Module 3 & 4

Artifact of Learning #1: Doctrine of Discovery 

How might rescinding the Doctrine affect the government's relationship with Indigenous peoples?

Re-learning about the Doctrine of Discovery has been unsettling to revisit the knowledge that I thought I 'knew' and be faced with a whole set of new truths from these readings. The fact that something rooted in 15th-century papal bulls provided European colonizers with the ideological and legal justification to commit atrocities is absolutely heart wrenching - as Tomchuck (2023) states it's unsettling to know that a set of papal bulls from the 1400's provided the basis for European powers to claim land that was already lived on and governed by Indigenous peoples. What is even more troubling is how this outdated, colonial logic still lingers within Canadian legal and governmental systems today. The continued reliance on the Doctrine of Discovery in Canadian courts long after its original religious and colonial context calls into question Canada's actual commitment to reconciliation....when the Vatican formally rejected the Doctrine in 2023 it should have been the start to legal and political change but the movement seemed to stop there but the government still uses the Doctrine to 'justify the Crown's history and ongoing assertion of control over Indigenous Peoples and their land" (Gunn & McIvor, 2023). If the government rescinded the Doctrine, their relationship with Indigenous peoples could actually begin to repair itself through actually reconciliation but while it is in place any policy enacted, even those meant to support Indigenous communities, will be rooted in "the denial of Indigeous rights" (Gunn & McIvor, 2023). Rescinding the Doctrine must go beyond statements and words, it requires dismantling legal systems built on its assumptions and replacing them with frameworks that truly recognize Indigenous sovereignty and law. Doing so could be a big step in the right direction towards building trust and equity into the government and Indigenous peoples relationship and it would be recognizing Indigenous legal traditions as legitimate and equal systems of law (Assembly of First Nations, 2018). A question I still have in regards to this is how can I teach about the Doctrine of Discovery and this concept through an unbiased lens? I am very clearly biased towards shaming myself and other Europeans and finding a balance so students don't feel intense white guilt is tricky. 

What old colonial ideas and racist stereotypes continue to influence us in Canada today?

Schools shape society - the words we use, the concepts we teach, and the stereotypes we let go unabashed as teachers really make a big difference because everyone goes through school. In this way, the Doctrine of Discovery isn't just a legal or political issue its an educational one. So many of us didn't even learn about the Doctrine or residential schools until later in our lives, and many of us had to go searching for that information ourselves. Colonial narratives are deeply embedded ino ur education system where there is often a sanitized version of Canadian history being taught that often erases or minimizes the experiences and rights of Indigenous peoples. These colonial ideas also persist in the everyday language that we use - the podcast was very eye opening to the words that we use and how they shape perceptions. For example 'discovery' implies that the land was unknown before Europeans arrived...completely erasing the presence of Indigenous peoples. Unlearning these colonial ideas requires more than awareness it demands active effort and humility. I really appreciate how many of us are committing to retaining our brains and decolonizing our own thinking. Education plays a key role, especially for younger generations is key. Teaching children about Indigenous worldviews where land is shared not owned will start to introduce relational thinking with everything animate around us. The question I still have about this is how can I balance developmental appropriateness with historical accuracy? When is it important to hold back and scaffold the hard information?

Where and how did you learn about the history of colonization in Canada?

When I first learned about the Doctrine of Discovery in high school I felt like I had been taught a lie throughout all of my schooling and life until that point. Similar to what a lot of other people have said on their reflections so far, it feels like this part of history was stomped down and not spoken about when I was an elementary student. In high school I learned about terms like First Nations, Inuit, the Indian Act, and I knew that smallpox was a terrible thing and that Europeans 'colonized' but it was all spoken about like something that occurred thousands of years ago, not merely decades. I first understood the reality of colonization when I learned that my friend Santana's grandma had been in residential school herself, and that the final school closed the year my sister was born. This is really when I started learning about our true history and began my truth and reconciliation journey. University really opened my eyes to our true history by the courses I chose to take, but that is where my first question stems from - it was my choices that led to me learning about our true history. If I had taken "History 101" instead of "History of Canadian Aboriginal Peoples" then I wouldn't have learned the truth.....very interesting. A big question I have about how we teach our own history is without a standardized textbook/resource/oral storytellers created by Indigenous peoples how can we ensure that the history is being taught accurately and respectfully? I know many teachers who are doing the work to unlearn their own biases, but I also know many who are not doing the work and often don't teach Indigenous knowledge because they find it too hard to find resources...that is something that I am stuck on for sure. Dismantling colonial narratives that continue to influence our education, laws, and social systems means confronting hard truths, amplifying Indigenous voices, and committing to reconciliation not just in words but in meaningful action. 

References 

Assembly of First Nations. (2018). "Dismantling the Doctrine of Discovery." [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.afn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/18-01-22-Dismantling-the-Doctrine-of-Discovery-EN.pdf

APTN News. (2023, Mar 14). "The Doctrine of Discovery and its Grip on Indigenous Lands." [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hGDUYYGqOz4 

Gunn, K., & McIvor, B. (2023, April 13). "Now what? Next steps for uprooting the Doctrine of Discovery." Retrieved from https://www.firstpeopleslaw.com/public-education/blog/now-what-next-steps-for-uprooting-the-doctrine-of-discovery

Tomchuk, T. (2023, May 11). "The Doctrine of Discovery." Canadian Museum for Human Rights. Retrieved from https://humanrights.ca/story/doctrine-discovery

TreeTV. (2015, Sept 16). "Doctrine of Discovery." [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V3gF7ULVrl4 

Artifact of Learning #2: The Indian Act

Three Pieces of New Learning

1. The Pass System: I can't imagine needing to get permission to go to the next city. The Pass System instituted in 1885 (for 60 years!!) was all new learning to me. The system was yet another effort to restrict Indigenous peoples into reserves and force First Nations people to get a "permit to leave the reserve" even to go see family in neighbouring villages (The Pass System, n.d.). A quote that stood out to me was "they want to control our land, they want to control our resources, they want to control our people... and they want to do it in a nice way" which to me speaks volumes about how we try to cover our history with a positive spin to it (The Pass System, n.d.). 

2. The Indian Act's permit system severely restricted Indigenous economic autonomy: Under the act, First Nations farmers on reserves were required to obtain permits to sell their produce, even things like grain and hay, and non-Indigenous buyers were barred from purchasing without permission which basically suppressed Indigenous participation in markets outside of their own peoples (Indigenous Corporate Training, 2015).  Forcing people to use a system of money, and then taking away their ability to make that money, is definitely an efficient way to destroy a culture - how upsetting. 

3. The Indian Act and the Métis and Inuit Peoples: I had always assumed that the Indian Act affected all peoples in Canada, but now I know that it applied only to First Nations people with "Indian Status" because the design was created to assimilate First Nations cultures. This leads to the thought of Métis and Inuit peoples being seen as even less than First Nations by the government, even they have still been subjected by laws, policies, and treaties that influence their rights. So even though the Canadian Constitution recognized Métis and Inuit peoples as Indigenous peoples, both groups "have not had Indian status and the rights conferred by this status despite being Indigenous to Canada and participating in Canadian nation building" (First Nations & Indigenous Studies, UBC, 2009). 

Two Intriguing Findings (& Why They Captivate Me)

1. The enduring prohibition of cultural practices through the Indian Act: I learned that the Act banned cultural ceremonies, languages, and traditional dress, such as forbidding the potlatch and even dolling out punishment for participating in cultural gatherings (Indigenous Corporate Training, 2015). This has always intrigued me because it reveals how colonial policy went beyond land and governance - it attached identity and spirituality. I think the government knew that Indigenous peoples were and always will be strong, and they knew the only way to assimilate them was to destroy their hope. Even more specifically, the Feminist Northern Network's "Colonialism and its Impacts" publication emphasizes how many of these policies were intentionally written to force disconnection from women and their community - maybe they knew a matrilineal society would survive assimilation so they had to break the women's spirits first (2016).  I want to learn more about how these bans were enforced and how communities have reclaimed these cultural practices. 

2. The mechanism of enfranchisement as a tool of assimilation: the Indian Act granted status loss (enfranchisement) automatically to Indigenous peoples who got professional degrees or joined the church to become clergy - how obvious of a forced choice does it have to be? Choose Indigenous identity or colonial citizenship (Indigenous Corporate Training, 2016). This also intrigued me because it showed me better how assimilation was embedded into policy, education, and religion rather than being opposed by it. I want to explore how this may have affected Indigenous identity and careers and learn more about enfranchisement as a political tool in general.

A Question I Have and a Beginning of an Answer

Given these longstanding colonial structured embedded in the Indian Act, how are Indigenous communities working to regain governance over their lands today?

Many First Nations communities in Canada are taking steps to reclaim self-governance especially when it comes to land and decision making. One important way they're doing this is through something called the First Nations Land Management Act (FNLMA) created in 1999 that allows First Nations communities to opt out of certain parts of the Indian Act that control how they manage their land. Instead, they are able to create their own land codes which are rules that reflect their own values and traditions for how the land should be protected (Indigenous Services Canada, 2022). By creating their own land codes, communities can make decisions more quickly and without needing federal approval. This helps protect heritage and sacred sites, plan housing, develop business and infrastructures, and restore cultural practices tied to the land. 

But then this beginning research just raises another question - which communities have successfully implemented these land codes, and how are these arrangements transforming their governance, cultural revitalization, and economic planning? From my initial readings it seems like there are over 150 First Nations groups in Canada already involved in the program! For example, Westbank First Nations in Kelowna adopted land codes and opted out the Indian Act and have since deveoped community housing, commercial areas, and cultural programs all based on their own governance system (First Nations Land Management Resource Centre, 2023). With more control, their traditional knowledge can finally be revived which you can definitely see when you visit their website!

Another interesting way I found a community taking back their rights is the Tsawwassen First Nation from where I grew up. Instead of working through FNLMA, they created a modern treaty with the government where they implemented a land code as part of their self-government agreement and have definitely found a way to integrate their traditions into urban development. Land codes seem like they are a tool to blend tradition with modern planning, especially if they are implemented with created as a community with elders and traditional teachings in mind. 

References

British Columbia Assembly of First Nations. (n.d.). First Nations in BC Interactive Map. Retrieved from https://www.bcafn.ca/first-nations-bc/interactive-map

Fem North Net. (2016). Colonialism and its impacts. Retrieved from https://www.criaw-icref.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Local-Women-Matter-3-Colonialism-and-its-impacts.pdf 

First Nations & Indigenous Studies. (2009). "Indian Status." UBC. Retrieved from https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/indian_status/ 

First Nations Land Management Resource Centre. (2022). Nipissing First Nation: A leader in protecting lands and culture through land codes. Retrieved from https://labrc.com/nipissing-first-nation-case-study 

Indigenous Services Canada. (2022). "First Nations Land Management." Government of Canada. Retrieved from https://www.sac-isc.gc.caeng/1643829194000/1643829226673

Government of British Columbia. (2020). Fact sheet: Benefits of treaties – Tsawwassen First Nation. Retrieved from https://news.gov.bc.ca/factsheets/factsheet-benefits-of-treaties

Indigenous Services Canada. (2022). "Eighth Annual Statutory Report Pursuant to Section 2 of the Indian Act Amendment and Replacement Act." Government of Canada. Retrieved from https://www.sac-isc.gc.ca/eng/1643829194000/1643829226673 

Indigenous Corporate Training. (2015, June 2). "21 Things You May Not Have Known about the Indian Act." Retrieved from https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/21-things-you-may-not-have-known-about-the-indian-act

Indigenous Corporate Training. (2015, June 10). "Indian Act and the Permit System." Retrieved from https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/indian-act-and-the-permit-system-? 

Indigenous Corporate Training. (2016, September 1). "Indian Act and Enfranchisement of Indigenous Peoples." Retrieved from https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/indian-act-and-enfranchisement-of-indigenous-peoples? 

Native Women's Association of Canada. (n.d.). "Indian Act." Retrieved from https://nwac.ca/policy/indian-act 

The Pass System. (n.d.) "The Pass System trailer." [Vimeo]. Retrieved from https://vimeo.com/426120334?fl=pl&fe=sh

Artifact of Learning #4: Child and Identity Protection Reflection

Inuit custom adoption is a longstanding and respected practice that reflects the strength, resilience, and interconnectedness of Inuit families and communities. Rooted in Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (Inuit traditional knowledge), this practice centers the well-being of the child through kinship and collective care, often ensuring children grow up surrounded by culture, language, and identity. It is a form of adoption that predates colonial legal systems and continues to play a vital role in Inuit society today.

However, in the current context shaped by colonial legacies, under-resourced social systems, and jurisdictional gaps there are growing concerns about how to balance cultural respect with the need to ensure child safety. Reports of children falling through systemic cracks, as outlined in the recent articles and videos, show that government systems often fail Indigenous families - not because of their customs, but because of institutional neglect, racism, and lack of meaningful Indigenous involvement in policy-making.

As someone learning and working within an educational context, this conversation holds deep importance. Children who come from custom adoption arrangements may not always have the formal documentation that schools or service providers expect. Without understanding the legitimacy of Inuit adoption practices, educators risk marginalizing or invalidating the identities of these students. This can result in barriers to services, misunderstandings about guardianship, or even harmful interventions by child welfare agencies.

It’s essential that educators, administrators, and service providers engage in learning that is culturally responsive and trauma-informed. We must move beyond colonial assumptions of what a “valid” family looks like and instead recognize and uplift Indigenous ways of caring for children. Learning environments should be spaces where Inuit children feel seen, respected, and safe - where their identities are honored rather than questioned.

At the same time, I recognize the voices of Inuit leaders and families who are calling for stronger supports and oversight, not to erase custom adoption, but to ensure that it evolves with the realities of today. This means creating systems that protect children without undermining Inuit self-determination. It means co-developing policies in true partnership with Inuit communities, where culture and safety are not opposing forces but guiding principles working together.

Ultimately, Inuit custom adoption teaches us that community and belonging are foundational to a child’s well-being. In the classroom, that lesson calls us to create inclusive, respectful spaces that honor Indigenous knowledge and challenge colonial norms. It is not enough to acknowledge these customs - we must actively work to understand and support them in a good way.

Inuit custom adoption is a deeply rooted cultural practice that has existed for generations among Inuit communities. Unlike formal adoptions processed through provincial or territorial courts, custom adoptions are arranged traditionally within the community, often involving extended family or close community members. These adoptions are grounded in values of kinship, collective responsibility, and cultural continuity, and they are generally not adversarial or bureaucratic.

Relevance in the Learning Environment

In a learning environment, particularly one that serves Indigenous or northern communities, it’s crucial to approach custom adoptions with cultural sensitivity, historical awareness, and a trauma-informed lens. 

Cultural Respect vs. Child Protection Concerns: Educators, social workers, and policymakers often face a tension between Cultural Respect and recognizing that Inuit custom adoption is a valid and important practice that sustains cultural identity, prevents disruption in community ties, and honors Indigenous ways of raising children and Child Protection Concerns that arise when these adoptions are unregulated by the state and may lack formal oversight, potentially placing children at risk in rare cases of abuse or neglect.

• This delicate balance has become more pressing due to recent reports, such as The Terry Roberts article detailing a scathing review of how protective services fail Inuit children and MLA statements expressing that in today's context, custom adoptions may leave children vulnerable without adequate regulation or checks.

Educators and professionals working with Inuit children must:

• Understand the legitimacy of custom adoption under Inuit culture, and not assume it is inferior or unsafe simply because it lacks formal documentation.

• Be aware of systemic issues (as highlighted by Cindy Blackstock and others) that disproportionately affect Indigenous children in care, often due to underfunded services and racial bias, rather than the failure of Indigenous family structures.

• Develop culturally appropriate interventions, recognizing that policies meant to "protect" can sometimes replicate colonial harm if they override Indigenous autonomy without understanding the cultural context.

• Understand the Importance of Jordan’s Principle, as explained in the CBC Kids News video, underscores that no child should be denied access to services because of jurisdictional disputes—this principle is essential when discussing Inuit custom adoption, where territorial vs. federal responsibility can create service gaps for adopted children.

How Can the Educational System and Preservice Teacher Training Be Improved to Prioritize the Safety of Indigenous Children?

To truly prioritize the safety and well-being of Indigenous children, the education system,  especially in the training of preservice teachers, must undergo deep, structural changes rooted in truth, reconciliation, and Indigenous self-determination. “Safety” must be understood not only in physical terms but also in cultural, emotional, and spiritual dimensions. Some ideas I have are these:

1. Center Indigenous Voices and Knowledge: Preservice teacher training should begin with and be guided by Indigenous educators, Elders, Knowledge Keepers, and community leaders. Indigenous perspectives must not be treated as “add-ons,” but as foundational to understanding the experiences of Indigenous students. Courses should include:

   • Indigenous child-rearing philosophies (e.g., collective care, custom adoption),

   • Teachings on the intergenerational impacts of residential schools, the Sixties Scoop, and ongoing child welfare injustices,

   • Land-based education, where learning reconnects future teachers with Indigenous relationships to land and place.

2. Mandatory Anti-Racism and Anti-Colonial Training: Systemic racism and unconscious bias remain barriers to safety in schools. Many Indigenous children are disproportionately surveilled, disciplined, or misunderstood because of stereotypes and a lack of cultural awareness. Teacher education programs must include the things below to move from performative allyship to real accountability:

• Training on how colonialism continues through education systems,

• Tools to identify and address racial bias and microaggressions,

• Reflection on white privilege and the role of teachers in either disrupting or upholding colonial systems.

3. Stronger Partnerships with Indigenous Communities

Teacher education programs must prioritize community-led partnerships, where Indigenous nations and organizations help co-design curriculum, host practicums in Indigenous schools, and evaluate outcomes. When communities are directly involved in shaping how teachers are trained, there is a greater chance those teachers will arrive in schools better prepared to create safe, culturally affirming spaces for Indigenous students.

4. Understanding Child Welfare Contexts: Teachers are often mandated reporters, yet many are unaware of the historic and current overrepresentation of Indigenous children in the child welfare system. Training must include below to ensure teachers do not unintentionally cause harm by misinterpreting cultural norms as risk factors:

• The history and implications of policies like the Millennium Scoop,

• Understanding Jordan’s Principle and how it applies in schools,

• Respect for Indigenous customs like Inuit custom adoption, with an understanding that “safety” may look different in Indigenous cultural contexts.

5. Ongoing Learning, Not One-Time Workshops

One course or training is not enough. Cultural safety is not a checkbox -  it is a lifelong commitment. Schools and faculties of education must create space for continual professional development rooted in Indigenous-led education. This includes mentorship opportunities with Indigenous educators and long-term community engagement.

To prioritize the safety of Indigenous children, teacher education must shift from a Eurocentric, colonial framework toward one that respects Indigenous sovereignty, centers lived experiences, and acknowledges the holistic nature of safety. This transformation is not optional -  it is a necessary step toward reconciliation and justice in education.