Teaching Treaties as (Un)Usual Narratives: Disrupting the Curricular Commonsense

Abstract

This article examines the importance of treaty education for students living in a province entirely ceded through treaty. Specifically, we ask and attempt to answer the questions "Why teach treaties?" and "What is the effect of teaching treaties?" We build on research that explores teachers' use of a treaty resource kit, commissioned by the Office of the Treaty Commissioner in Saskatchewan. Working with six classrooms representing a mix of rural, urban and First Nations settings, the research attempts to make sense of what students understand, know and feel about treaties, about First Nations peoples and about the relationships between First Nations and non-First Nations peoples in Saskatchewan. It is revealing that initially students are unable to make sense of their province through the lens of treaty given the commonsense story of settlement they learn through mandated curricula. We offer a critique of the curricular approach in Saskatchewan which separates social studies, history and native studies into discrete courses. Drawing on critical race theory, particularly Joyce King's notion of "dysconscious" racism, we deconstruct curriculum and its role in maintaining dominance and privilege. We use the term (un)usual narrative to describe the potential of treaty education to disrupt the commonsense. (Un)usual narratives operate as both productive and interrogative, helping students to see "new" stories, and make "new" sense of their province through the lens of treaty.

Sticky points: teacher educators re‐examine their practice in light of a new Alberta social studies program and its inclusion of Aboriginal perspectives

“…3 Usually unaddressed in such discussions are the interconnected realities of non-AboriginalAboriginal wealth and poverty. Also commonly ignored are the educating forces that produce the predictable trans-Canadian "knowledge" that many non-Aboriginal Canadians have about issues related to the imaginary Indian (Francis, 1992; see also Tupper & Cappello, 2008). Thus, it is necessary to add to the list above by engaging students in the authoritative and internally persuasive discourses that impact their interpretations of non-Aboriginal and Aboriginal perspectives.…”

“…1 The inclusion of Aboriginal perspectives in Alberta's social studies program is part of a broader international debate over what ought to be their place and purpose in provincial or national curricula (Luke, 2009). These range from how best to improve educational achievement in particular Indigenous communities (Brayboy & Castagno, 2009) and culturally appropriate ways to assess achievement (Klenowski, 2009) to disagreements over whether Aboriginal perspectives should be offered as a standalone Native studies course elective or infused within the curriculum for all public school students (Tupper & Cappello, 2008). This new program represents this latter concern for infusion.…”

Treaty education for ethically engaged citizenship: Settler identities, historical consciousness and the need for reconciliation

“…(Ignatieff 1998: 170) Given the foundational importance of treaties to the Canadian state, why do so many Canadian citizens have little if any knowledge or understanding of them? (Tupper and Cappello 2008). Why is there such widespread ignorance of the multiple and varied missteps by the Government of Canada in fulfilling treaty promises?…”

“…They are illustrative of a particular narrative of Canadian -Aboriginal relations, advanced through public discourse, criticized by Roger Epp as '… relentless fragments of daily media coverage of court cases, blockades, corruption allegations, and leadership struggles ' (2008: 125). These discourses constitute a dominant (and decontextualized) story of Canada and what it means to be Canadian, in which Aboriginal histories, experiences and epistemologies are largely absent (Epp 2008;Schick and St. Denis 2005;Tupper and Cappello 2008) and through which non-Aboriginal peoples are not required to consider the various ways their ongoing privileges are directly connected to treaties. These discourses do not necessitate a reconsideration of relationships with First Nations people, nor do they demand an examination of historical or contemporary settler identities alongside First Nations identities.…”

“…In light of colonial frontier logics (illustrated by public response to the FNUC crisis), civic participation as a means of rationally reforming society is differentially perceived when the participants are First Nations peoples. Treaty education draws attention to the differential experiences of rights and freedoms for First Nations and settlers, and as such, offers students interrogative and productive possibilities to simultaneously decolonize their understandings of the past, of universal citizenship and settler relations with First Nations people (Tupper and Cappello 2008). This in turn has the potential to open up alternative understandings of what it means to be a citizen of Canada, and what our shared responsibilities for reconciliation might be.…”