Search results

The authors describe an original unit plan that draws from local and national concerns for truthful history education about the history of racial violence in the United States. The unit plan contextualizes one impetus for truth and reconciliation in a community with a history of anti-Black violence.

The participants partnered with the Equal Justice Initiative to pilot the unit in their district’s new African American History course. The unit drew on historical research and cultural memory to situate local history within a broader context of racism and violence.

The teachers identified eight goals for the unit so that students could understand racialized violence, acknowledge racism as the lived experience of many of their students, and participate in a collaborative learning environment with productive discussions. Speaking from their own experiences with racism, and creating opportunities for students to do the same, the teachers aided the community in voicing long-silenced memories.

Besides bridging some of the gaps between local, regional, and national histories, more research is needed to further examine historical trauma and its implications for both the past and present, in order to amplify and humanize experiences of racism. Additional research is a critical step in developing more thoughtful, empathic and holistic discussions of history and racism at the local level.

In the wake of the recent past, the authors have learned that teaching about the history of racial violence can be enhanced and empowered by reference to relevant current events. The resurgence of racially charged language and violence over the past few years makes this goal more urgent than ever. This unit gives practical guidance to teachers who face this challenge.

The sociopolitical reality of historical trauma and racism must be confronted, and proximity to key events is important in conveying the urgency of racial violence and the need for history education that addresses it. Teachers are making difficult decisions about their options for teaching about race, and they are understandably concerned about any perceived missteps. Nonetheless, inclusive, truthful history education is an appropriate and essential response to narratives of exclusion and silence as the authors help students to develop deliberative skills concerning difficult topics such as racial violence. Teachers and students, together, can do the crucial work of remembering.

The stripping away of narrative agency, identity and history can cover up stories about the stripping away of life and dignity. In the unit plan, the authors recognize truth and reconciliation—especially in the education of people who have relatively little exposure to topics of race and racism—as elemental to a restorative stance against racism.

In 2019, the Kaurna Nation and traditional custodians of the Adelaide plains in South Australia, challenged the City of Holdfast Bay to walk alongside them to create an exhibition exploring the true history of South Australia’s colonisation. This collaboration ultimately became the award-winning exhibition ‘Tiati Wangkanthi Kumangka’ (Truth-Telling Together). This project was envisioned, led, and implemented by the Kaurna Nation at the Bay Discovery Centre in South Australia. Ultimately, ‘Tiati’ became more than just another exhibition. It became a pathway to healing and possibility for both the Kaurna Nation and the City of Holdfast Bay. When considering indigenisation of museum spaces, ‘Tiati’ demonstrates how smaller museums and/or local government can play a pivotal role in reshaping the traditional narrative of colonialism in Australia’s museums, with the voice of First Nations people at the forefront.

No matter how dominant a worldview is, there are always other ways of interpreting the world. (Littlebear, 2000, p. 79)

No matter how dominant a worldview is, there are always other ways of interpreting the world. (Littlebear, 2000, p. 79)

These words resonated with me when I first started my career in higher education in Canada 15 years after being a school teacher for much of my young adult life in México. Back then, in Mexico, I took for granted the way in which I lived my values. While there were instances and contexts where those values were challenged, it was not until I moved to Canada that I started redefining and reshaping my worldview, negotiating what was negotiable within me, and fighting to maintain my position in what was not negotiable. I am still learning to navigate the world of postsecondary education where I have learned that, as Siksika Elder Leroy Littlebear (2000) observes, “No one has a pure worldview that is 100 percent Indigenous or Eurocentric; rather, everyone has an integrated mind, a fluxing and ambidextrous consciousness” (p. 85). How then, do I show all of who I am when my position toward Indigenous history, culture, language, and values is informed by my own upbringing and experience and consequently might be perceived as “biased”?

This auto-ethnographic chapter addresses this question by presenting a case study where I reflect on Littlebear's (2000) observations on the fluidity of worldviews and the development of an “ambidextrous consciousness,” and how those principles have allowed me the space to be my authentic self despite the different ontological and axiological orientations I have encountered my work in higher education.

Embedded in built environment discourse, this chapter examines the traditional knowledge and resilience of the Ngadjuri Nation Peoples through an Elder’s narrative of reconciliation as well as resistance in their subsisting colonial settlement. Removed from ‘Country’ in the 1840s, Ngadjuri Aboriginal community endured colonial industries of open-cut copper mining and large-scale pastoralism as irreparable destruction to their cultural landscapes. European processes in the resources sectors reshaped natural topographies, deconstructing Ngadjuri Songlines and Ancestral Dreaming stories. Burra’s colonial stone buildings of settlement, painstakingly cut and composed from materials of the surrounding ecological terrain, prompted new narratives from Ngadjuri as a way of alleviating scars. Broadly speaking, this chapter aims to show how cultural heritage of two communities is provocatively and conceptually unpacked through the vernacular buildings’ cross-cultural foundations. That is, an under-reported narrative was unwittingly bestowed on the colonial-built forms with hidden meanings that deserve further investigation. This chapter offers a counternarrative to colonial histories revealing Ngadjuri’s methods for reconnecting to Country and culture after generations of disempowerment. It explores how within the materiality of colonial structures, the Ngadjuri entwined their remediated storylines – revealing a data curation that had avoided popular discourse in the galleries, libraries, archives, and museums [GLAM] sector representation. This example implies there are bodies of knowledge in built cultural heritage hidden elsewhere on our Aboriginal Nations and the challenges it presents GLAM in their Indigenisation processes.

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.

To ensure that students are well prepared to successfully analyze this case, they should be familiar with the following concepts, theories and principles:

▪ Stakeholder theory

▪ Concept of duty to consult and accommodate

▪ Concept of social license to operate (SLO)

▪ Concept of indigenous economic self-determination

▪ Indigenous world view

▪ Seventh generation principle

▪ Cree principles

▪ Dene principles

The information provided in this case was gathered by the authors through face-to-face interviews, phone interviews, e-mail exchanges and secondary research. Meadow Lake Tribal Council (MLTC) separates business operations from council operations through use of corporate entities (as shown in Exhibit 1 of the case). Meadow Lake Tribal Council II (MLTCII) is the corporate entity that oversees two companies referenced in the case: Mistik Management and NorSask Forest Products LP. Interviews were conducted with the General Manager at Mistik Management, Certification Coordinator at Mistik Management, Chief of Buffalo River Dene Nation, Chief of Waterhen Lake First Nation, MLTC Vice-Chief, Board Member and Advisor to MLTCII, President and CEO of MLTCII, MLTCII Business Development Consultant and a former consultant with MLTC, NorSask Forest Products and Mistik Management.

Mistik Management Ltd., a forestry management company co-owned by the nine First Nations of MLTC, was a leader in economic reconciliation in 2022. However, the company had dealt with significant challenges not long after it was established in 1989. Richard Gladue, former Chief of the one of MLTCs Member First Nations and a leader in economic development at MLTC, had been actively involved in establishing the organization. Gladue loved the life and vitality of the boreal forest in the Meadow Lake region and felt a sense of responsibility to take care of the forest and the land for generations to come. This responsibility was balanced with the acknowledgement that the forest also provided vast economic development, employment and wealth generation opportunities for MLTC and its Member First Nations.

In the early 1990s, MLTC and Mistik Management dealt with a year-long blockade by a group of protesters that included members of Canoe Lake Cree First Nation, one of the Member First Nations of MLTC. They had not been consulted on Mistik’s processes and policies, and the company’s clear-cut logging had affected their ability to continue their traditional way of life and practices on the land. After the incident, Mistik Management moved more quickly to invest in a co-management process that they were still refining and using in 2022 when consulting with Indigenous groups and communities.

A natural resource economy brings together Indigenous peoples, industry and government. In this case, students will learn about the important role that relationships play and how decisions are made when balancing complex legal, environmental and economic interests. Students will learn about the history of duty to consult and accommodate in Canada; conduct a stakeholder analysis and reflect on how decisions affect stakeholder interests; and make recommendations for meaningful Indigenous engagement strategies using the concept of social license and indigenous principles.

This case is suitable for use in undergraduate courses on indigenous business, ethical decision-making, public policy and/or natural resource development. There may also be applications in other fields of study, including anthropology, economics and political science.

If the case is used in an indigenous business course, it would be best positioned in the last third of the class, after topics such as duty to consult and accommodate, social license and meaningful engagement with indigenous communities have been covered. If used in an ethical decision-making course, it would be best used when discussing stakeholder theory and engaging in stakeholder analysis. If used in a public policy course, the case could be used to start a discussion around the duty to consult and accommodate indigenous communities in Canada. If used in a natural resource development course, the case would be best used as an example of indigenous economic development.

This study investigated a new attributional phenomenon in a brand scandal setting in which consumers tend to blame the top management of a brand, even though it was the frontline parties that caused the scandal. The authors termed this phenomenon upward blame attribution (UBA), shedding light on whether consumers in a host country indicate a higher UBA for a multinational (vs domestic) brand scandal, which in turn reinforces their revenge and impairs their reconciliation reactions, and whether these effects are contingent on consumer animosity.

Two experimental studies were conducted with real and fictitious brand/product and country stimuli with 1,399 Chinese participants.

Both studies verified UBA and found that Chinese consumers' UBA is higher for multinational (vs domestic) brand scandals, which drives their stronger desire for revenge and weaker desire for reconciliation. Moreover, consumers with high (vs low) animosity toward a multinational brand's home country reported a higher UBA for the multinational (vs domestic) brand scandal, which in turn reinforces their desire for revenge and impairs their desire for reconciliation.

The study provides new insights into host-country consumers' more severe UBA and responses toward multinational versus domestic brand scandals and the amplifying role of consumer animosity in these processes. It also has implications for mitigating host-country consumers' UBA and negative responses to multinational brand scandals.

This study contributes to the blame attribution literature by verifying consumers' UBA and the country-of-origin (COO) literature by revealing host-country consumers' higher UBA, stronger revenge desire and weaker reconcile desire toward multinational (vs domestic) brand scandals. It extends the knowledge regarding consumers' blame attributions toward the top management of a multinational (vs domestic) brand in scandals and the impact of such attributions.

In this book chapter, I focus on the epistemological, ontological and axiological practice traditions that help to reveal the taken-for-granted assumptions about the management of trust funds in First Nation communities. Informing this chapter is a qualitative research study involving 11 First Nation community members in Canada who were interviewed. Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing and the theory of practice architectures are used to identify the cultural discursive, material-economic and social-political arrangements that enable and/or constrain practice. The findings reveal that Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing collide adversely with trust account decision making due to the duties and obligations guiding trust settlement agreements. The ways in which trust account practices can be transformed to ensure greater alignment with Indigenous ways of knowing, being and doing are outlined.

This chapter explores the dual, contentions spaces of consciousness the Rwandan diaspora communities navigate. First of which was created through the stories of trauma and displacement since the Rwandan genocide and is influenced by the current Rwandan government's control over narratives of identities and remembrance both socially and politically. The second originated from the younger generations' attempt to assimilate to the only country they have never lived in and personally known. In this second space, the younger generations were forced, consciously or unconsciously, to choose between their communities' attachment to the past or creating a new path or future. Most importantly, being in diaspora means accepting that the different generations will often remain at the periphery of the new country, like outsiders looking inward. This phenomenon of social exclusion is a result of different factors, such as social categorisation, collective trauma and the narratives of otherness, which shape the different generations' identity shifts and sense of belonging. Using a phenomenological research method, this study analysed how one event, the 1994 Rwandan genocide, changed the meaning of diaspora consciousness and divided the communities into social categories such as ‘victims’ and ‘perpetrators’. Using the experiences of Rwandan American diaspora communities, I explored the impact of the labels of ‘victim’ and ‘perpetrator’ and how they have not only created specific narratives around remembrance and accountability but also crystallised the normative ideas of who was harmed and who was responsible for inflicting that harm. This chapter analysed the Rwandan communities' social development and assimilation, their understanding of their pasts and their members' social and political engagements in addressing their roles in their communities and nations.