Media.Knet.Ca

RESEARCH FINDS SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION IN GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON ABORIGINAL EDUCATION

Speaking Notes for Delbert Horton, Past-Chair Aboriginal Institutes Consortium On the Release of the CRRF Report on Aboriginal Institutions of Higher Learning

Click here for the full 87 page report (pdf version)

August 24, 2005

• I am pleased to participate in the announcement of the completion of this report.
• The recommendations are crucial to the stability, growth and development of Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions.
• There are eight in Ontario which deliver a variety of programs including degree, diploma, certificate and skill-trades programs.    Our institutes also deliver a variety of adult education programs, and some operate alternative secondary school programs.  We also conduct community-based research.   In short, we respond to a wide variety of First Nations education needs and are an integral component of a First Nations life-long learning system.
• The first recommendation calls for the federal government to recognize, through legislation, the authority for First Nations institutions to grant degrees, diplomas and certificates. Currently our institutions must work in partnership with mainstream institutions and purchase the right to grant their degrees and their diplomas.   
• The related issue is the need to ensure sustainable funding for First Nations institutions.   Without government policy and legislative recognition, there is no mechanism to ensure adequate access to sustainable resources such as operating grants.
• A variety of models exist to recognize and resource First Nations institutions.  Unless policy change occurs, the successes achieved by First Nations institutions will be limited.   There are increasing demands, such as increasing numbers of students and demands for new education and training programs.  The existing approach is not adequate to allow First Nations institutions to grow and to thrive.
• First Nations post-secondary institutions are an important resource in First Nations education and a potential resource to all governments which deal with First Nations education.   An investment to build our capacity is an investment in enhancing the quality of First Nations education in Ontario.

************************************************************************************************

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CRRF SPONSORED RESEARCH FINDS SYSTEMIC DISCRIMINATION IN GOVERNMENT POLICIES ON ABORIGINAL EDUCATION

Toronto, August 24, 2005: A study released by the Canadian Race Relations Foundation (CRRF) and prepared by the Aboriginal Institutes’ Consortium, representing eight Aboriginal post-secondary  education and training institutes in Ontario, has found that there is a consistent pattern of systemic discrimination in the way the federal and provincial governments handles the education of Aboriginal students.

The report, Aboriginal Institutions of Higher Education – A Struggle for the Education of Aboriginal Students, Control of Indigenous Knowledge and Recognition of Aboriginal Institutions, was released at the “OUR CHILDREN, OUR FUTURE, OUR WAY” conference sponsored by the Chiefs of Ontario. It examines the evolution of government support for Aboriginal students enrolled in post-secondary institutions and the development of Aboriginal post-secondary institutions, noting that it was only in 1968 the federal government adopted a policy to provide funding support for status Indians enrolled in post-secondary studies.

In 1972, the National Indian Brotherhood (now the Assembly of First Nations) released a policy document, Indian Control of Indian Education, which reaffirmed the rights gained through treaties for Aboriginal peoples to be in control of their own education. The federal government adopted the policy a year later. Its shortcoming was that it was geared to elementary education.

“One of the excuses governments use to get out of their responsibility of funding Aboriginal higher-learning institutions is to play each off against the other,” observes LuAnn Hill, one of the authors of the report. “The federal government says that education is a provincial responsibility. The provinces say that the federal government is responsible for the education of Aboriginal persons. We are caught in the middle.”

The report makes it clear that First Nations institutions have developed sophisticated programs which meet all the “established” criteria for graduation. Nevertheless, only a few have been granted the right to award their own degrees. It demands that all First Nations post-secondary institutions be given the same recognition.

Additional recommendations include obtaining sustainable funding comparable to mainstream institutions; ability to transfer credits earned in an Aboriginal institution to a mainstream school and vice-versa; increasing the amount of funding available for First Nations’ student; making specialized funding available to address language issues, including language preservation; that the two levels of government and the Aboriginal communities to establish a formal process to develop policy and legislation to support Aboriginal education.

“Governments’ control of Aboriginal education has always been one of the ways they have used to try to assimilate Aboriginal peoples,” observes Paul Winn, Vice Chair of the CRRF. “By not allowing Aboriginal tertiary institutions to grant degrees or certificates is one way they continue to exercise paternalistic control over Aboriginal peoples.”

The conference was also the venue for the release of A New Agenda: A Manifesto for First Nations Education in Ontario, a foundation document adopted and endorsed by the Chief of Ontario.

-30-

The Canadian Race Relations Foundation’s mission is to shed light on the causes and manifestations of racism, provide independent, outspoken national leadership, and act as a resource and facilitator in the pursuit of equity, fairness and social justice for all Canadians. The CRRF is a registered charitable organization and has Special NGO Consultative Status with the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. 

Contact:
Dominique Etienne, Communications, CRRF: 416-952-8171

From CRR web site at http://www.crr.ca/Load.do?section=26&subSection=38&type=2

Aboriginal Institutions of Higher Education

A Struggle for the Education of Aboriginal Students, Control of Indigenous Knowledge and Recognition of Aboriginal Institutions ...
An examination of government policy

 Click here for the overview and summary document (pdf version) - included below in html format

By:The Aboriginal Institutes' Consortium
Published by:Canadian Race Relations Foundation

Overview

Aboriginal peoples  continue to reclaim their cultures and languages and require educational programs that are responsive to their worldviews, histories, contemporary circumstances, social systems, and knowledge systems.  Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions have emerged in order to design, develop, and deliver educational programs that respond to the higher learning needs of Aboriginal persons.

Federal and provincial governments have not embraced this community-based Aboriginal development.  Both the federal government and the government of Ontario have, to a certain extent, attempted to accommodate the special needs of Aboriginal students attending provincial colleges and universities by making funding available to these institutions to provide Aboriginal-specific programs and services.  However, Aboriginal peoples are not content to remain consumers in the provincial education system.  Ownership of traditional knowledge and application of appropriate methodologies and appropriate content are significant issues, and have driven Aboriginal communities to develop their own post-secondary institutions.  These institutions are not formally recognized in federal or provincial law or policy as educational entities in the same manner as provincial colleges or universities, and operate on the periphery of the established education system in Canada.

This study examines the history and development of Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions and assesses how governments in Canada have responded to their development.  It also examines major consequences of this lack of policy and legislative support by providing a comparison between Aboriginal institutions and provincial colleges and universities.  Finally, because the issue affects Aboriginal institutions across Canada, recommendations for policy and legislative support for Aboriginal institutions are presented.  This study also raises the question: 'Does racism exist with respect to Canadian policy and legislative support for Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions?'

Executive Summary

Education can either be a tool for success or a tool for destruction.  This study examines key events in the recorded history of Aboriginal education that have triggered a concentrated and consistent reaction from Aboriginal peoples to take continuous measures to design and develop an evolving and distinct education system to address the unique needs of Aboriginal peoples. 

Education was one of the earliest means by which the Canadian government attempted to absorb and assimilate Aboriginal peoples into accepting the culture and educational practices of the dominant society.  This study highlights some of the key events in the recorded history of Aboriginal education since European settlement and some of the outcomes resulting from colonial education systems. 

The most notable practice employed for this purpose was the development of residential schools run primarily by various religious orders.  The residential schools removed children from their communities, often leaving them unable to return home for a number of years.  This social experiment inculcated Aboriginal children into Euro-Canadian religious values and social mores, including training in the Euro-Canadian understanding of the roles of men and women.  Until 1951, the Indian Act of Canada forbade Aboriginal persons, defined as "Indian" for the purposes of the Act, from attending university unless they voluntarily relinquished their status as an Indian under a process called enfranchisement (The Indian Act, 1876).

A review of the history of Aboriginal education highlights the actions and involvement of non-Aboriginal peoples in education and the need of Aboriginal peoples to define their own vision and aspirations for education.  It also demonstrates that since 1972, Aboriginal peoples have consistently asserted their determination to regain control of their systems and institutions of education.

In 1969, the government of Canada tabled a White Paper document on the future of Aboriginal peoples in Canada (Ottawa, 1996a).  It essentially called for the assimilation of Aboriginal peoples into the body politic, indistinguishable in law from the Canadian populace.  This led to a massive mobilization of Aboriginal persons and the formation of numerous organizations dedicated to the recognition of Aboriginal rights and identity.  In 1972, First Nations  in Canada joined together to issue a policy document entitled Indian Control of Indian Education, which demanded recognition of the right of Aboriginal people to educate their children (National Indian Brotherhood, 1972).  This call has subsequently been reaffirmed in great detail in numerous documents including, most notably, the Assembly of First Nations' Tradition and Education: Toward a Vision of our Future (1988), the Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (Ottawa, 1996a and 1996b), and the relatively recent Report of the Minister's National Working Group on Education (Ottawa, 2002).  Aboriginal peoples have been consistent in their demand for recognition of their education authority and control over the education of their children.  

At every level - from early childhood to elementary, secondary, and post-secondary - Aboriginal peoples continue to develop and deliver education programs for their citizens with the understanding that "the Road to Knowledge is Eternal" .  The activities in which Aboriginal peoples have engaged include planning and administering elementary and secondary schools, developing immersion programs, providing early childhood education, partnering with mainstream colleges and universities, and ultimately, developing Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions to deliver adult and post-secondary education programs.  At every level, Aboriginal peoples have had to struggle with federal and provincial laws, policies, and procedures that do not serve their interests.  As Aboriginal communities develop the capacity and the institutions needed to control their own education, government policies and programs have not evolved to recognize the work accomplished and the economic benefit of Aboriginal institutions in Aboriginal communities across Canada.  It is important to note that mainstream institutions across Canada are afforded economic benefits due to the lack of policy support for Aboriginal-controlled institutions. 

By the mid-1970s, the number of Aboriginal persons attending post-secondary institutes began to rise dramatically across Turtle Island (North America).  The response across Turtle Island varied.  In Canada, the federal government (through the Department of Indian Affairs) provided grants to established post-secondary institutes to develop and deliver programs specifically for these students.  Provincial funds were also made available to mainstream, established institutions to develop and deliver culturally sensitive programs for Aboriginal students.  In the United States, post-secondary institutions also began to address the growing number of Aboriginal students and state and federal funds were made available to assist these institutions in meeting the needs of Aboriginal students.

With the growing number of Aboriginal students came the need to control and deliver culturally appropriate programs to Aboriginal students.  In the United States, the Tribal College movement began.  In 1970, the Navajo Institute became one of the first Aboriginal institutions to deliver programs to its students.  In Canada, Blue Quills First Nations College in Alberta, a former residential school, began to deliver programs for its students in 1971, responding to the need for local control of all Aboriginal education programs.

In the United States, there are now thirty-three Tribal Colleges, which are recognized through federal legislation as post-secondary institutions with the authority to grant certificates and two-year diplomas.  In Canada, there are fifty Aboriginal post-secondary institutions; however, these institutions have not been afforded authority similar to that of their southern counterparts.  Instead, current federal and provincial policies force Aboriginal institutions to partner with "recognized" mainstream post-secondary institutions in order to access funding and to ensure the credibility and portability of student credentials.

There are two primary questions that arise from this situation: (1) Why have Aboriginal post-secondary institutions not been recognized as having the right to grant diplomas, degrees, and certificates in their own right? and (2) Why won't governments in Canada provide Aboriginal institutions with equitable access to funding? 

Existing federal and provincial policies and funding programs provide some acknowledgment of the work of Aboriginal institutions, but also entrench them as second-class institutions.  Only in the province of British Columbia has legislation been passed to recognize two Aboriginal institutions as having the authority to grant degrees and diplomas (British Columbia, 1985).  The rest of Canada must move forward and develop legislation to enable all Aboriginal institutions to hold this same authority.

Research into these issues highlights the successes achieved by Aboriginal peoples that have exercised control over their own education systems from the elementary level through to Aboriginal owned and controlled post-secondary institutions.  This study demonstrates some of the unique aspects of Aboriginal post-secondary institutions, which differ significantly from the design and creation of mainstream post-secondary institutions.  The ways in which Aboriginal institutions address the unique cultural, language, social, economic, and political needs of Aboriginal peoples evidences their successes in improving access, retention, and success rates of Aboriginal persons in post-secondary institutions. 

This study demonstrates the extent of policy and legislative support for Aboriginal institutions, discusses policy limitations impacting the stability, growth, and continued development of Aboriginal institutions, and examines the consequences of the lack of policy support.  Provincial and federal policy and legislative support for Aboriginal institutions from other jurisdictions such as Saskatchewan, British Columbia, the United States of America, and New Zealand provides examples of policy change that could occur to increase support for Aboriginal post-secondary institutions in Canada. 

An examination and comparison of policy support for Ontario's mainstream post-secondary institutions in relation to the policy support for Aboriginal post-secondary institutions also operating in the province of Ontario demonstrates inequities in the system.  For example, even when Aboriginal post-secondary institutions deliver mainstream programs, they are not eligible to receive direct operating grants that are available to mainstream post-secondary institutions for the same outcome.  This brief example demonstrates how Aboriginal institutions are clearly disadvantaged by a lack of government support.  This lack of policy support for Aboriginal institutions is discriminatory and creates barriers that have negative impacts on Aboriginal persons, communities, and Nations; ultimately, this impacts upon Canada's economy and labour market.  

This study exposes the current situation; government policies have relegated Aboriginal institutions as second class institutions, reliant on "mainstream" institutions to validate their programs and grant diplomas and certificates. The potential for Aboriginal institutions to be in an equitable position where government funding is available, where the transfer of credits is honoured, where faculty and infrastructure are established, is not available within current legislation or policy. This is systemic racism, and this must change. Change must occur or Aboriginal post-secondary institutions will remain in a subservient position, responding to government policies and brokering programs that are recognized only by the established institutions. It is time to recognize the work that has been accomplished by Aboriginal post-secondary institutions in providing quality, cultural-based programming for their communities. Government policy and support must honour this work, and support the future equitable developmentof Aboriginal-controlled post-secondary institutions.