Indian Affairs Minister Strahl calls Professor Randy Lundy’s comparison of cutting funding to First Nations University to assimilation policy “ridiculous”. This is the remark of someone at a loss for anything substantive to say in rebuttal.
Professor Lundy’s point is that the alternative to a First Nation university institution is “assimilation”, or perhaps more properly “integration”, into the mainstream institutions. It seems that this has the same failed end goal as residential schools: “assimilation.”
The “mainstream” universities, even those making the most sincere efforts to do really good things in this area – and they must be gratefully acknowledged – are hard pressed to deliver on meaningful results, or to create an inviting environment for Aboriginal students. Indeed, earlier this week the UofR held a consultation discussion on making the university more inviting to Aboriginal students. Students themselves said that the curriculum is empty of meaningful content with respect to Aboriginal peoples, and that it does not create a good place for learning for Aboriginal students. This is not for want of expressions of intent and action on the part of the UofR, which has, for example, created an Aboriginal Student Centre and organizes various events and activities. But that is only part of the overall university environment; the classroom, cultural compenents, genuine respect for students, and real inclusion are important.
Recent studies document the failure of the “mainstream” post-secondary education system for Aboriginal students, not to mention the dismal performance of the K-12 system, both on and off reserve.
Returning to Professor Lundy’s remarks, it should be noted that an even more widespread practice than residential schools in the 1960s was “integration”, which saw the closing of on-reserve day schools and widespread bussing of First Nations students to public (and separate) schools. The well-documented experience of students subjected to this system speaks to the one-sided character of “integration” (i.e. assimilation), similar to the problems that the UofR describes encountering today. The federal government admitted the failure of the integration experiment, and adopted the “Indian Control of Indian Education” policy.
That policy has had its growing pains, and mixed success. On many reserves, the lack of resources and other issues make it difficult to provide students with a good education. There are also communities where the results shine and put the “mainstream” system to shame. There is a need to provide more resources, to evaluate results, make improvements more aggressively, adopt best practices and provide meaningful and effective content to the phrase “Indian Control of Education”.
This is as true for post-secondary education as for K-12 education. Many of the problems faced by reserve schools have been reproduced in the FNUniv, particularly in the past five years: politicized governance, poor management, squandering of limited resources, and diversion of inadequate resources from one purpose to another to meet urgent needs. These practices must be radically reformed. The Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Chiefs in Assembly, the interim Board of Governors, and interim Chief Operating Officer, have shown that they recognize this. Institutional practices must be professionalized.
But the solution is not to close the institution and return to the failed policies of assimilation which have characterized the Indian Department throughout its history.
Minister Strahl appears not be aware of the long history of deadly folly within his Department of Indian Affairs, and as George Santayana said, “those who cannot remember the past are doomed to repeat it.”
Read Full Post »
