Search results

The purpose of this paper is to present a study of the transformation of First Nations’ health governance, describing the development of partnerships between First Nations and provincial and federal governments for co-creating solutions to address First Nations’ health inequities in British Columbia (BC). The paper frames this transformation in the context of a Canada-wide reconciliation initiative stimulated by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

This qualitative case study was a joint initiative between Simon Fraser University and the BC First Nations Health Authority (FNHA), involving interviews with senior leaders within the BC health system, FNHA and First Nations communities. In addition, a policy roundtable was held in February 2015 which gathered 60 participants for further dialogue on the process.

Key themes included: partnership and relationships, governance and reciprocal accountability, First Nations perspectives on health and wellness, and quality and cultural safety. Findings indicate that significant transformational changes have happened in the relationship between First Nations and the mainstream health system. The creation of the FNHA has led to more representation for First Nations people at all levels of governance and health service planning, which will ultimately lead to more culturally safe health services that incorporate a First Nations perspective of wellness.

The transformation of First Nations health governance in BC can serve as an example in other indigenous health settings both within Canada and internationally.

This paper describes a transformative health governance process in First Nations communities that is an historical first in Canada.

This essay engages with scholarship on history as a discipline, curriculum documents and academic and public commentary on the teaching of history in Australian, British and Canadian secondary contexts to better understand the influence of the tension between political pressure and disciplinary practice that drives the history wars in settler-colonial nations, how this plays out in secondary history classrooms and the ramifications this may have on students' democratic dispositions.

This article aims to compare secondary history curricula and pedagogies in Australia, Britain and Canada to better articulate and conceptualise the influence of the “history wars” over the teaching of national histories upon the intended and enacted curriculum and how this contributes to the formation of democratic dispositions within students. A conceptual model, drawing on the curriculum assessment of Porter (2006) and Gross and Terra's definition of “difficult pasts” has been developed and used as the basis for this comparison. This model highlights the competing influences of political pressure upon curriculum creation and disciplinary change shaping pedagogy, and the impact these forces may have upon students' experience.

The debate around what content students learn, and why, is fraught because it is a conversation about what each nation values and how they construct their own national identity(ies). This is particularly timely when the democratic self-identification of many nations is being challenged. The seditious conspiracy to storm the US Capitol on 6 January 2021, Orban's “illiberal democracy” in Hungary and the neo-Nazis in Melbourne, Australia are examples of the rise of anti-democratic sentiment globally. Thus, new consideration of how we teach national histories and the impact this has on the formation of democratic dispositions and skills is pressing.

The new articulation of a conceptual model for the impact of the history wars on education is an innovative synthesis of wide-ranging research on: the impacts of neoliberalism and cultural restorationism upon the development of intended curriculum; discipline-informed inquiry pedagogies used to enact the curriculum; and the teaching of national narratives as a political act. This comprehensive comparison of the ways in which history education in settler-colonial nations has developed over time provides new insight into the common elements of national history education, and the role this education can play in developing democratic dispositions.