Canada Travel Journal

Bienvenue au Canada!

(Yes, Canada! For family and friends that have been following my Fulbright journey from the start, you may recall that I was originally going to be sent to South Korea. A one-year travel delay due to Covid necessitated some other changes to the international field experience, and those of us originally assigned to South Korea got reassigned to other countries.)

Yesterday, my Fulbright colleagues and I travelled from our home towns—which are all across the United States, spanning Hawaii to Maine—and convened in Toronto, Ontario. We have spent over a year working together within the Teachers for Global Classrooms program: engaging in global education coursework, helping one another critically examine our cultural competence and the practices at play in our own classrooms that may build our students’ cultural competence, partnering on cross-curricular projects and multi-school collaborations, and more. Finally meeting these colleagues in person is so special. I went from being a little bit nervous to meet them (like meeting your classmates at a new school for the first time), to being thrilled to be in their presence and deepening our connections, to having major imposter syndrome upon hearing them speak so thoughtfully and articulately about the ways in which they are working to disrupt harmful systems and promote equity in their own educational communities of practice and in education at large. While it’s true that we all have so much we will learn from our Fulbright experience, and the international field experience in particular, I feel like I, personally, am going to learn exponentially from each conversation I have with the amazing educators in my Fulbright cohort!

Today’s sessions began with an overview of the international field experience from our IREX facilitators: Emily Dudley, Lynn Seumo, and Gina DeSantis. IREX—the International Research & Exchanges Board—is “an international, non-profit organization that specializes in global education and development.” Among their partners in more than 100 countries is the Fulbright program housed within the US Department of State’s Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, and their organization has been pivotal in designing and facilitating the Teachers for Global Classrooms (TGC) international field experience. This is a significant trip for our facilitators, too, as Canada is a new destination for the Fulbright TGC program. They spoke with us about the ways in which the field experience is designed to give us exposure to and access to as many different voices and perspectives as possible in a span of just a couple weeks, and it should allow us to build our network of collaborators. They also reminded us that as much as we are in Canada to engage in learning, we are also here as cultural ambassadors for the United States. No pressure ;-)

Next, members of the US Embassy Ottawa and Consulate in Toronto gave us an overview of the US Embassy and Consulate General, the role of American diplomats, and bilateral policy priorities. Diane del Rosario, Public Affairs Officer for the US Consulate General, talked about the deep friendship shared between the US and Canada, and about the ways in which diplomacy between our countries involves building, maintaining, and strengthening relationships between individuals and organizations from our two countries. Sharing the longest international border in the world, we have a wealth of shared values and interests, among them trade, security, and business ties. A major initiative of the consulate is the “Roadmap for a Renewed US-Canada Partnership.” Policy priorities include post-pandemic economic recovery, bringing down barriers faced by underrepresented groups, and advancing climate change ambitions. You can read much more about the Roadmap here, but in the meantime, I’ll leave you with the Roadmap’s opening statement, signed by US President Joe Biden and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in 2021:

It is in the shared interest of the United States and Canada to revitalize and expand our historic alliance and steadfast friendship to overcome the daunting challenges of today and realize the full potential of the relationship into the future. The Roadmap for a Renewed U.S.-Canada Partnership announced today establishes a blueprint for an ambitious and whole-of-government effort against the COVID-19 pandemic and in support of our mutual prosperity. It creates a partnership on climate change, advances global health security, bolsters cooperation on defense and security, and it reaffirms a shared commitment to diversity, equity, and justice. Bound by history and geography, the partnership between the United States and Canada endures because we invest in each other’s success.

Next, we spoke with Daniel Stewart, Foreign Service Officer for the US Department of State, who delved more deeply into the Roadmap and what makes it so special. First, few countries have such a thing that specifically lays out the work we are agreeing to engage in together toward multi-lateral global alliances. Second, it is the first time we have named inclusivity and equity at the crux of these types of policies; our efforts in areas such as business and defense will not be successful if we are not mindful of DEI considerations, as they won’t be sustainable. This reality is especially felt in Canada, where 1 in 5 are immigrants, or “newcomers.” Canada’s large percentage of newcomers results in a cultural climate that is perpetually growing and evolving, and many Canadians take pride in this aspect of their national identity. Meanwhile, more recently, there is increased attention on acknowledging Canada’s Indigenous First Nations population and growing intentionality around healing historic injustices.

To wrap up our sessions with government officials, we met with Helen von Gohren from the US Embassy in Ottawa, who reminded us that despite the US and Canada serving as friends, partners, and allies, our countries have fairly different educational systems. She previewed some of the educational trends and initiatives that we would see during our time in Canada, especially the movement to decolonize educational practices. Canadian education boards increasingly acknowledge that in addition to Indigenous knowledge having a place in the classroom, so too should Indigenous methods of learning; I am so excited to learn more about this during our upcoming school visits in Ontario and Saskatchewan. Helen has a passion for Canada’s arctic communities, where baby steps are being taken toward outreach, and she recommended that we read “The Right to Be Cold: One Woman’s Story of Protecting Her Culture, the Arctic, and the Whole Planet,” by Sheila Watt-Cloutier. The book details the Inuit people’s work to bring the United Nations’ attention to “forever chemicals” (also known as the “dirty dozen”) and their impact on the arctic. I will definitely be reading this in preparation for the Global Teaching Dialogue coming up in July!

The second part of our day, we focused in on education. First, Hang Lyu, an EducationUSA Advisor at Fulbright Canada, presented on “Special Topics in Canadian Education.” I’ll try to summarize things as briefly as I can here. Canadian provinces function much as states do in the US in terms of local educational oversight, but with even fewer centralized federal policies impacting the country’s educational systems at large; there is no Canadian Ministry of Education, but rather provincial ministries. The school year is similar to that in the US, with most schools in session early September through the end of June (190 days). Kindergarten is optional in Canada, and school is compulsory from age 5 or 6 (grade 1) through age 16 throughout the country but extended through age 18 (or high school graduation) in Manitoba, Ontario, and New Brunswick. There are four types of school boards, or what we would think of as “districts” in the states, all receiving public funding: English Secular, English Catholic, French secular, and French Catholic. There are also private schools over which the Ministry of Education has no oversight, but these don’t necessarily grant an Ontario Secondary School Diploma (OSSD). There are also independent schools, which are licensed by the Ministry and must comply with provincial standards, and which do grant an OSSD. Many of these independent schools are International Baccalaureate schools, and they often look similar to exclusive, expensive private schools in the US. To become a licensed educator in Canada, you attend college for either a Bachelor of Education degree (which is the most common pathway) or, if you have earned a bachelor’s degree in another area, you can attend the country’s singular Master of Teaching program. Each candidate completes three to four practicums. Primary-Junior teachers (grades K-6) and Junior-Intermediate teachers (grades 4-10) are licensed in one subject area, while Intermediate-Senior educators (grades 7-12) must be licensed in two subject areas. College is price-controlled, government-owned, and affordable. College costs most Canadians $10,000 Canadian dollars in total (approximately $7,825 American dollars), and tuition assistance is available for students who cannot afford that. Student assistance programs are run at the provincial level, through programs like the Ontario Student Assistance Program.

Currently, there are four main priorities/initiatives in Canadian education, and these have a large DEI component. First, Canada is trying to make early learning and childcare much more affordable and equitable for families. In addition to programs that are in place to help regulate childcare costs, the federal government has begun work with partners at the provincial level and with Indigenous communities to build a country-wide, community-based childcare system. There is still much to iron out in these details, and each of Canada’s major political parties (Liberal, Progressive Conservative, New Democratic, Green) has a slightly different approach on how to best achieve this.

Second, Canada is reconsidering its STEM education model. Ontario recently rolled out a new math curriculum, has begun teaching digital literacy in grade 1, and has begun teaching financial literacy in grade 4. Math programs in Canada have traditionally employed a “pathway” or “streaming” system (or what we would call “tracking” in the US) in which courses are offered for the same grade level but at different levels of proficiency (such as honors courses for more advanced learners). De-streaming the math classroom takes a “low floor, high ceiling” approach in which teaching is differentiated within a single classroom, but all students have access to the same tools, curricula, and opportunities, regardless of whether they are an early bloomer or a late bloomer. Grade 9 science has also recently been de-streamed under the changing STEM model. Another change in the STEM model employed in much of the country is a commitment to hybrid teaching; high school students in Ontario, for example, are required to complete two online courses. Although hybrid teaching and learning was challenging for teachers and students alike during the pandemic, this model helps build comfort with technology tools, and it renders students more prepared if and when a shift back to full-time hybrid learning might be warranted in the unpredictable future. Hang admitted that the hybrid piece of the STEM puzzle is still changing and is influenced in large part by the political party in power at a given time, so this component will likely continue to shift.

Third, efforts are being made in the area of Indigenous education. Knowing about the past (seen in such efforts as learning about residential schools, beginning meetings with a land acknowledgement, etc.) is important, but it is merely a jumping-off point for seeking strength-based approaches in Indigenous education. Such approaches could include the human connection to land, Indigenous arts, belonging and community, and self-determination/self-governance. School boards across Canada are exploring various ways of integrating these approaches, both within single subject areas (i.e. lacrosse in physical education, kaktovik numerals in math) and cross-curricularly (i.e. exploring the water crisis on reserves in science and social studies).

Fourth, Canadian schools are committed to culturally inclusive pedagogies. You may recall that 1 in 5 Canadians are newcomers. In Ontario, specifically, 25% of the population speak a second language at home. Canada’s culture is also diverse in faith/religion/creed. The boards recognize that remaining Euro-centric in their approach would perpetuate systems that have historically underserved minoritized groups and which would not serve the best interest of Canada’s increasingly diverse population.

Our final session of the day was with members of the Toronto District School Board. First, Anne Chirakal, Principal of Central Technical School, shared some of the work the board has been doing around prioritizing student voice in school improvement processes. When the school conducted an equity audit this year, Anne thought it was important that the students have a seat at the table, as they are the ones who will be most impacted by the results of the audit. Students, parents, and staff were all involved in creating the audit, which took the form of focus groups. (Anne warns that audits conducted in survey format often bring apathy into play.) The interviews were conducted by an outside organization rather than by school or board administrators, so that the participants’ responses would not be influenced by any positional power at play. The majority of the interviews were around school climate, which includes such factors as “availability of educational resources; students’ equitable access to opportunities to learn; institutional expectations that students will work hard and achieve; the physical environment; the treatment of students; the quality of interpersonal relationships between and among students, teachers, and staff; and strong connections between families, schools, and communities” (peopleforeducation.ca). Anne talked a bit about the work of Marie Battiste, which impacted her views on education, and she recommended Battiste’s book “Decolonizing Education.” In it, Battiste "documents the nature of Eurocentric models of education and their devastating impacts on Indigenous knowledge,” suggesting reform that must take place in our schools to reposition Indigenous knowledge within the curriculum. Last, Anne believes that inquiry is one of the mot powerful ways to create equitable and identify-affirming practices, which the Toronto board is attempting to do through it’s choice-based programming.

Reiko Fuentes, head of secondary programs and admissions, told us more about that programming. All secondary students within the Toronto board are able to choose a specialization or program of study (similar to a magnet school in the US) based on their unique interests. Through this, the board aims to “center the voice and the need of students and [to] be culturally relevant and reflect the identities of its students.” Specialized programming includes general arts, dance, drama, music, performing arts, visual/media arts, cyber arts, elite/exceptional athletics, integrated technology, international baccalaureate, leadership pathways, math/science/technology, advanced placement, law in action, and a specialist high skills major. In order to remove known barriers to accessing these programs and to decrease the underrepresentation of particular groups of students, the board decided that the only admission criteria should be student interest; there is priority placement for Indigenous, black, middle eastern, and Latinx students, with a centralized random selection process after the priorities placements. There are no entrance exams, no application fees, no audition requirements, and report card grades are not taken into consideration during the program placement process.

Jason To, coordinator of math/numeracy, talked more about the de-streaming movement in Canadian schools, which we first learned about this morning in our session with Hang. In the past, formal and informal streaming practices showed up at the elementary level in a way that led to “have” and “have not” segregation in the schools. When students got to high school, they were primed for one of three streams: academic (most often leading to university), applied (most often leading to college), and essentials (most often leading to the workplace). The Toronto board is very proud of being the first board to look at the research regarding the harmful effects of this segregation and to lay out a multi-year strategic plan to phase out streaming practices. The board believes strongly that it’s not enough just to change the structures at play; they must also change the teaching environment and instructional practices to adapt to these new structures. To support the work of de-streaming, teachers and administrators are currently engaged in professional learning are bias, power, privilege, systemic racism, oppression, and the rationale for de-streaming. There is a greater focus of inclusive pedagogies, including Universal Design for Learning, differentiated instruction, and culturally responsive pedagogy.

Mike Gallagher, Superintendent of Education, also spoke with us about the rationale for the board’s current work. He pointed out that for too long, black and Indigenous communities were disproportionately represented in school suspensions. He asked questions like “How are we creating the conditions to authentically engage the voices of our students, especially those from underrepresented communities?” “How is the professional learning our teachers are engaging in landing on students’ desks?” “Did the kids have the kind of day that makes them excited to come back tomorrow?” Additionally, board member Suzan Joueid reminded us that in addition to seeing themselves represented in the curriculum, it’s also important that students see themselves reflected in supplemental resources (for example, library books).

I can’t believe how much we’ve already soaked in after just one day! I’m so grateful to be here, and I’m definitely looking forward to the days to come!

Today, our cohort visited various sites in the Halton school district, just west of Toronto. I was assigned to Oodenawi, a K-8 school. The name “Oodenawi” references the Ojibwe/Anishinaabe term “community.” The Mississaugas of the New Credit First Nation Anishinaabe, in particular, are the original people to inhabit the land now known as Halton. Our session with school administration began with a land acknowledgement:

Halton as we know it today is rich in history and modern traditions of many First Nations and the Métis. From the Anishinabe to the Attawandaron, the Haudenosaunee, and the Métis - these lands surrounding the Great Lakes are steeped in Indigenous history. As we gather today on these treaty lands we have the responsibility to honour and respect the four directions, land, waters, plants, animals, ancestors that walked before us, and all the wonderful elements of creation that exist. We would like to acknowledge and thank the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation for sharing their traditional territory with us.

Beginning meetings with a land acknowledgment is a newer—but increasingly common—practice in Canada, and the practice is one of the recommendations of Canada’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). The TRC spent 6 years (2007-2015) traveling the country and collecting the stories and experiences of thousands of Indigenous citizens, especially around the residential school system that devastated so many families and attempted to strip Indigenous children of their cultural identities. The TRC’s final report includes 94 “calls to action” for reconciliation between Canada and its Indigenous people, with calls to action related to education among them. You can read the full report on the National Centre for Truth and Reconciliation’s website here.

The work of the TRC and its calls to action has had an effect on Oodenawi’s curriculum and instructional practices, as it has throughout the province and the country. The school acknowledges, for example, that they must change the way they teach history, presenting it not just from a colonial perspective but also from an Indigenous perspective. Matthew Reid, a 5th grade teacher at the school, explained that the faculty incorporate Indigenous knowledge in their curricula and “ways of knowing” (i.e. relating, behavior, responsibility, thinking, language, knowing, and doing) in their pedagogies. He described a lesson in which students were gaining an understanding of the land from various perspectives: using maps, which are a Eurocentric construct, but also exploring Indigenous ways of knowing the land, such as through our relationship with it, or the way in which all aspects of the land (the water, the rocks, the plants, the animals) are living according to that worldview.

The school does not decide, alone, on what Indigenous knowledge should be learned and/or how it should be taught; they consult with Mississaugas elders and education consultants to access truth and knowledge from another worldview. This wasn’t always the school’s approach. Initially, although their intentions were good, they misstepped by failing to consult with their treaty partners. They began teaching the Anishinaabe’s 7 “grandfather teachings” in conjunction with their character education curriculum, and in doing so, said that “we took on a spirituality that we shouldn’t have.” They also found that, at times, they unintentionally generalized customs of Indigenous people too broadly. For example, a statement like “the Indigenous people of Canada traditionally used snowshoes in the winter months” apply to some, but not all, Indigenous tribes. Gabriela Echeverria, Oodenawi’s principal, quickly learned the importance of involving the treaty partners in everything from what Indigenous knowledge should be taught (and how it should be taught) to deciding on the name of the school itself. She said that naming the school was intended as an important first step in building a relationship, and consulting with tribal elders about curriculum is now important for maintaining that relationship. She said that “when you involve a treaty partner, it requires truth, authenticity, and respect,” noting that this is an important part of the reconciliation that must occur after the historical theft of the Indigenous people’s land, language, culture, and trust.

We talked with Gabby about some of the tensions at play in the US education system, including the debate over Critical Race Theory, and we wondered if Ontario boards had felt any similar tensions with the introduction of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and the ways in which boards were addressing those calls to action. Gabby responded, “Whenever you’re resisting processes that have perpetuated a dominant narrative, you’re going to meet tensions and resistance. But that resistance in itself is racism, so you cannot let it stop you from doing what you know is right.” Key to Halton’s good work in this area is its commitment to Culturally Responsive Relevant Pedagogy (CRRP). Under this model, cultural competence, critical consciousness, and high academic standards are at the center of each decision the board makes, from what special assemblies will look like to what books will be purchased for the school. The district asks not just “who does this serve” and “what purpose does this serve,” but also “who does this exclude” and “where are the gaps.”

We had the opportunity to visit a handful of classrooms during our time at Oodenawi. I most enjoyed the time spent in the kindergarten classroom, where an inquiry-based approach was clearly utilized. The students’ own questions and curiosities about the world around them served as the basis for their exploration in this classroom. Evidence of problem-solving and experiential learning around bees could be seen in the giant hive fort the students had built in their classroom and the construction of a honeycomb model out of hexagonal blocks. Posters on the walls contained students’ questions about bees (some of them populated with the answers the students had discovered), bee-themed artwork the students had made, and diagrams the students had populated with the parts of a bee. Later in the unit, the students will tie in number recognition by drawing stripes on their bumblebees according to the numbers displayed on their wings. The students initially became interested in bumblebees after going for a walk and seeing them on the flowers outside; the co-teachers then put on a live-cam of a hive upon returning inside so that students could observe bee behavior and pose questions, which is how this particular unit of inquiry was born. I asked the teachers if they find following students’ inquiries alone allows them to hit on all of their grade-level standards. They said, first, that their provincial standards are left intentionally broad, which allows classrooms a significant level of autonomy in what they explore and how they choose to explore it. They also said that about half of the time, they employ “guided inquiry.” For example, if the students needed to meet science standards related to insects before the year was up, but they had not yet posed any questions of their own related to this, the teachers might choose a series of read-alouds related to this to spark students’ curiosity on this topic. Spending time in the kindergarten classroom, it was clear that students had a sense of ownership of the work being done; not only were they exploring their own inquiry, but they also got to choose from a variety of classroom materials (art materials, building materials, writing materials, reading materials) to decide how they wanted to explore this inquiry on this particular day. It was wonderful how much they were learning and, moreover, how much they were enjoying learning!

We spent today at the Forest Valley Outdoor Education Centre, where we learned about the role of outdoor education in the Toronto schools. Our session opened with cedar tea, which was taken from the property, responsibly sourced, and for which thanks was given when sourced. It also opened with a land acknowledgement:

We acknowledge we are hosted on the lands of the Mississaugas of the Anishinaabe, the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, and the Wendat. We also recognize the enduring presence of all First Nations, Métis, and Inuit peoples.

David Hawker-Budlovsky, Principal of School Operations and Outdoor Education, talked to us about the Toronto Disctict School Board’s (TDSB) multi-year strategic plan, which has five pillars: 1) transform student learning, 2) create a culture for student and staff well-being, 3) provide equity of access to learning opportunities for all students, 4) allocate human and financial resources strategically to support student needs, and 5) build strong relationships within school communities to support student learning and well-being. The ultimate vision, according to David, is for students to become contributors in society — not just in today’s world, but in the world in the myriad ways it is changing. The Covid pandemic hit during what was only year two of the strategic plan, and the TDSB was tasked with some quick pivots related to pandemic recovery. In addition to some of the strategies one might expect (i.e. differentiated supports, digital tools, virtual learning, etc.), the use of play—especially outdoor play—was an important part of their recovery plan. The outdoors was one of the safest and most natural ways for students to rebuild a culture of collaboration and comfort with one another while still staying safe amid the pandemic. As more and more teachers began to see the benefits of outdoor learning experiences, the notion of pandemic “recovery” was replaced with pandemic “response,” denoting the desire not to go back to things exactly as they were pre-pandemic. Since then, the TDSB has made outdoor education a mandated part of its curriculum; K-8 students must complete two one-day programs per year, with at least one three-day overnight program occurring between grades 5-7.

David argues, however, that we must expand our notion of outdoor education beyond something that just happens a couple times per year on a field trip, but rather something that happens every day in every classroom, no matter the weather or the season. How this place-based learning will occur differs from school to school (i.e. urban vs. suburban vs. rural setting), but David argued that any classroom with a door is a set up for outdoor education. In addition to leading groups at the TDSB’s outdoor learning centers, the outdoor education specialists have created a database of lessons that classroom teachers can use with their students in their school environments, including urban environments.

The themed programming at the Outdoor Education Centre incorporates experiential learning, Indigenous perspectives, inquiry-based learning, environmental stewardship, ecological literacy, place-based learning, and STEM. The programming is low-tech but high-engagement, and it is designed to help students make better decisions about how to care for our planet in future years. The programming incorporates Indigenous ways of knowing and connecting with land, but the program’s educators are also mindful of Indigenous sovereignty; we must acknowledge where Indigenous knowledge comes from, situating ourselves and those from whom we have received that knowledge within that body of knowledge, much like one would cite a source when writing a paper.

After the presentation, we got to tour the property together and engage in some of the team-building activities that the educators complete with the students. At the end of our time at the OEC, we felt refreshed and energized. We had laughed a lot, learned a lot, moved our bodies, breathed fresh air, seen some beautiful sights, and had an increased awareness of our place in a system greater than us.

We closed out the day with a networking dinner with Fulbright teachers and Canadian Fulbright alumni to discuss experience in and topics related to K-12 education. Susan Crystal, Consul General of the US Consulate Toronto, and Dr. Michael Hawes, President and CEO of Fulbright Canada, were among the evening’s speakers. It was interesting to hear them share stories of Fulbright’s evolution since its founding over 70 years ago and stories of teachers—and, subsequently, youth—positively impacted by the global experiences the organization facilitates. I consider myself extremely lucky to now count myself among those ranks! Our time in Toronto has been wonderful, and I’m looking forward to what’s in store for us the next few days in Saskatchewan!

Yesterday, we flew from Toronto, Ontario to Saskatoon, Saskatchewan. Today, we are spending time at Wanuskewin Heritage Park, a National Historic Site and a Provincial Heritage Property. The park sits above Opimihaw Creek and the South Saskatchewan River. First Nations occupation of the land ended with the signing of Treaty Six in 1876 and the arrival of settlers in the area roughly 15 years later. The park houses artifacts that predate the Egyptian Pyramids and which serve as examples of Pre-Contact occupation of the Great Plains region.

Dr. Ernie Walker, one of Wanuskewin’s founders and its Chief Archeologist, walked the land with us while relaying the dark history of what took place here (and throughout much of the United States) in the name of Manifest Destiny, most notably, settlers deliberately killing off the bison in an effort to destroy the Indigenous people’s main source of food and and their hunter-gatherer culture. North America’s bison count plummeted from over 30 million to only a few hundred across the continent in the late 19th century, endangering the bison and First Nations cultural practices alike. Wanuskewin is participating in the effort to revitalize the bison population (the population is now up to 20,000-25,000), and we even got to see two bison calves born just a week-and-a-half ago!

Inside the property’s building, a host of archeological and print resources detailed early relations (“Pre-Contact” era) between Canada’s Indigenous people and European newcomers, the marked shift in relations due to colonization and assimilation policies, and more recent efforts toward reconciliation. Pre-Contact, “European newcomers acknowledged Indigenous peoples as sovereign nations. […] Indigenous peoples had well-established societies and governments with political, legal, social, and economic systems developed in harmony with the laws of the Great Spirit” (wording taken from exhibit). Europeans began settling in the area around 1500, and trade with the Hudson’s Bay Company began in 1670. During this time, King George III recognized Indigenous land as just that, and Indigenous nations as sovereign. However, “over the next 200 years, the perspective of the colonizing governments was that Indigenous peoples were a ‘problem’ to be solved through severing their connection to Indigenous spirituality and ways of life” (exhibit). This was a time of promises made, promises broken, and various atrocities committed against Indigenous people: the Treaty of Ghent, The Indian Act, National Policy of 1879, the creation of residential schools, the Peasant Farming Policy, and the Sixties Scoop, to name a few. Since 1969, initiatives have begun to shift toward reconciliation, taking the form of organization and advocacy for Indigenous people and laws moving toward equality for Indigenous people. Specific initiatives include the establishment of the Saskatchewan Indian and Métis Department in the provincial government, publication of “The Unjust Society,” establishment of the Saskatchewan Indian Cultural College and the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College, the Native Law Centre, the Saskatchewan Indian Veterans’ Association, formal acknowledgement and apologies from various churches and government bodies for their historic roles in crimes committed against Indigenous peoples, the United Nations Declarations of the Rights of Indigenous People, the establishment of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission and its subsequent 94 Calls to Action (briefly discussed and linked in an earlier blog entry), the Idle No More movement, and legal proceedings for the Sixties Scoop Policy.

There is still a very long way to go toward true reconciliation. Candace Wasacase-Lafferty, a Wanuskewin board member and our other guide during our time at the park, shared her thoughts on this. Candace is First Nations Saulteax and Anishinaabe, and she is a leader within the Saulteax’s matriarchal society. She said that, at large, “reconciliation is for Canada; reclamation is for the Indigenous people who inhabit this land.” In terms of reclamation, she pointed to efforts such as those underway at Wanuskewin, and she contrasted that with efforts in the United States, where reservation lands are often the most undesirable, least farmable lands. Candace believes that while the work of the TRC is definitely influential, the real transformation lies in interpersonal experiences such as those we are engaging in with Fulbright and by spending time in Wanuskewin with Ernie and her. Candace said that the real ability to right these historic wrongs is “story to story and heart to heart.” She said that it will take at least a generation to see change, but that “at least we’re on the right path now.”

Candace shared stories from her own life and that of her father’s life. Her father was taken to a residential school in the early 1940s. There, his Indigenous language was outlawed, and when he had children of his own, he was deliberate to teach them only English. “It was for our own survival,” said Candace. When she was a young woman, Candace almost joined the ranks of the epidemic of missing and/or murdered Indigenous women and girls: While walking down a city sidewalk, one man jumped her and began dragging her into a van while another man filmed the incident, both of them laughing. She was fortunate to fight her way out of the man’s grasp just as her friend arrived on scene, causing the men to flee. She said that what was most disturbing about the situation was not the man attempting to kidnap her or even the one filming — rather, it was all of the passersby on that busy sidewalk who saw what was happening and did not attempt to intervene. She was Indigenous, after all, and so the value placed on her life was markedly less than the value afforded to, say, a white woman. These gut-wrenching stories prompted one of my colleagues to comment on how remarkable it is that despite all of the atrocities committed against Indigenous people, the Indigenous community members with whom we have met have been nothing but kind and welcoming, when it would be understandable that they might instead hold a grudge against those of us that come from positions of historic power and privilege. Candace responded that, indeed, Canada can learn from its Indigenous people — from their resilience, forgiveness, love, and welcome. She said that continuing in a place of anger would not allow them to move forward toward a better future.

There is so much about our time at Wanuskewin that I still don’t know how to fully articulate, from how special these relationships we are forming are to the increased awareness about the role of space and place in cultural identity. I’m just so grateful for the opportunity to be here and to learn from these remarkable people (like Candace! like my Fulbright colleagues!) who are willing to give me a glimpse into their life and their worldview!

We spent the first half of the day at the University of Saskatchewan’s Gordon Oakes Red Bear Student Centre. Here is a description of the centre from a university view book:

As an intercultural gathering place, the Gordon Oakes Red Bear Student Centre brings together the teachings, traditions, and cultures of the peoples of Saskatchewan. Grounded in the teachings of collaboration, cooperation, humility, reciprocity, and sharing, the centre aims to enhance Métis, First Nations, and Inuit student success. The centre’s purpose is to facilitate the coordination of effective student services for Métis, First Nations, and Inuit students and build relationships within and outside the university with Indigenous Peoples. The centre provides a home for Indigenous undergraduate and graduate student leadership and allows for mutual learning opportunities for students and faculty. The centre also functions as the university’s hub for on-campus Indigenous engagement and initiatives.

The physical space of the centre, which was designed by a First Nations architect and modeled after a lodge, was stunning. At the center of the space, on the ceiling, is a medicine wheel, its four quadrants representing the continuous interaction and balance between one’s physical, spiritual, mental, and emotional realities. The wheel sits above the space used to engage in ceremony, and the filtration system situated in the middle of the wheel around a skylight is such that the smoke created by burnt offerings and/or smudging is scattered simultaneously to the north, south, east, and west.

While the space and the programs housed there are impressive, the most meaningful part of the day was once again the people with whom we interacted and the relationships we formed. Candace Wacase-Lafferty, who we met at Wanuskewin and who works at the University of Saskatchewan, was with us again. We were also joined by Roland Duquette and by Louise B. Halfe. Roland Duquette is a Mistawasis First Nation Elder and Knowledge Keeper. He spoke with us about how he uses the four quadrants of the medicine wheel to “check in” on himself each day before leaving the house, saying that this is his “safety net” to ensure that he will be able to see, hear, and say good things; if one piece of the wheel is off, it throws one’s whole being off, and it is in those times that one must seek out the guidance from those with whom they have a strong relationship to help them achieve realignment. For Roland, that person is Candace; she has adopted Roland as a father, just as he has adopted her as a daughter. Roland has had to work through some difficult things as a survivor of the residential system, which stripped him of his name (he was “number 595” in the schools) and his identity alike. Louise B. Halfe, whose Cree name is Sky Dancer, is also a survivor of the residential school system. She is Canada’s Parliamentary Poet Laureate, and she is committed to retelling Canada’s history from an Indigenous perspective in her work, much of which recounts her time in the residential schools. Louise’s path to healing is due, in large part, to Jungian therapy, which is “an analytical form of talk therapy designed to bring together the conscious and unconscious parts of the mind to help a person feel balanced and whole” (pyschologytoday.com). Louis said that for her, as for many academics, the danger is in being too much in one’s head and not enough in one’s soul; she said that the path between the heart and the mind is the “longest journey,” but that unless you learn to bridge these, you can be a victim of your own thoughts and/or feelings.

The real magic of the day is something for which I don’t really have adequate words. Elder Roland Duquette invited us into ceremony. It involved grounding, sharing, smudging/cleansing, teaching, and guidance. I’ve written and rewritten this paragraph a number of times, trying to really explain what this experience meant, and like I said, I just don’t have the words. Just know that it was incredibly personal and incredibly intimate, and we were so honored to have been invited to share this experience with the people we had grown to know and love in such a short amount of time. There was a lot of vulnerability among us in that space, and the amount of support we each gave and received was beautiful. We talked about families, relationships, cultures, identities, struggles, triumphs, and there were many tears among the group. It was transformative.

Next, we visited St. Frances Cree Bilingual School, the largest Indigenous language school in the world. The bilingual program, which was founded in 2007, has a focus on nehiyaw language and culture. The school serves approximately 700 students, representing 57 Saskatoon neighborhoods and 55 First Nations communities.

In addition to meeting with school and district personnel, it was a treat to meet with a handful of the school’s parents, who spoke passionately about their gratitude for a program that not only acknowledges but also celebrates and fosters their children’s First Nations identities. In addition to a high level of family engagement and an active Parent Advisory Committee, the school benefits from community engagement in the form of partnerships with the College of Nursing, SaskSport Dreambroker, Big Brothers and Big Sisters, Indigenous Teacher Education Project (ITEP), Saskatoon Nutana Rotary Club, and tribal elders.

The school’s curriculum prioritizes four areas: 1) Land-based learning: Rather than just learning on the land, a central tenet of First Nations Ways of Knowing is the importance of learning from the land. To be sure that this learning takes place authentically, all of St. Frances’s teachers work with ITEP candidates in planning and delivering these lessons. 2) Indigenous STEAM: The school’s program “highlights Indigenous technologies, modes of inquiry, perspectives on the environment, and human interactions with the environment. Indigenous STEAM celebrates multiple intelligences and diverse expressions of learning” (from a slideshow presentation shared with our group). 3) First Nations student and family wellness: The school recognizes that if students’ fundamental health needs aren’t being addressed, it will be difficult to address learning outcomes; moreover, the school recognizes the health disparities present among First Nations communities. In response, the school houses a First Nations Child and Family Wellness Centre where students and their families can receive primary health services and health education. Also notable about this program is their commitment to “shape services to fit the community,” such as providing “holistic wellness services that recognize the strengths and resiliency of First Nations families” (slideshow). 4) Learning in community: Inquiry learning plays a large role in this facet of the school’s curriculum, as it allows space for students to engage in learning according to their unique interests and abilities, and moreover through elder-articulated Indigenous learning paradigms. When consulting with elders, school leaders were told “don’t build boxes,” and they have taken that advice to heart in implementing this program.

Through an initiative led by four amazing moms who went to bat for a better learning spaces for their children, construction is soon to begin for a new, state-of-the-art learning facility. The new facility features aesthetic elements that represent the northern lights, nehiyaw syllabics, and curvilinear design features, as a way of visually representing the school’s values. Grade-level learning pods will promote collaboration among teachers and students. (As an aside, the superintendent told us about a time he asked a student learning in a pod structure who their teacher was; it took the student 5 tries to correctly identify their primary teachers because of the communal nature of this teaching model!) The facility will also house non-traditional instruction spaces that support such initiatives as First Nations visual and performing arts, STEAM-field learning, First Nations traditional teachings, and botanical research. It will also house a family gathering space, a community kitchen, a community classroom, an elders’ teaching space, and a medicines lab.

Throughout our time at the school and our various conversations about program structures and curricula, one theme kept emerging as the driving force behind why they do what they do: identity. Because of the legacy of residential schools and the outlawing of Indigenous people’s languages, the nehiyaw language—an integral component of Cree identity—was forced to “skip” a generation. St. Frances School is playing a role in rightfully restoring the language to the Cree people. According to the superintendent with whom we spoke, “We’re part of the hurt, and we need to be part of the healing.” The superintendent believes that restoring educational sovereignty is an important aspect of reconciliation between First Nations peoples and settlers, and he can se a day when the Saskatoon board relinquishes control of the school, allowing the tribal leaders and parents to take the helm. When asked about what it will take to get there, the school leaders articulated a balanced approach that involves multiple ways of nurturing their students; loving them and holding them close is an important component of this, but it is successful only when coupled with the willingness to raise the bar, fill in the gaps, and hold them accountable. To borrow some language from the social psychological literature, at St. Frances School, students experience the growth that they do not just because who they are (“identity”) is acknowledged and celebrated, but also because who they have yet to become (“future possible selves”) is at the forefront of the administration’s decision-making.

Today, over brunch, we continued to learn about the structure and initiatives of the largest school division in Saskatchewan, including global education programming. Although we were originally supposed to meet with a panel including representatives from the Saskatoon Public Schools, some unforeseen circumstances resulted in a more intimate meeting with just Rob Norris, the province’s former Education Minister. Rob has had a really interesting career which includes time as Coordinator of Global Relations within the senior administration of the University of Saskatchewan; as a member of the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly; as Minister of Advanced Education, Employment, Labour, Immigration, and Innovation; as the Legislative Secretary for First Nations and Metis Peoples; and as the Senior Government Relations Officer for Canada’s synchrotron.

Because of his rich and varied experiences, our conversation with Rob was able to veer off onto interesting tangents beyond the realm of education. He talked about reconciliation as both an intellectual pursuit as well as one that is extremely personal for many. He shared stories from Saskatchewan’s past (i.e. the relationship between Chief Whitecap and Gerald Willoughby during the Métis Rebellion, international work in the sciences revolving around Ottawa’s synchrotron) and highlighted the importance of drawing on our past to provide us guidance about how to best proceed moving forward in the the present. One particular lesson he shared with us that he felt was important to us and to our work as citizen diplomats was that we must make sure we’re seen doing the good work we are doing. We shouldn’t assume people inherently understand the nature of our work; diplomacy comes with strategic communications. He also talked about the way the swing of the pendulum (educationally, politically, socially, etc.) brings fiscal prudence into greater focus. He is deeply concerned that what we often think is progress is really just fiscal policy, and as fiscal policy changes, things begin to fracture. In those moments, we realize that a decade has gone by in which we have missed opportunities for real progress. These lessons may seem a bit more abstract than those we have learned from the programs and policies we have investigated in the schools we visited, but they are nonetheless practical as we begin to ponder how to take the lessons we learned in Canada back to our home communities, leveraging our experiences abroad for greater student impact at home.

Yesterday, we traveled back to Toronto so that we could reconnect and debrief with members of the US Embassy and Consulate, as well as with cohort members who had completed their regional site visit in Quebec City.

I was part of a group assigned to speak with the Embassy and Consulate representatives about the structure of Canada’s educational system across provinces. We found that the provincial educational system had a number of strengths. Local control allows districts more flexibility, allowing them to customize their educational offerings to the unique needs, interests, and identities of their particular students. Along these lines, lack of a centralized curriculum allows teachers more freedom in planning and allows students from marginalized communities to learn in their native languages. The provincial system also allows them to better meet challenges particular to their region and capitalize on opportunities particular to their region; one example we saw of this was how the Toronto and Saskatoon school boards had utilized outdoor education as a means of Indigenous learning and ways of knowing.

The provincial system, however, lends itself to some particular challenges. This system, at times, creates exclusionary practices within Canada. For example, after high school, the majority of Quebecois students attend College d’Enseignement General et Professional (CEGEP), which is similar to what we think of in the states as vocational school, and which is meant to act as a bridge between high school and university. Because CEGEP is unique to Quebec, students from other provinces are often excluded from attending university in Quebec, where students who have attended CEGEP have a leg up on the competition and where universities have come to expect completion of CEGEP among its applicants. Exclusionary practices are also evident in Quebec in the elementary years, when students’ eligibility to attend a French-speaking school is contingent on having a native French-speaking parent; vice versa, admission to an English-speaking school is contingent on having a native English-speaking parent. (This was particularly surprising given the high percentage of newcomers in Canada). We were pleased to learn that school funding was not tied to an area’s property taxes (which creates so much funding disparity in the US), but Canada’s per-pupil funding also has challenges; schools with fewer students have fewer resources available despite the possibility of greater challenges to overcome, especially in regard to rural schools and schools with a higher percentage of language learners. A centralized/federal point of funding might be able to balance some of these inequities in terms of access to funding. Leaving decisions about curricula in the hands of the provinces also means there’s little accountability in certain regards; for example, although the country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission (see Tuesday, June 7 blog post) articulated a number of calls to action specific to education, we saw great disparity in how provinces chose to address (or, in some cases, ignore) these.

There’s much we can learn from the Canadian education system. One theme that stood out to our group was the benefit of a community-based focus within a school. Community-based learning allows for all students to see themselves in their school and in the curriculum, which in turn both allows them to feel valued and to take ownership of their learning. Thinking back to our global education training in the year leading up to the international field experience, this hearkened back to the idea of “glocalization,” in which issues of global significance find local resonance.

Another theme that stood out to me, in particular, was Canadian schools’ approach to inquiry-based learning. Going into this experience, I had the following guiding question: How is inquiry-based learning enacted in Canadian elementary schools? Our Fulbright leaders told us that it’s permissible and quite common for our research focus to shift away from our original guiding question and to land somewhere else during the international field experience. I certainly saw an amazing example of inquiry-based learning in the kindergarten classroom at Oodenawi (see Wednesday, June 8), but beyond that, as you’ve likely gathered upon reading the blog, the focus of our exploration organically shifted to the work around reconciliation for First Nations Canadians. I initially thought this path would force me to change my research question, but seeing how this reconciliation work is manifesting itself in the schools in Saskatchewan and in Ontario, I’m realizing just how compatible inquiry-based learning and reconciliation are with one another. So much of the reconciliation work being done is about reclaiming aspects of culture that were stripped away from Indigenous people and were almost lost. The schools that are most committed to this important work aren’t just accessing Indigenous Knowledge but also Indigenous Ways of Knowing. This was evident at Oodenawi, at the Forest Valley Outdoor Education Center, and especially at St. Frances Cree Bilingual School. Reclamation of a culture can’t happen by simply learning about that culture, but must include immersion within cultural practices, inclusive of pedagogical practices. Similarly, true inquiry-based learning doesn’t just happen by learning about something in which students are interested, but must allow students the freedom to learn in ways that are unique to their strengths, areas of opportunity, cultural identities, etc.

After the representatives from the US Embassy and Consulate left, our session took an emotional turn as our cohort was given the time and space to reflect on what this experience meant to all of us. We talked about how honored we felt to participate in this experience, especially when we were led into something so intimate as the grounding ceremony in Saskatoon. We talked about the importance of getting uncomfortable and being willing to dwell in those spaces in order to experience growth. We talked about our connection to one another and how in awe of one another we all are (seriously, these people have the biggest brains AND the biggest hearts!) I am so grateful to have been given this opportunity, and I am forever changed because of it. Of course, now the important and difficult work of bringing this change to my own classroom and my students begins!