Mapping and Complicating Conversations about Indigenous Education

Ahenakew, Cash

doi:10.1080/15595692.2017.1278693

Cited by 41 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the work of addressing the ways in which science education is produced by and reproducing colonial logics is not a straightforward or simple task. As Mik'maq educational scholar Marie Battiste (2008) states, "what is becoming clear to educators is that any attempt to decolonize education and actively resist colonial paradigms is a complex and daunting task" (p. 508): not only because they are strictly complicated tasks, but also because colonial structures and systems also come to shape our ability to respond to them and even imagine something beyond them (see also Ahenakew, 2017;Battiste, 2005). For example, even within Peat's (2002) articulation of the rich potentiality of points of resonance, there are subtle and not-so-subtle traces of the ways in which the relationship Indigenous and Western science is always already one that cannot not be colonizing (even when working towards something else) 11 :…”

Section: My Relation To Indigenous Metaphysics the Metaphysics Of Momentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Bang and Marin (2015) remind, the curricular inclusion of Indigenous perspectives is differentially problematic if we cannot also attend to the taken-for-granted and naturalized epistemological, ontological, and axiological commitments and enactments of what we are including perspectives into. As Bang and Marin (2015) state, if science education continues to "focus on 'settled' phenomena as well as 'settled' perspectives and relations to phenomena" (p. 531), which rely on and reinforce settler privilege while simultaneously dismissing, diminishing, and denying Indigenous ways-of-living-with-nature, presence, and futurities, it will remain but a tokenistic inclusion which serves to distract from the more unsettling demands of this work (namely, Land) and is often primarily an effort to reconceptualize and recenter the subject of dominance (see also Ahenakew, 2017).…”

Section: On Unsettling Science Education: Decolonizing and Deconstrucmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Unsettling Metaphysics in Science Education

Higgins

2020

Unsettling Responsibility in Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the relation between Western modern science and Indigenous ways-of-knowing-in-being as it manifests within spaces of science education: as simultaneously co-constitutive and othering. In turn, unsettling science education is presented as a double(d) approach to address the ways in which settler colonial logics linger and lurk within sedimented and stratified knowledge-practices. As a more nascent approach to the question of Indigenous science within science education, this is expanded upon by drawing from decolonizing and post-colonial approaches. Further, drawing across the two, deconstruction is highlighted as a (meta-)methodological approach to bear witness to the ways in which settler coloniality often manifests as absent presences and to (re)open the space of response within science education towards Indigenous ways-of-knowing-in-being.

show abstract

Section: My Relation To Indigenous Metaphysics the Metaphysics Of Momentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: On Unsettling Science Education: Decolonizing and Deconstrucmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unsettling Metaphysics in Science Education

Higgins

2020

Unsettling Responsibility in Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Social cartographies are, per se, reflexive and agnostic in allowing for paradoxes, vested interests in supporting singular narratives, and make space for seemingly contradictory and incommensurable discursive orientations to function simultaneously in a particular context such as higher education (de Oliveira Andreotti et al , , p. 85). Other examples of social cartography applied in higher education research include, but are not limited to Ahenakew (), de Oliveira Andreotti, Stein, Sutherland, Pashby, Susa, and Amsler, (), and Stein ().…”

Section: Towards a Social Cartographymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other examples of social cartography applied in higher education research include, but are not limited to Ahenakew (2017), de Oliveira Andreotti, Stein, Sutherland, Pashby, Susa, and Amsler, (2018), and Stein (2017).…”

Section: Towards a Social Cartographymentioning

confidence: 99%

A social cartography of analytics in education as performative politics

Prinsloo¹

2019

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data—their collection, analysis and use—have always been part of education, used to inform policy, strategy, operations, resource allocation, and, in the past, teaching and learning. Recently, with the emergence of learning analytics, the collection, measurement, analysis and use of student data have become an increasingly important research focus and practice. With (higher) education having access to more student data, greater variety and nuanced/granularity of data, as well as collecting and using real‐time data, it is crucial to consider the data imaginary in higher education, and, specifically, analytics as performative politics. Data and data analyses are often presented as representing “reality” and, as such, are seminal in institutional “truth‐making,” whether in the context of operational or student learning data. In the broader context of critical data studies (CDS), this social cartography examines and maps the “data frontier” and the “data gaze” within the context of the dominant narrative of evidence‐based management and the data imaginary in higher education. Following an analysis of the main assumptions in evidence‐based management and the power of metrics, this paper presents a social cartography of data analytics not only as representational, but as actant, and as performative politics. What is already known about this topic Student data in higher education are increasingly used not only to inform operational and strategic planning, but to inform and shape curricula, pedagogy and student learning. The collection, measurement, analysis and use of student data are informed by a particular data imaginary in service of evidence‐based management. Data and analytics are seen as objective, neutral representations of reality and used as basis for informing policy, operational planning, resource allocation, and, increasingly, learning analytics and student facing dashboards. What this paper adds Critically examines data analytics in higher education as “truth‐making” and never neutral, and always as provisional snapshots of “reality” serving particular, often undeclared, assumptions and interests. Situates learning analytics as the collection, measurement, analysis and use of student data in the broader context of the data imaginary and student data as “data frontier”. Provides evidence that data analytics is not only representational, but, increasingly, performative and political. Implications for practice and/or policy Makes explicit some of the theoretical, political, epistemological and ontological assumptions underpinning and sustaining the data imaginary in higher education. Foregrounds the need for more critical approaches to our expectations, collections, analyses and use of student data. Argues the need for policy and practitioners to recognise the inherent political and performative nature of data and data analysis, and the need for transparency, accountability and care.

show abstract

“…However, the equality principle applied in public policies can fall into a problem of imposing a unitary framework -paradoxically -in order to recognize individuals, students, citizens and communities or collectives. Ahenakew (2017) provides an interesting contribution to this matter, by denouncing the fact that institutional efforts for integrating indigenous knowledge in the official educational sphere fail when they instrumentalize this knowledge to maintain the political asymmetry between the white and the aboriginal culture, and when they depoliticize it and minimize conflict through its superficial inclusion.…”

Section: (Iii) Equality and The Risk Of Imposing Hegemonic Discoursesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous higher education in Mexico and Brazil: between redistribution and recognition

Oyarzún

Franco

McCowan

2017

Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Indigenous groups in Latin America face a double exclusion from higher education, with low levels of access to institutions, and little acknowledgement of their distinctive cultural and epistemological traditions within the curriculum. This article assesses current policies in Mexico and Brazil towards indigenous populations in higher education, considering the various responses to the challenge, including affirmative action programmes in mainstream universities, intercultural courses and autonomous institutions. These policies and initiatives are analysed using the theoretical frames of redistribution and recognition, focusing on demands for formal equality and material well-being on the one hand, and a distinctive cultural and educational space on the other. While state-sponsored policies focus primarily on the redistributive element, initiatives based on recognition come largely from autonomous organisations, raising a series of dilemmas and tensions around educational justice for indigenous populations in the region.

show abstract

Mapping and Complicating Conversations about Indigenous Education

Cited by 41 publications

References 20 publications

Unsettling Metaphysics in Science Education

Unsettling Metaphysics in Science Education

A social cartography of analytics in education as performative politics

Indigenous higher education in Mexico and Brazil: between redistribution and recognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About