECE must be rooted in indigenous
philosophies, cultural practices and protocols or else this will be simply a repeat of residential schools.
Chapter 9 suggests that there is a role for parents in evolving the reform of schooling in their
communities. The concept of parental involvement is strange because for many years parents were
completely excluded from the education of their children (at school). Uses a case study of a Cree
community and school. Suggest adult education about the decolonization of schools may be useful for
parents to understand the potential of schools and education for the next generations.
Chapter 10 classifies education services as current, emergent and needed. Describes the transitional
decolonization process and the associated process of the devolution of education to First Nations peoples
using examples of services along this continuum. Makes recommendations for next steps.
Chapter 11 explores the devolution and decolonization process through the lens of the urban Aboriginal
experience in which there are fewer resources, more racism/discrimination and a smaller community of
support.
Chapter 12 lessons for graduate students (indigenous and non-) about decolonizing research.
Blair, Heather A., and Billy Joe Laboucan. “The Alberta Language Initiative and the Implication for Indigenous
Languages.” Canadian Journal of Native Education 29.2 (2006): 206
Blair and Laboucan question a 2003 policy directive implementing a 6 year compulsory 2 nd language program in
Alberta schools with respect to what it means in the context of Indigenous languages, teachers and their needs,
students and language development, and the revitalization of Indigenous languages in Alberta. They identify
significant risk for language loss/death among those languages that are already endangered; most of the languages
are not spoken at home. They argue for language planning to occur alongside language policy development and
implementation, and present an overview of what language planning entails. The article presents the findings of a
one-day symposium organized by an ad hoc group, interested in expressing needs and issues in response to
language loss and the 2003 policy directive.
Blesse, Diann S. “Aboriginal Teacher’s Perceptions of Classroom Learning Environments.” Master’s thesis,
University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1997.
7
8
Blesse’s study of Aboriginal teacher’s experiences in the classroom (Northwest Territories) finds that they integrate
traditional cultural values learned through their primary socialization experiences with their development of
classroom learning environments. The classroom environment reflects their culture and compliments community
interactions. Their goal is to draw compatibilities between classroom learning and the life learning outside of it.
Her study is based on 3 questions:
1) Are there traditional Aboriginal socialization practices that influence
Aboriginal teachers' perceptions, attitudes, and choices when developing their
classroom learning environments?
2. Is there a connection between Aboriginal teachers' articulated values and
traditional teachings?
3. Which aspects of Aboriginal teachers' classroom learning environments and
the accompanying value-based rationales would they recommend be included in
both Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal teachers' training?
Corson, D. “Norway's Sámi Language Act: Emancipatory implications for the world's aboriginal
peoples.” Language in Society, 24, pp.493-514, 1995
The article discusses the effect of the 1992 Sámi Language Act in Norway in revitalizing the Sámi culture.
The Act legitimized the native language in government operations, including the education system. Using
various ethnographic methodologies, the paper discusses: 1) The organizational structure of Sámi and
regular schools to allow aboriginal languages 2) The influence of Sami cultural groups in Sámi and regular
schools and 3) the balance of language used in instructional practices for Sámi students in the bilingual
and bicultural context. The author contents that the Act provided the necessary foundation for Sámi
nation to become “agents of their own emancipation”. In essence, language legitimization by the Act
established a recognized political voice. Second, localization of the Sámi language in six local districts
enhanced local control of cultural conditions and circumstances. The non-partisan Sámi Education
council provides valuable supports to the local districts by mediating discords between Sámi and
Norwegian culture as well as devising acceptable solution for Sámi nation. Churchill asserts that the
Norwegian experience is “no extraordinary concession for governments to governments to be making to
groups of their citizens; devolving social policy decision-making in this way is no more than consistent
with modern notions of social justice p.511”. The Sámi model offers hope for cultural revitalization for
other Aboriginal cultures subject to assimilation by a dominant culture.
Crago, Martha B. “Communicative Interaction and Second Language Acquisition: An Inuit Example.”
TESOL Quarterly 26.3 (1992): 487-505.
The article focuses on the role of cultural context in the interactions between Inuit children, their families, and
non-Inuit teachers. Crago looks at Inuit culture’s ways of using and learning languages, and argues that teaching
strategies for 2nd language needs to be based on knowledge of cultural membership for Inuit children and that how
language is taught and learned is central to communicating culturally. Non-Inuit teachers need to be aware of
ethnicism in their teaching (denial of a person’s cultural ways). Research focused on Inuit in the communities of
Kangirsuk and Quaqtaq (Ungava Bay, Northern (arctic) Quebec). In Northern Quebec, all schools offer three
languages: Inuktitut, English and French. In the communities of Kangirsuk and Quaqtaq, Inuit culture and Inuktitut
is taught from kindergarten until Gr. 2, and from Gr. 3 until the end of high school courses are in English and taught
primarily by Qallunaat. However, Inuit culture is taught through some core courses, in Inuktitut, until the end of
high school, comprising about a quarter of a student’s time in the beginning of high school to a fifth of a student’s
time by the end of high school. The article, through interview segments, outlines disparities between Inuit cultural
norms and their expression in 2nd language situations, as well as generational differences within Inuit culture as
expressed by children/grandchildren in social situations. Value judgements by Qallunaat teachers, and
expectations of behaviour based on Qallunaat norms are also revealed. Crago outlines important differences that
impact 2nd language learning and teaching. Differences between Inuit culture and French/English cultures, the
8
9
status of the child, and social structures of child-caring, methods of teaching and learning, and application of
knowledge have an affect on learning a 2nd language. The author suggests that culturally aware/congruent
methods of teaching might include comprehension-based 2nd language learning programs (learning by listening),
and cooperative, peer interactive activities (language learning from peers), but that they would need to be tested
to maximize learning and minimize cultural loss. Other ideas include using competencies gained in 1st language
learning to learn the 2nd language, 1st language teachers teaching the 2nd language and using culturally relevant
material to enable less of an adjustment to the 2nd language.
Davis, L.R. Gaywish, and C. VanEvery-Albert. “Section One Editorial: Indigenous Methodologies.”
Canadian Journal of Native Education 31.1. (2008): 9.
Very brief introduction to how Aboriginal academics use cultural knowledge to find teaching and research
methodologies that respect and affirm their identities as First Nations people.
Dorais, L.J. “Bilingualism and Diglossia in the Canadian Eastern Arctic.” Arctic 42 (1989): 199-207.
Dorais suggests that in the Eastern Arctic, the process of colonization is demonstrated by language loss and
diglossia (uneven status between languages), as a symptom of language conflict. While agreeing that, at a local
level, some communities are immersed in Inuktitut and Inuit culture, and that since the 70’s there has been efforts
to halt the domination of English/French over Inuktitut and Inuit culture, Dorais points to understanding diglossia
on a macro-social level, and understanding diglossia as part of a process of dependence and inequality. He cites
Prattis and Chartrand (1984: 46-47), as offering a blueprint for bolstering Inuktitut and Inuit culture at the macro
(government) and micro (community) levels and enabling decentralization as a way of ensuring community input
on education, language, media and culture, however, the pervasiveness of southern bureaucratic and educational
structures and investment, discourage and disable the use of Inuktitut over generations, as evidenced by codeswitching, use of English between Inuktitut speakers, and use of English within Inuktitut speaking families among
younger generations (under 40). Using historical examples, references to local studies and an overview of policy
development with respect to bilingualism (and what led to it), Dorais ultimately argues that what exists in the
Eastern Arctic is a ‘subtractive bilingualism’ whereby languages do not complement each other, but result in
uneven valuing and, eventually, replacement.
Fuzessy, Christopher. “Biculturalism in Postsecondary Inuit Education.” Canadian Journal of Native
Education 22.2 (1998): 201-9.
Fuzessy follows 5 Inuit students from Nunavik, QC, enrolled in their first year of post-secondary school. In theory,
following other studies, these students would have gained bicultural and bilingual ‘competencies’ enabled by
primary cultural and linguistic immersion, Kativik School Board’s mandate to enable strong 2nd language and
cultural learning as a consequence of strong primary cultural teachings and relevant pedagogy/curriculum, and
generational changes in accepting mainstream influences and developing a 2 way bicultural and bilingual
framework between community and school. Fuzessy’s main focus is whether the self-reported cultural identities of
these students reflect mainstream, bicultural, or traditional Inuit identities. The result of the study was that most
of the students who were followed have a bicultural cultural identity; Fuzessy encourages the examination of the
rate of transition from primary to secondary culture in Inuit students, and accompanying factors, to enable the
development of relevant curriculum and pedagogy to support stages of students’ bicultural development.
Gallagher-Mackay, Kelly. “Review Essay: Concilliator’s Final Report: “The Nunavut Project.” Canadian
Journal of Education 30.4 (2007)
This article is a review of Thomas Berger’s 2006 Conciliator’s Final Report: “The Nunavut Project,” that the goal to
improve Inuit representation in the territorial government could be met through the expansion of bilingual education.
While Gallagher-Mackey supports Berger’s recommendation, she argues that he has not considered the “equally
9
10
serious challenges of improving overall educational quality and directly tackling issues of socio-economic
disadvantage,” which are also at the core of the issues facing the Nunavut education system. The author provides a
brief overview of Article 23 and motivations for appointing Berger to conduct such a review: namely, the realization
that Inuit employment is “crucially important for equity in the territory.” Berger’s report stresses that rather than
continue to focus on increasing demand for Inuit employees in the public sector (the strategy to-date), the interested
parties should provide the resources necessary to increase the supply of Inuit employees, turning the focus to
education (with the federal government providing the bulk of the funding and the GN delivering the services). Making
use of available literature, Gallagher-Mackay further asserts that Berger has oversimplified and overstated his case in
the report. The literature is clear that the loss of Inuktitut skills both negatively impacts individual achievement and
undermines the collective identity of students. Berger states in his report that the existing “early exit immersion”
whereby students transition from Inuktitut classes to English classes after grade 3 is contributing to negative
educational outcomes. The loss of primary language skills that results from this “too-sudden” transition is damaging
to their future academic achievements. Gallagher-Mackay argues that Berger’s assertions lack evidence; quoting
existing literature, the author suggests that in fact socio-economic status and educational achievement of children’s
parents are also important determining factors in a child’s success in either/both languages. Other factors affecting
success, particularly in Nunavut, include:

Access to diagnosis and treatment for learning disabilities; other health problems and issues at home;

The quality of education (particularly literacy) in the early grades before the transition takes place. (She notes
that in other places, this transition between languages takes place much earlier, with much fewer problems);

The rapid changes to the education system in the territory in the last 40 years from residential schools to
community-based schools with Inuit teachers;

Lowered expectations for Inuit students fueled by stereotypes about Inuit learning styles, leading to a reliance on
hands-on learning rather than on reading and writing (skills that are necessary for public sector employment);
Notably, Gallagher-Mackay agrees with Berger that expanding bilingual education will likely lead to an increase in the
number of Inuit teachers and thus the development of a bicultural education system in Nunavut, which “may be less
alienating” for students and communities. Ultimately, however, there must be political will to expand bilingual (and
bicultural) education. By focusing solely on bilingual education though, it allows the system to “avoid looking inward
to the multitude of ways in which students are not having their needs met…” [and] “it defers accountability for results
because it is contingent on training significant numbers of Inuit teachers.”
Goldbach, Ib. "Greenland: Education and Society between Tradition and Innovation."
Intercultural Education 11.3 (2000): 259-71.
While the ultimate purpose of this article is to describe the evolution of education policy in Greenland
over the last 50-60 years and the challenge of finding a balance between tradition and innovation,
Goldbach provides a comprehensive account of Greenlandic political and social history and relationship,
characterized by periods of friction and periods of collaboration, between the indigenous Greelanders and
their Danish colonizers. Goldbach divides Greenland’s history into four periods: the precolonial period (up
until the early 18th century); the colonial period (between the 1700s-1953 when Greenland became a
Danish county); the industrialization period (1953-1979 during which time Greenland looked the most like
Denmark); and finally the Home Rule period, starting in 1979. Over the course of these periods, and the
latter two in particular, policies regarding education and language have taken both extremes and neither
extreme has shown to be successful. In 1953, as a Danish county, Greenland was expected to standardize
its education system but it lacked the capacity to do so; thus necessitating an influx of Danish teachers
(with their language and culture) to Greenland. In 1979, Greenlandic was re-established as the primary
language of Greenland but recruiting Greelandic speaking teachers has proven to be a challenge.
Greenland’s solution to this problem has been the opposite of other developing countries. Rather than
attempting to educate as many native-speaking teachers as possible, the Home Rule government has
chosen a longer-term strategy to provide high quality education to relatively few Greelander teachers.
The second part of the article uses the different levels of education (from elementary to tertiary) to
illustrate the struggle to find a balance between tradition and innovation. At the elementary and high
school levels, education is delivered at the municipal level and there are schools in all communities (this
has been the most expensive solution to a previously centralized – and thus residential – school system
but one that has helped to maintain social and cultural customs). Drop out rates are incredibly high,
10
11
especially in the “academic branch” that seeks to prepare students for university in Europe (as opposed to
the vocational school branch). The school system is a hybrid of the European model with unique
Greenlandic characteristics. The goal of the curriculum is to provide an education that is of high quality
with comparability to the western model. The two upper secondary options for students have their own
challenges: the academic branch is designed to prepare students for European universities (although
there is a university in Greenland now) while remaining true to traditional. The vocational training option
is more popular; similar to an apprenticeship model, students are attached to local enterprises for two
years before spending time in the classroom. This approach was developed to address very high
unemployment among youth. While this article was written, a new policy was in design that would offer
any student in Greenland who does not continue in school or find employment after secondary school, a
one-year training position to help improve their employment opportunities. Despite these programs, drop
out rates are still high in Greenland.
Goldbach concludes by arguing that drop out rates are a cultural problem; the government and the
political system value education but the ordinary citizen, he says, does not. Goldbach does not offer any
solutions to this problem. The history of Greenland, he argues, suggests that it is possible to navigate
through two cultures to find a common way to address challenges. In the end, he says, Greenland has
chosen neither tradition, nor innovation but both.
Greenwood, M., S. Leeuw, and T. Fraser. “Aboriginal Children and Early Childhood Development and
Education in Canada: Linking the Past and the Present to the Future.”Canadian Journal of Native
Education 30.1 (2007): 5
Greenwood, Leeuw, and Fraser contend that Aboriginal children cannot be extricated from colonial history, and
nor can they be unaffected by the socioeconomic conditions in Aboriginal communities. They argue that early
childhood carries political potential for transformative change that may benefit communities and nations –
Aboriginal children are the future. They present an overview of historic and colonial events that influenced
Canadian relations with Aboriginal peoples, and a brief look at demographics contributing to current Aboriginal
realities, including features that affect demographic outcomes and hide variation between communities.
Greenwood, Leeuw, and Fraser discuss a variety of policy directions that were designed in response to Aboriginal
people’s demand for Canada to commit to the future health of Aboriginal children, such as community based
childcare programs based around community parental involvement, health promotions, social support, education,
nutrition, and language. The policies, however, are subject to change when governments change, and Greenwood,
Leeuw, and Fraser are careful to point out additional challenges, such as relevant curriculum and materials,
community control, right to design programs and services that foster the development of Aboriginal children. In
addition, they detail specific challenges in the areas of culture and language, standards and regulations, and
training and capital.
Hilyer, Gail M. “Higher Education in the Northwest Territories”. Higher Education in Canada: Different
Systems, Different Perspectives. Garland Studies in Higher Education, vol 11. Glen A. Jones, ed. New
York: 1997.
Hilyer focuses on Arctic College, the only substantial post-secondary institution in the Northwest Territory. She
places her focus on Arctic College’s separation into two post-secondary institutions, one in Fort Smith, and the
other in Iqaluit, and argues that those responsible for post-secondary directions will need creativity to enable the
colleges to work within a ‘complex framework’ of emerging self-determination, community based services,
changing governance structures, and finite economic resources. Hilyer provides background information of
demographics and economic factors, post-secondary availability in the NWT, a discussion of organizations involved
in research in the NWT, a history of Arctic College, and a discussion of future concerns.
Hicks, Jack. “Education in the Canadian Arctic: What Difference has the Nunavut Government made?”
Indigenous Affairs. 1 (2005).
11
12
Hicks’ overview of education directions in Nunavut – Inuit cultural traditions, imposition of educational reform by
the federal government (as a colonizing step), loss of culture and language resulting in cultural insecurity, political
action advocating Nunavut as a territory and the inclusion/return of Inuit values, language and voice in the
education system – leads to a view of Nunavut facing internal turbulence (headquarters shifts, community
disillusionment with Inuktitut teaching and directionless policies). While Hicks points to successes (increased high
school graduation, and post-secondary achievement), he notes that the quality of education received in Nunavut is
difficult to measure. Government initiatives such as Akitsiraq Law School, Nursing, and Education training
programs result in badly needed, trained, Inuit professionals, however, Hicks argues that still low numbers of high
school graduates and post-secondary, trained, professionals indicates problems in the system. In addition,
acknowledgement of social impacts on the quality of the Nunavut education system and investment in socioeconomic initiatives and well planned education strategies needs to occur before Nunavut can be identified as
solidly self-governing.
Hodgson-Smith, K. “Seeking Good and Right Relations: Student Perspectives on the Pedagogy of Joe
Duquette High School.” Master’s thesis, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1997.
Hodgson-Smith’s thesis is an analysis and description of what makes education meaningful for students at Joe
Duquette High School within the cultural framework of Good and Right Relations. She begins her thesis with a
personal account of her immersion in culture through family and community, and the difficulty she had finding
meaning and self in mainstream high school, and the effect of this change on her. She describes Joe Duquette as
one of 4 other urban aboriginal schools; its premise came about through student request and recognition that
mainstream educational approaches did not address Aboriginal needs and culture. Joe Duquette’s educational
philosophy is based on the Medicine Wheel and Sacred Circle; it promotes and formulates aboriginal approaches
to learning and teaching. Hodgson-Smith details social and family supports that the school offers, as well as
positive student experiences, influencing enrolment and program development.
Johnston, Bill, and Kimberly A. Johnson. "Preschool Immersion Education for Indigenous
Languages: A Survey of Resources." Canadian Journal of Native Education 26.2 (2002): 107.
Johnston and Johnson present examples of Indigenous language revitalization and stabilization programs
at the preschool level. They begin with Pezihutazizi (Upper Sioux Community in Southwestern Minnesota),
as the impetus for the article. The Pezihutazizi community tried several different methods (mentoring,
language recording projects, programs for middle and high school students, adult education, among
others) to stabilize the Dakota language. Despite these programs, they decided that the only valid method
would be a program that enabled individuals to be immersed in the language, to learn the language
through meaningful content, and to be offered to preschool children, who were best equipped to learn
the language. Johnston and Johnston offer a brief overview of the questions that accompanied organizing
the program, from who would teach the courses and the training they’d have, to community involvement
and pedagogical considerations. They place the article within the context of undergoing a literature survey
in aid of setting up a preschool immersion program in an Indigenous language. Their findings illuminated 3
broad examples of successful programs, of which they offer concise historical summaries and elements of
success. 1) Maori and Hawaiian programs (Kohanga Reo and Punana Leo), 2) Arapho preschools in
Wyoming, and 3) programs in US and Canada that offer culturally relevant teachings (but for which
further detail was difficult to obtain). Johnston and Johnson also review additional preschool immersion
programs, except that they are located in remote communities in which the majority of the population is
indigenous, and for whom language immersion is for language maintenance, rather than revitalization. In
these communities, parents and children speak their language (Yu’Pik Eskimos, Alaska; Cree and Dene
communities, Saskatchewan; Cree, Quebec). They note that in these communities, bilingual programs are
transforming into immersion programs in order to further address fears of culture and language loss
through the encroachment of English. Johnston and Johnson’s present several common themes from
12
13
among their reviews. First, communities are increasingly choosing immersion to counteract language loss.
Tied to this is an appreciation that earlier immersion in the heritage language is key. Second, parents and
community need to play a substantial role financially, ideologically, and logistically. Third, conflict within
the communities regarding educational approach, framework, and rationale is common. Energy must go
toward winning over opponents and explaining point of view. Fourth, a combination of Indigenous and
Western practices may induce conflict; supporters need to keep an open mind. Fifth, it is important to
keep a monolingual classroom in an immersion program. Sixth, time and energy must be invested in
obtaining recruiting and training teachers from among Elders and youth, and working with non-Native
teachers while respecting traditional approaches (Elders). Seventh, culturally relevant materials need to
be developed and used. Eighth, dissemination of programs and methodologies as a way of enabling
sharing among Indigenous populations, as well as counteracting or balancing Western approaches.
Martin, Ian. Aajiiqatigiingniq- Language of Instruction, A Report to the Government of Nunavut.
Department of Education: Nunavut, 2000.
Martin’s discussion document advocates for a strong bilingual (Inuktitut/Innuinaqtun-English) education system in
Nunavut, arguing that the present model replaces the first language (Inuktitut) with an imperfectly learned 2 nd
language (English), is an infringement on individual and collective linguistic human rights of the Inuit people, does
not respond to the present and future human resource needs of the territory (an educated, bilingual, selfdetermined population), and by enabling language loss contributes to economic and social problems. He offers for
discussion a re-commitment to the Bathurst Mandate (bilingual society by 2020), implementation of strong
bilingual program (through Education Act) in schools, process of consultation on limited set of ‘strong’ models to
engage communities and account for community/regional differences across Nunavut, and the elimination of
‘transition’ between languages – creating instead comprehensive primary school policies for solid bilingualism.
Martin advocates for increased funding, policies, and the creation of specific education organizations with roles
that instigate and support educational reform.
Chpt 2-3 Defines language of instruction and points to a mixed system whereby depending on geographic location,
some students’ 1st language is Inuktitut and 2nd language is English, and in others, English is the first language, and
Innuinaqtun is the 2nd. In both cases, Martin indicates that the educational system privileges English and does not
give students enough immersion in their first language at school to be able to comfortably adapt to learning the 2 nd
language. The system after Gr. 4/5 (students transition to English language) is monolingual English-medium, not
bilingual because one language is taught, and the other language becomes a subject. The system as a whole is
bilingual, but called an ‘early exit transitional bilingual education model’ because of the switch to English at Gr.
4/5. Martin takes apart the model’s terminology, and concludes that it is flawed for a variety of reasons, including:
students do not learn either languages well, it denies Inuit culture and the human right for linguistic expression,
denies Inuit and Canadians the ability to interact equally, with understanding of each other’s culture, contributes
to cultural gaps between schools and Inuit communities, does not contribute to Nunavut’s human resource needs,
and denies/fails to address the next generation of high level bilinguals (Inuit ‘intelligentia’) grounded in traditional
knowledge and capable of forwarding decolonization.
Chpt. 4-6: Martin grounds the 4th chapter in identifying questions and issues that arise out of language debate
(English or Inuktitut) in the schools and the directions of policy toward Language of Instruction. He specifies a
number of problems and questions that arise, including: capacity, lack of policy direction, community
interaction/consultation, leadership issues, culturally relevant resources and materials, and basic linguistic
infrastructure and understanding. Chpt 5 discusses language shift – that in homes and school across Nunavut,
English is more the dominant language, and that the system of schooling is creating subtractive bilingualism. He
also discusses the fact that while Inuktitut and Innuinaqtun (endangered language) are weakened, gains in
comprehending the English language also have not been made. Martin calls this semi-lingualism – students are not
fluent or have high literacy in either language.
13
14
Martin suggests that rather than looking at the negative effects that the education system has contributed to, it is
important to also view education historically, and, in this light, positively as a move away from strictly monolingual,
assimilatist beliefs of government prior to the 1970’s. The emergence of a political voice for Inuit values and
languages (Tagak Curley commission) offered viable alternatives and enabled the beginning of change. Martin
provides a useful chart documenting the historical evolution of language of instruction in schools in the NWT.
Chpt. 7-9: Martin discusses Indigenous ways of enabling change, and suggests Qallunaat have meaningful ways of
contributing to a stronger Inuit focused educational system ; Chapt. 8 is an overview of particular weaknesses of
the exit transitional model: student’s human rights are infringed upon, and students are also impeded cognitively
and linguistically. All involved should be working together, in an informed way, to reverse language shift. A strong
model of bilingualism starts with language of instruction. Chpt. 9 discusses the framework for creating a model for
language of instruction; Martin references thinkers on language policy to highlight societal goals from ideological
constraints of language conflicts (English/Inuktitut) (Stairs, Fettes, Silaturnamut, Alfred).
Chpt 10-13 – Martin offers a historical view toward bilingualism through to the transitional model, underlines
recent initiatives within current government that suggest improvement, and argues that Education Nunavut needs
to commit to a strong bilingual system as well as strengthen delivery of education through 5 key infrastructure
components. Martin offers 5 options for a strong bilingual delivery, pointing to ways they can be used in Nunavut:
Immersion, Maintenance Model, Two-Way, Dual Language, European Plurilingual School.
Chpt. 14-26: Martin applies the models to communities in Nunavut, and addresses questions of language policy
and linguistic duality, expanding on earlier suggestions to create organizations that are education based and that
have reporting and policy functions.
Nungak, Zebedee. “Capping the Inuktitut Formal Education System.” Inuktitut 94 (2004): 14.
Nungak strongly criticizes the imposition of a Qallunaat education system on Inuit, directly contributing it to Inuit
crises in self-identity and esteem, language loss, and loss of cultural and traditional knowledge necessary for
survival and for community, across 4 generations. His solutions are that funding and recognition needs to be
available for the development of Inuktitut curriculum, and that an Inuktitut instructor needs the resources and
certification presently available for English and French. One third of the year should be devoted to Inuktitut, and
Inuit expertise used to deliver relevant programs; in all cases, a national funding program should be available for
the purpose of strengthening Inuit schooling.
Okakok, Leona. “Serving the Purpose of Education”. Harvard Educational Review. 59.4 (1989): 405.
Okakok outlines the change from Inupiat Eskimo traditional ways – e.g. elders as resource – as beginning with the
introduction of another culture’s (Western) educational system and beliefs (Christianity) in the 1920’s, which
served to displace the Inupiat educational ways and traditions. In the 70’s, the Inupiat Eskimos regained control of
their education system (North Slope Borough, NW Alaska) and incorporated aspects of their history and culture,
striving to balance scholastic achievement on par with other US states, with cultural identity and values. They
found that academic success was tied to the inclusion of Inupiat Eskimo knowledge. Okakok outlines, with personal
examples, how cultural differences between Inupiat and Western lifestyles made learning in a Western
environment a struggle; their native language was not allowed to be used, and English, in the absence of the 1st
language, even more difficult to comprehend. The negation of Inupiat culture in the Western school system made
learning a struggle; Inupiat Eskimo control of education, and schooling – from infrastructure to curriculum –
enabled academic achievement, survival education, and personal and cultural, lifelong, learning of Inupiat Eskimo
values. Innovations that Okakok offers, juxtaposing them with their valuation in Western society, are: enabling
community members to act as teachers in the classroom, to foster one-one relationships and learning experiences,
nurturing of individual interests, and the use of these interests toward learning other subjects and practical roles in
the community, inclusion of cultural activities and encouragement of parental involvement. She outlines changes –
14
15
policy related and curricular – and difficult decisions that the board has made in their desire to create a viable
educational system for Inupiat Eskimo students.
Patrick, Donna, and Perry Alexander Shearwood. “The Roots of Inuktitut-Language Bilingual
Education.” Canadian Journal of Native Education 19.2 (1999): 249-262.
Patrick and Shearwood argue that the roots of Inuktitut-Ianguage bilingual education was the result of Inuit
demand to direct the education of their children in Inuktitut and with Inuit values, Canadian and Quebec desires to
assert control in the Canadian north for resource and military control (sovereignty), and an international
movement toward bilingual education. They trace some of the historical events that led to bilingualism in the
Canadian north, including examples of successful minority and Aboriginal language programs elsewhere, and offer
comments on the effects of bilingualism on future Inuit. The inclusion of Inuktitut as language of instruction,
alongside English and French, as language policy in Northern Quebec led to the creation of Inuit curriculum,
trained teachers, and teacher training program in the 60’s – they posit this as influencing the bilingual movement
in the Canadian arctic in the 70’s. They also argue that while bilingualism has in some instances enabled further
domination of English, it has also created positive results, such as language maintenance, greater employment
opportunities for Inuit, improved relations between the school and community,
increased academic performance among Inuit students, and increased pride in Inuit cultural and linguistic heritage,
among others.
Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples
Volume Three: Gathering Strength. Ottawa: Canada Communications Group. 1996.
Shearwood, Perry Alexander. Literacy and Social Identity in a Nunavut Community. PhD Thesis.
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education (Toronto): 1998.
Shearwood examines the relationship between literacy and social identity in the community of Igloolik, Nunavut,
explaining how literacy and social identity have been constructed through the processes of sedentarization,
standardization, and credentialization. He describes how people in Igloolik access resources and position
themselves in social groups through education, learning the finals, or reading and writing traditionally.
Chpt 1-4 : Shearwood presents his study, his data, and rationales. He gives an overview of the history of contact
between Inuit and non-Natives, including the expansion of the Canadian state into the North. He discusses
sedentarization and the settlement of Inuit into communities in the 60’s and 70’s, followed by political movement
by Inuit to regain control of the social processes in their communities. The power of the Canadian state has been
maintained, he argues, through credentialization and standardization.
Chapter 5: Shearwood presents an analysis of changing views of the Inuktitut language, spoken and written, as an
effect of contact between Inuktitut speakers and English speakers. The standardization of Inuktitut orthography
had an effect on the construction of social identities, and Shearwood offers a historical account of various changes
that were proposed or occurred in order to facilitate communication between the NWT government and Inuit,
enable Inuktitut medium education and teacher training, and to further legitimize (through funding of Inuktitut)
the Canadian government. In addition, standardization was a way for Inuit to assert identity, which led to the
establishment of a language commission. When standardization occurred, the effect was that older Inuit were able
to read material, but did not adopt the new orthography, younger bilingual Inuit learned the new system through
employment or educational settings, and youth who attended school in the 1970’s were taught to read and write
Inuktitut using the standard orthography. Increases in time spent in school and settlements (rather than with
parents and camp), created a shift in responsibility in teaching Inuktitut from the family to the school.
Chapter 6: Shearwood details local institutions that developed out of the contemporary mixed economy in Igloolik,
and argues that community members access symbolic and material resources through participation in both
15
16
domestic and cash economies. The viability of the domestic economy underpins aspects of the relationship
between literacy and social identity, and it is subsidized by income received from participation in the cash
economy. He offers an overview of companies in Igloolik, and their employment through ethnicity. Shearwood
discusses bilingual education model types: the transitional model (language shift, cultural assimilation and social
incorporation), maintenance model (language maintenance and strengthened cultural and civil rights identities)
and the enrichment model (language development, cultural pluralism and social autonomy), as a way of looking at
social construction and influencing participation in the mixed economy, and relating educational policy to Igloolik
and the North. Problems that impede language instruction are lack of trained teachers (Inuit or non-native trained
in Inuktitut) and culturally relevant curriculum, as well as a dual value system for educational process that
correspond to the domestic and cash economies – for example, participation in one to the exclusion of the other.
The challenge, Shearwood claims, is promoting respect for both systems.
Shearwood analyses aspects of the cash and domestic economy, from statistical information to local employment.
He links credentials to participation in the wage economy; this results in the development of ethnic stratification in
the division of labour that privileges non-Natives disproportionately. While some Inuit choose or are obligated to
participate in the domestic economy, the cash economy still subsidizes it; they need to be able to access the
resources in both to sustain themselves. Gradually increasing education for younger Inuit may resolve stratification
and maintain stability within social interactions, and Shearwod identifies ways, within the models of education,
literacy, and the credentials of literacy, of legitimizing employment as well as transferring skills from the school to
the workplace and other settings in the community (e.g. organizations). Shearwood argues that education
(through literate practices) validates the both the social system in communities and the authority of the Canadian
state. The social system enables variable participation in both the domestic and cash economy.
Chpt. 7-8: Shearwood discusses how literacy practices (reading and writing) are related to group membership.
Literacy practices break down into 3 basic categories: getting an education (in English), leaming the finals (in
Inuktitut), and reading and writing traditionally (in Inuktitut). They assist individuals to access resources in the
community, as enabled by social identity and sedentarization, standardization and credentialization. Shearwood
uses ethnicity and age groupings as elements of social identity that relate to literacy, in turn, ethnicity and the age
groupings he uses are affected differently by sedentarization, standardization and credentialization. For example,
elders have access to resources in the domestic economy through authority developed by knowledge, alliances,
and kinship structures; younger Inuit access resources but are constrained by the power of the elder Inuit. The
social identity of the elder Inuit is developed through the domestic economy, and also the ability to read and write
in Inuktitut. Resources in the cash economy are accessed through education and learning the finals, which leads to
participation in wage labour or participation in a community organization that gives a stipend. Old Inuit access
resources through reliance on kin structures.
Shearwood links the relationship of literacy, conceptualized as getting an education, learning the finals, and
reading and writing traditionally, to social identity within groups of older Inuit, active biliterates, other younger
Inuit, or non-Natives. Elders, writing traditionally, participate in institutions that validate these methods of
communication and enable them to access resources in the domestic economy and also have access to the wage
economy. They can communicate about Inuit life and ways through younger Inuit who are biliterate. Active
biliterates, who are educated, have learned the finals, and are also bilingual, are intermediaries for elders, and
thus legitimize the elder’s experiences and Inuit identities. The biliterates are able to participate in the wage
economy, but also participate politically – as intermediaries for elders, they can claim for their own the Inuit
identity that the elders express and remember. As such, they have fought dispossession, and because of their
levels of literacy, have achieved a land claim settlement, as well as influenced educational and social processes for
their communities. They have access to material and symbolic resources through their biliteracy, but as ‘bridges’
between two generations, are pressured in their responsibilities to both. Younger Inuit have learned English
writing and reading in school. Inuktitut may be more difficult to write. They’re able to access resources in Igloolik
in diverse ways, and have the potential to become biliterate/bilingual through continued education or further
immersion in Inuktitut. Non-natives are able to participate in the wage economy through education levels,
however, changes in social identities as relate to literacy practices will likely find employment equalizing as Inuit
participate in credentialization, and the literacy practices that go with it.
16
17
Shearwood suggests that research be carried out with respect to how linguistics conditions language planning
decisions in the context of state formation. He also suggests that longitudinal monitoring of how education relates
to ethnicity and employment would be useful in relation to understanding social mobility and equality, as well as
participation in both cash and domestic economies. How research and education can be integrated in the North is
also of importance, as a way of returning research outcomes to community settings.
Taylor, Donald M., and Stephen C. Wright. “Do Aboriginal students benefit from education in their
heritage language? Results from a ten-year program of Research in Nunavik.” Canadian Journal of
Native StudiesCanadian Journal of Native Studies 23.1 (2003): 1-24.
Taylor and Wright summarize the results of a 10 year research project, instigated by the Kativik School Board and
designed to assess the outcomes of the Kativik’s bilingual program. The current status of Inuttitut in Nunavut,
intellectual potential of students, the affect of the bilingual format on Nunavik student’s language learning and
impact of the bilingual format on self-esteem guided the research. Results indicate that Inuktitut is strong in
Nunavik, but communities are more fluent than literate, and that English is a ‘link language’, the preferred 2nd
language for both French and Inuit. Younger generations are increasingly more fluent in English, at the expense of
their knowledge of Inuktitut. The challenge for Kativik is to replace a ‘subtractive bilingualism’ with an ‘additive
bilingualism’ that increases students’ skills in Inuttitut. Testing for intelligence in Inuit students showed that rather
than questioning intelligence, a strategy of support and appropriate classroom experiences from parents,
community leaders, and educators would promote educational success. There were significant academic and
linguistic advantages for children entering Kindergarten immersed in Inuttitut. They developed a level of language
skill that allowed them to use Inuttitut to solve complex mental problems; children in the English or French
programs were able to perform simply in English or French, but fell behind in their use of Inuttitut. The corollary is
that solid first language instruction and comprehension will enable the children to adapt more easily to the 2nd
language. Finally, Inuit students enrolled in Inuttitut demonstrated positive self esteem toward themselves and
Inuit as a group; those Inuit students enrolled in the French or English program showed preferences for White
students over other Inuit students and declining levels of positive self esteem. Taylor and White conclude that the
program of Inuttitut instruction from K-3 is successful, and that training Inuit teachers and developing culturally
relevant curriculum was well founded; the next steps for the Kativik School Board is to instigate a program that
extends beyond the early years of school.
Taylor, Donald M. and Stephen C. Wright. “Language Attitudes in a Multilingual Northern
Community.” The Canadian Journal of Native Studies 9.1 (1989): 85-119.
Taylor and Wright argue that in Northern communities a new social order is evolving. They examine how questions
of language and culture are entwined with economic, political, technological, and educational aspects of life in
Northern communities and observe that an important challenge is to develop appropriate policies that strengthen
Inuit culture and work to erase impacts and strongholds of colonialism. They surveyed Anglophone, Francophone,
and Inuit residents in the largest community in Nouveau Quebec, which has 75% Inuit, 15% Francophones, and
10% Anglophones to determine language attitudes, intercultural/group views, and threats to Inuit language and
culture. Taylor and Wright’s pivotal question centres on type of role that Inuit culture and language will play in the
North of the future. The challenge, they note, is to reconcile ideological differences (assimilation vs. language and
cultural immersion) and come to an understanding about how culture affects the interactions between groups in
the changing/future North. Their main focus is on how language is an effective way of studying intergroup and
cultural relations. In both transparent and more internal ways, language can cement unity among ethnic groups
and convey respect among groups of different ethnicities, as well as enable power and status, and thus affect
policy and enable accommodation in areas of education, government, and media. Three interrelated themes are
used to categorize the study, each with their own set of questions: Language Attitudes (covering linguistic fluency,
intergroup communication, domestic, community, and institutional use and the general importance within the
17
18
community); Intergroup Attitudes (extent of contact between community groups and degree of ‘getting along’);
and Threats to Inuit Language and Culture (community’s views on bilingualism, interest from younger generation in
heritage language, and role of school in language teaching). Taylor and Wright’s exploration into Language
Attitudes identified that Inuttitut use is strong; it is the language of choice in the home and considered important,
both by Inuit and Anglophones, for the future. The school, with family and community, is seen by all 3 cultures as
having an important role in the continued learning of Inuttitut. English is the language spoken by all three cultural
groups, and it is seen as important to the life of the community, especially in a professional context. Taylor notes
(also citing Dorais), that research needs to be done with respect to language in the workplace, but that a concern
may be that English gains an elevated prestige professionally, subordinating Inuttitut. The main finding of
Intergroup Attitudes underscored the results of Language Attitudes – Anglophones occupy a central position –
typically Inuit and Anglophones are mutually attracted. Data collected to study Threats to Inuit Language and
Culture indicate that all three groups were uncertain whether future generations would maintain interest in the
Inuit language and way of life, but felt that the school had an important role to play in the maintenance of
language. In addition, the community felt strongly that bilingualism is possible and that Anglophone and
Francophone children should learn Inuttitut, as well as their own language. There was considerable support for
early language promotion as a way of ensuring future success. Taylor and Wright further conclude that the
community displays ambivalence arising out of feelings of optimism and disquiet. Optimism is a result of language
strength, positive feelings toward bilingual possibilities, educational policies toward first language (Inuttitut) in
early school years, and strong ties with Anglophones. Disquiet is a product of the central position of the
Anglophone community and the strength of English in the workplace and among a younger (<45) Inuit. In addition,
there is concern that a younger generation will lose interest in traditional ways and language and cultural erosion
will result. Taylor and White argue that the emergent ambivalence is a signal for community leaders to act with a
plan for the future – the current positive feelings will maximize the chances that goals can be achieved, and the
disquiet will motivate others to take action.
Timpson, Annis May. “Reconciling Indigenous and Settler Language Interests: Language Policy
Initiatives in Nunavut.” Journal of Canadian Studies 43.2 (2009): 159.
Timpson examines issues that shape language politics and policies in Nunavut. She considers how Inuit and federal
government policies and perspectives have shaped the political and constitutional framework addressing language
policies, and then considers institutional contexts that also frame language policies, examining specifically
language of instruction and language of work in government. Recent language legislation in Nunavut combines a
rights oriented/anti-discrimination approach to official languages with legislation to protect the Inuit language
from further erosion. Timpson points to Nunavut as the first Canadian jurisdiction to link official recognition of
Indigenous and settler languages (GNWT 1988 Official Languages Act; Inuktitut, English and French)) with specific
measures to protect an Indigenous language (Inuit Language Protection Act – 2008). Two effects of these policies
may be a re-evaluation of the settler-oriented model of bilingualism, and, on a global level, their contribution to
the maintenance and revitalization of other Indigenous languages that have suffered erosion and/or been
relegated to minority status through the processes of colonization.
Timpson offers a historical perspective of language policy development; broad protection of Inuktitut was not
central to the land claims agreement (while it was central to Inuit negotiators) as the process of the negotiation
was firmly embedded in the settler-oriented model of bilingualism (constitutionally and by the federal
government). She outlines several articles in the agreement that secured the protection of Inuit language by
enabling Inuit beneficiaries to provide input into social and cultural policies (Article 34), and creating goals of
proportional representation in the government (Article 23) She points briefly to the ambition of the Bathurst
Mandate, given anglophone domination and parallel factors of language loss and mixed language use. Timpson
supports her discussion of language policies with useful data and analysis to present a view of the demographics of
language acquisition, use, and erosion across the Arctic. She notes the direct relationship between age and
unilingualism, the loss of language comprehension (Innuinaqtun, Western Kitimeot), and documents percentages
of language use domestically and at work, concluding with statistics that over 50% of Nunavummiut think and
speak English at work, and use English at school. Yet, the bilingual orientation of Nunavummiut, shown by
18
19
statistics, is significant given the GN’s objective toward functional bilingualism by 2020. At the level of territorial
government, she outlines direct priorities of the Government of Nunavut to protect the Inuit language and culture
through activities and legislation developed or advocated by the Department of Culture, Language, Elders, and
Youth, the Department of Education, and the Commissioner of Official Languages. The Canadian government,
however, has constitutional obligations that ensure the protection of English and French and impacts the
allocation of funding resources toward language protection for Inuit. As a result, language policies are
problematized by three factors. First, neither English or French language is the first language of the majority of
residents in the territory. Second, constitutional recognition creates a binary of majority/minority languages when
all 3 languages are clearly in use in the territory. Third, even though English is a used by 27% of the population, it is
the dominant language of governmental, educational and commercial sectors. Further complicating language
policies and practice is the impact of the educational system. Lack of extended Inuktitut instruction (past Gr. 3),
developed Inuit curriculum and trained Inuit teachers (Qallunaat comprise the majority of education professionals)
and student confusion faced with 1st language in a domestic capacity and 2nd language in an educational setting,
deter an advantageous promotion of Inuit language(s). Timpson identifies 4 major developments to improve
language of instruction. First, Corson and Martin’s 2000 report identified problems with the early exit immersion
model and advocated for over 200 teachers with Inuit language. Second, the Department of Education failed to
legislate Bill 1 in 2000, which highlighted the rights of settler language communities in the face of plans to develop
an Inuit centred education system. Third, the Berger Report (2006) pointed to a need to move beyond early exit
immersion strategy in order to enable Inuit students, upon graduation, to be confident in their first, and 2 nd,
languages, which would in turn enable post-secondary options and employment opportunities, as well as cultural
and linguistic preservation. Fourth, the Education Act (2008) committed Nunavut to bilingualism by 2020. Timpson
further details important aspects of the Berger report, noting its strategic advocacy and that it brought public
awareness to the importance of connecting a long term Inuit oriented education strategy with the aim of creating
an ‘ethnically reflective public service’. The objective of making Inuit language the working language of
government is challenged by language loss and the dominance of English, however, despite initiatives through
CLEY, and Inuktitut intensive training through Pirurvik. In addition, the focus on translation services on InuktitutEnglish, rather than facilitating interaction between unilinual Inuit or Qallunat in routine activities, and the need to
further develop the online living dictionary (Asuilaak) adds to the challenge. Government integration of Inuit
Quajimajatutanqit (IQ) has, so far, been a way of promoting Inuktitut use within the workplace, as those
developing the strategies have mainly worked in Inuktitut, translating to English as a way of making IQ more widely
known). Timpson links her discussion of language of instruction and language of the workplace through discussion
of language legislation, specifically the Inuit Language Protection Act, focusing on its implementation, precursors,
aims, and civic directions. She argues that while the act is intended to promote the Inuit language in the
workplace, this can only take place within the context of a larger protection strategy that links education and
government employment as central to Inuit employment. In addition, she points out that while it is critical
legislation, the other critical element, as yet unresolved, is that of resources for language education and
development. If the GN achieves its goal to preserve and promote Inuit language, it may provide a model for other
indigenous groups aiming to prevent language loss, as well as offer an approach to official language politics and
the protection of aboriginal languages in Canada. English dominance in the workplace and among youth, a
Eurocentric federal model of bilingualism, and limited availability of Inuit curriculum and teachers are, however, a
challenge to the achievement of the GN’s goals.
Wright, Stephen C., Donald M. Taylor, and Judy Macarthur. “Subtractive Bilingualism and the Survival
of the Inuit Language: Heritage-Versus-Second-Language Education.” Journal of Educational
Psychology 92.1 (2000): 63-84.
Wright, Taylor, and Macarthur examine the impact of early heritage and second language education on heritage
and second language development among Inuit, White, and mixed heritage children in an arctic community. They
contextualize their study in a global context of Indigenous minority language rights, and rationales for heritage
language instruction, but note that even when heritage language systems are in place, they often serve as a
transition, to ease the student into the dominant language and culture. The effects of transition, rather than
19
20
further immersion, are cultural and self-esteem issues, linguistic loss, and, for some, the eradication of their
heritage language, and by extension, their cultural existence. Wright, Taylor and Macarthur focus on Inuit in
Nunavik. They identify that despite the strength of Innuttitut, there is fear that English and French are increasingly
intruding on Inuit culture and language. Out of a fear of language loss, Inuit are promoting education as a way of
maintaining their language. Their study is conducted among children in their first three years of formal education.
It focuses on language development among Inuit children instructed in Inuktitut, and Inuit children instructed in
one of the dominant languages (French and English). Although Inuit see English and French as important for future
opportunities in Nunavik, instruction first in the heritage language, to afford a solid understanding and
comprehension, followed by instruction in a second language, will not only maintain the heritage language but
ensure true bilingualism. Wright, Taylor, and Macarthur offer an overview of subtractive bilingualism and its
effects, summarizing that it occurs when heritage language is dominated, and perhaps replaced, by a 2 nd language.
At a young age, subtractive bilingualism also slows the development of the heritage language, but also leads to
difficulties in acquiring a second language. Under a “threshold” hypothesis, the heritage language would be taught
until a certain proficiency was reached. A ‘first things first’ principle would then be applied that ensured that the
heritage language was developed before the 2 nd language became the focus. Wright, Taylor, and Macarthur outline
some of the debates about what constitutes language proficiency under the threshold hypothesis, mainly the
distinction between ‘conversational’ and ‘academic’ – conversational utilized in day to day activities, and academic
as a way of making abstractions, or decontextualizing information. Subtractive bilingualism will have a particular
effect on academic language proficiency, as it is slower and more difficult to acquire when learning a language.
Wright, Taylor and Macarthur propose three hypotheses to support the effect of dominant language instruction
and subtractive bilingualism on language proficiency. First, that there would be a slowing down of Inuttitut
proficiency among children in English and French programs, and second, the disruption of heritage language
proficiency should be avoided by Inuit children enrolled in a program of heritage language use on heritage
language use. The third point was that those Inuit children enrolled in English and French programs would acquire
English and French more slowly.
20