UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

Jurisdiction, Resources, and Accountability in Basic Education Programs:

An Analysis of the Issues, Challenges and Current Realities facing

First Nations Students in Alberta

By

Maurice Allen Manyfingers

A DISSERTATION

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES IN

PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE

DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

GRADUATE DIVISION OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH

CALGARY, ALBERTA

APRIL 2010
 UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY

FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES

The undersigned certify that they have read, and recommended to the Graduate

Division of Educational Research for acceptance, a thesis entitled “Jurisdiction,

Resources, and Accountability in Basic Education Programs: An Analysis of the

Issues, Challenges, and Current Realities facing First Nations Studies in Alberta”

submitted by Maurice Allen Manyfingers in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

__________________________________
Supervisor, Dr. John W. Friesen
Graduate Division of Educational Research

__________________________________
Dr. Anthony Marini
Graduate Division of Educational Research

__________________________________
Dr. J. Tim Goddard
Graduate Division of Educational Research

__________________________________
Dr. James S. Frideres
Department of Sociology
__________________________________
External Examiner, Dr. Peter J. Heffernan
University of Lethbridge
ancator with experience working in senior leadership positions for the
government of Canada, Alberta Education, and first Nations, the researcher is
genuinely committed to finding long-term solutions that support student success,
achievement, and quality education programs for all first Nations students in
Canada.
In Alberta, first Nations student performance lags far behind all other students in
areas such as: provincial achievement tests, high school completion rates, and
acceptance to post-secondary programs.

In addressing the current educational circumstance, this thesis will examine three
areas: 1) Jurisdiction – what government strategies and actions are needed to fix
First Nations education in Canada? 2) Resources – Is there adequate funding
support for these existing programs? 3) Accountability – What are the necessary
mechanisms needed to ensure accountability in First Nations education
programs?
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables iii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1

Current Circumstances 1

Brief History of Native Education in Canada ..............................................2

The Canadian Context 5

The Alberta Context 5

Purpose .........................................................................................................7

Jurisdiction ................................................................................................... 8

Fiduciary Responsibility to the First Nations of Canada ........................... 9

Education Services Delivery to First Nations ............................................10

Existing National Aboriginal Education Framework Agreements.............11

Federal Funding of First Nations Education Programs............................. 12

Alberta Education Funding.........................................................................14

Comparing Federal and Provincial First Nation Education Funding.........15

Lack of 2nd and 3rd Level Support in First Nations Education Programs..16

Reporting of First Nations Student School Performance and Achiement..17

First Nations Band Operated Schools in Alberta....................................... 18

First Nations Student Participation and Achievement on PAT Exams..... 19

First Nations Student Achievement on Provincial Exams......................... 20

i
 Current Cross-Ministry Education Initiatives in Alberta............................20

FNMI Education Policy Framework...........................................................21

The Alberta Commission on Learning (ACOL).........................................22

Conclusion...................................................................................................23

Chapter 2: RESEARCH METHOD 24

Overview and Approach 24

Interviews................................................................................................... 25

Interview Participants and Biographies 26

List of Questions..........................................................................................28

Format, Transcription, and Validity............................................................29

Personal Epistemological Perspectives.......................................................29

Trust.............................................................................................................30

Assumptions................................................................................................31

Limitations of the Research........................................................................32

Ethical Considerations................................................................................32

CHAPTER 3: BACKGROUND TO LITERATURE REVIEW.....................33

40
Recent National First Nations Education Policy 34

Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable.....................................................34

The Canadian Council of Learning.............................................................34

The Conservative Agenda – Reforming First Nations Education..............35

Literature Review........................................................................................36

ii
Indian Control of Indian Education............................................................ 36

Indian Self-Government and Aboriginal Education in Canada..................36

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP)...................................38

2000 & 2004 Auditor-General Reports on First Nations Education..........39

Transfer of Education Services from INAC to the First Nations...............40

Lack of Support for Band Operated Schools..............................................41

Leadership and Governance On Reserve Education Systems....................41

Absence of Teacher Quality Standards on Band Operated Schools..........42

Student Achievement & Performance Measurement in Band Schools..... 43

Recent Government Initiatives for First Nations Students in Alberta........44

Amiskwaciy Academy................................................................................44

Success for First Nations Students in British Columbia............................ 46

Education Enhancement Agreements in B.C............................................. 46

First Nations Education Steering Committee (FNESC).............................47

First Nation Student Achievement Data Collection in B.C........................48

Other B.C. First Nations Education Initiatives...........................................49

Developments in First Nations Post Secondary Education in Canada.......49

The University of British Columbia’s Aboriginal Strategic Plan..............50

The University of Calgary...........................................................................51

Norquest College – A Public Institution First Nations Success Story.......52

Teacher Training Programs in Western Canada – Success Stories...........52

iii
 Apprenticeship Programs in Alberta...........................................................53

First Nations University of Canada (FNUC)..............................................54

FNMI Education Policy Framework Implementation in Alberta...............56

FNMI Student Funding to Provincial School Boards In Alberta...............57

Input Model vs. Output Model in First Nations Education........................58

Northland School Division..........................................................................58

Chapter 4: DISCUSSION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA 60

Question 1 60

Question 2 62

Question 3 65

Question 4 67

Question 5 69

Question 6....................................................................................................71

An Analysis and Overview of Current Initiatives in F.N. Education........ 73

Chapter 5: JURISDICTION, RESOURCES AND ACCOUNTABILITY

IN FIRST NATIONS EDUCATION PROGRAMS.......................................74

Jurisdiction..................................................................................................74

Formalized Relationships of First Nations and Provincial Governments.75

Resources and Funding...............................................................................78

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Education Funding Methodology...79

iv
 The Need for Comparability and Cost Analysis: Canada and Alberta.....80

Accountability ..........................................................................................81

Accountability in First Nations (Band) Operated Schools.......................81

Financial Accountability...........................................................................82

Educational Accountability of First Nations (Band) Operated schools...83

A First Nations Education Authority Act.................................................83

Kainai Government Agreement................................................................84

Chapter 6: RECOMMENDATIONS 85

Chapter 7: CONCLUSIONS 89

Concluding Remarks...The Last Word.....................................................91

References 93

Appendix A: Interviews with First Nations Education Experts 99

Appendix B: Conjoint Faculties Research Ethics Board 148

Appendix C: Certification of Institutional Ethics Review 149

Appendix D: Letter of Participation to Interview Participants 150

Appendix E: Consent Form 151

Appendix F: Aboriginal Enhancement Agreements in British Columbia......152

Appendix G: Memorandum of Understanding on First Nations Education

In Alberta.........................................................................................................154

v
 List of Tables

Table 1: Achievement and Participation of first Nations Students on

Alberta Provincial Achievement Tests (Page 20)
Table 2: Question 1 – What is the Current Status of First Nations, Métis
and Inuit Education in Canada/Alberta? (Page 61)
Table 3: Question 2 – Have there been points of progress in First Nations,
Métis and Inuit Education in Canada (Page 64)
Table 4: Question 3 – What is the role of the federal and provincial
government in improving educational outcomes for First Nations
students? (Page 66)
Table 5: Question 4 – What is the role of provincial school boards and
other stakeholders in ensuring accountability in education programs for
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students? (Page 68)
Table 6: Question 5 – Is there adequate funding for First Nations
education programs? (Page 70)
Table 7: Question 6 – How do we close the educational gap between First
Nations and non-First Nations students? (Page 72)

vi
 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study marks the end of a very long journey that would not be possible
without the teachings, encouragement, love, wisdom and friendship of a variety
of individuals. To all of them I offer my profound gratitude. First, I would like
to thank specifically Dr. John W. Friesen, my rock and dissertation advisor who
knew when to apply the pressure, when to provide the necessary support, and for
not giving up on me.

I would also like to thank three notable supervisors and extraordinary individuals.
Thank you, Dr. J. Tim Goddard, Dr. Anthony Marini, and Dr. James S. Frideres.
I would also like to thank Sylvia Parks, Assistant Graduate Coordinator of the
Graduate Division of Educational Research, for your support and
encouragement.

I would also like to thank my friends, colleagues and experts who agreed to give
me their valuable time and consented to do interviews: Dr. John Brosseau, Del
Dahl, Dr. Colin Kelly, Donna Crowshoe, Terry Fortin, Jacquie Skytt, Don Zech,
Mike Davenport, Curtiss Pilling, and Brian Wildcat. First Nations education in
Alberta is in good hands with this group of education leaders. I would also like to
thank some of my friends and mentors who always made the time to talk: Al
Rollins, Frank Horvath, Dr. Jane Martin, the late Mat Hanrahan, Rick Morrow,
Michael Walter, Maria David-Evans, the Honorable Gene Zwozdesky, Dr.
Abinash Mishra, Michel Brazeau, Debra Srayko, Chief Clarence Louie, and
Robert Steele.

I would also like to acknowledge some of my friends and colleagues on the Blood
Tribe: Henry Big Throat, Joyce First Rider, Richard Fox Jr., Annette Bruised

vii
Head, Chris Coleman, Clarice Beebe, Jacinta Fox, Leo Fox, Marie Shade, Marvin
Fox, Linda Weasel Head, and Treffrey Deerfoot. Thank you for your
unconditional support and friendship.

Last, I would also like to thank my two best friends. Thanks to my wonder wife
Kelly Jo for you love, understanding, and patience while I went through this
experience. You have always made been the best part of my day. Finally, to Dr.
Helen Manyfingers, the foundation of my character and success comes from my
mom; I am truly the luckiest son on the face of the earth.

Thank you. You all mean more than more than you will ever know.

viii
 Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Current Circumstances

“Indian and Northern Affairs Canada does not know whether the results
achieved for First Nations students are in line with the resources provided by the
department. The budget provided for this program is over $1 billion annually.
We remain concerned that a significant education gap exists between First
Nations people living on reserves and the Canadian population as a whole and
that the time estimated to close the gap has increased from 27 to 28 years.”

Auditor-General of Canada (2000)

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
Chapter 4 (p.43-44)

Canadian culture places a great emphasis on the value of education. Education is

generally seen as essential to success; young people who do not show academic
potential are usually regarded as early failures (Frideres, 2005, p. 7). The current
education programs and systems offered to First Nations students are failing
them, compared to other Canadian. If First Nations are to participate
meaningfully in the Canadian economy and society, it is critical and all parties,
first Nations governments and education authorities, provincial and federal
governments, school boards, parents, and other stakeholders work together
towards achieving education improvement for First Nations students.

The goal of this thesis is to provide some new insights to the question “Why are
current education programs and systems offered to First Nations students in
Canada and Alberta failing them?”

The objective of this dissertation examines the experiences of First Nations

education practitioners, some who are Native and some of whom are non-Native.

1
This research is similar to other bodies of research such as cultural studies, gender
studies and feminism, in that these groups are somehow disadvantaged, unequal
or deemed to be not as good as the dominant group.

Brief History of Native Education in Canada

Early Indian education in Canada in the 1800’s was largely based on the fear that
the First Nations, as “savage” races, could explode with violence if not handled
delicately. Canada has an imperialist ideology that has traditionally held that the
Indian would inevitably vanish as a distinct race in the face of the white man’s
“superior” civilization; it was therefore Canada’s duty to remake them into loyal
subjects of the Crown (Stanley, 1936, p. 364).

Alexander Morris, (Stonechild & Waiser, 1997, p.7) summarized early Canadian
Indian education policy in his 1880 book on the treaties. “Let us have
Christianity and civilization to leaven the mass of heathenism and paganism
among Indian tribes,” he invoked. “Let us have a wise and paternal
Government…doing its utmost to elevate the Indian population, who have been
cast in our care” For over 100 years (1870 – 1970), the Government of Canada
implemented various policies on First Nations such as mission and residential
schools with the agenda of colonizing the Indians towards the end goal of
assimilation into the dominant culture.

The first major analysis of Canadian Aboriginal education in the 20th century was
H.B. Hawthorne’s research and policy study, Survey of the Contemporary Indians of
Canada (Canada 1966, 1967). This study drew attention to the educational failures
of Aboriginal people in Canada in areas such as high school dropout rates, the
lack of Indian university and college graduates, illiteracy rates, and the need to
provide more relevant and meaningful education systems for Indian students.

2
In 1969, the Minister of the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern
Development, the Hon. Jean Chretien released what is commonly referred to as
the White Paper and it was the latest innovation regarding Indian policy. Part of
the policy was to remove Aboriginal children from federally run schools and
integrate them with all other students in provincial schools. The underlying
premise on which the new plan was based was clearly assimilation, not integration
(Friesen and Friesen, 2002, p. 13).

In 1970 in British Columbia, members of the Upper Nicola Band were

dissatisfied that the neighbouring public school did not provide the necessary
educational supports or relevant curriculum to assist their children. It was this
dissatisfaction with the provincial school system that led the Upper Nicola Band
to seek local control. University of British Columbia’s Director of First Nations
House of Learning, Verna Kirkness, expressed that the Indian control policy
placed the responsibility of Indian education where it rightfully belonged – with
the Indian people (Kirkness and Bowman, 1992).

In 1972, the National Indian Brotherhood (now the Assembly of First Nations)
released an education position paper called Indian Control of Indian Education
that recommended radical changes to make educations relevant to the philosophy
and needs of First Nations and argued that integration was not a one-way
process. The report identified two key principals: 1) parental responsibility and 2)
local control of education (National Indian Brotherhood, 1972). The
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development adopted a new policy
of Indian control of Indian education in 1973 that began the process of
devolution and giving limited control to First Nations bands.

The treatment of First Nations children with head-lice who were attending
provincial schools, forced the James Smith First Nation in Saskatchewan to pull

3
out all its students attending the provincial school board of Kinistino. With the
assistance and support of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations
(FSIN), the first band-controlled school in Canada was established on the James
Smith Reserve in 1973 (Goddard, 1997). The James Smith First Nation School
became the model for other Band-controlled systems in western Canada.

In the late 1980’s, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada accelerated the process of
devolution and delegated authority of education programs and services to the
First Nations. In response, most First Nations in Alberta incorporated as
societies under Provincial Societies Acts, establishing their own education
authorities to manage the operation and maintenance of the schools on their own
reserve communities.

Tradition and Education: Towards a Vision of Our Future (AFN, 1988) called for the
recognition of the right of First Nations to remain distinct. The Report of the
Royal Commission on Aboriginal People want two things from education: 1) “To
have schools support their children in learning skills they need to participate fully
in the economy”, and 2) “To have schools to help children develop as citizens of
Aboriginal nations with the knowledge of their languages and traditions
necessary” (RCAP, p. 3.5.1 1996).

In Alberta, the First Nations Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework was released,
accepted and implemented in 2002 by the Government of Alberta’s Ministry of
Learning. A specific area of concern was the need to increase attendance,
retention and graduation rates of Aboriginal students in Alberta. Statistics for the
2002-03 school year show that 75 percent of all Alberta students completed high
school within five years of entering grade 10. By contrast, 1996 Statistics Canada
census data indicated the Aboriginal high school graduation rate for First Nations

4
students was 15 percent less than those not reporting Aboriginal ancestry
(Alberta Education, 2002).

The development and implementation of this policy framework recognized the

specific needs of First Nations learners and acknowledged the importance of
Aboriginal history, language and culture in Alberta. The significance of the First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework was reiterated in 15
recommendations made by Alberta’s Commission on Learning in their report
released in October 2003. This government document was called Every Child
Learns, Every Child Succeeds (Alberta Commission on Learning, 2003).

The population of Aboriginal people is growing much faster that the non-
Aboriginal population – at a rate of almost 27% compared to 10% growth for the
overall population. According to the latest census data, 156,000 people in Alberta
identified themselves as Aboriginal. There are over 52,000 school-aged First
Nations children in Alberta. Looking ahead, the number of Aboriginal children is
expected to continue to increase primarily because the birth rate is 1.5 times the
birth rate for non-Aboriginal people (Statistics Canada Census Data, 2001).
Closing the education gap between First Nations students becomes an
increasingly urgent issue, given the rising population of this segment of the
Alberta population.

The Canadian Context

In Canada, there are 455 schools on reserve, 446 are under First Nations
management and 9 are under federal Government management (INAC, 2002,
p.2). The term federal school refers to a school still directly operated but
managed by First Nations, by the federal government on Indian reserves (Hall,
1992, p. 59).

5
In addition to instructional services, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
supports education infrastructure on reserves that includes: construction,
maintenance and operation of school buildings and facilities. In Canada, it is
estimated that 70,000 (61 percent) students attend schools on reserve, while
45,000 First Nations students attend schools off reserve (39 percent). It is
estimated that only 30 percent of the on-reserve First Nations population have
met the requirements for an Alberta High School diploma (Friesen and Friesen,
2002 p.12).

The Alberta Context

In Alberta, it is estimated that 25,000 first Nations students are enrolled in

elementary and secondary education programs from kindergarten to grade 12.
Forty percent (7,000 students approximately) reside on reserve and attend
provincial schools. Sixty percent (18,000 students approximately0 reside on-
reserve and attend 53 First Nations Band Operated schools. There is one on-
reserve school that remains under Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
administration of the Cold Lake First Nations Reserve.

In general, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada education funding for First
Nations students living on-reserve include provision for instructional services,
costs for on-reserve students attending provincial schools (tuition agreements)
and costs including financial support for student services such as transportation,
counseling, and special programs. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada funding
support of first Nations Education Authorities is contingent upon compliance
with Alberta Education’s provincial standards and processes in two areas:

1) Alberta Education Instructional Requirements – This requires all

accredited schools in Alberta to meet a basic provincial ministry
requirement of having a prescribed number of school days (190 student

6
 school days), hours of instruction in a school year (950 hours per year);
and

2) Alberta Education Teacher Development and Certification –

That requires all teachers working on-reserve must possess an Alberta
Education approved certification requirements of completing an Alberta
Teacher Preparation Program or an out-of-province equivalence.

Monitoring and ensuring that all 53 First Nations schools on-reserve are in
compliance with these provincial standards and processes are the work of the
First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch of Alberta Education. As the
former Director of FIRST NATIONS, METIS AND INUIT Services Branch,
this researcher is well aware of the current relationship between Alberta
Education and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. If Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada, Alberta Region is satisfied that the basic provincial standards are
met by the 43 Alberta First Nations Education Authorities, then transfer
payments are made from the federal government to the Alberta First Nations.

Jurisdiction

Sections 91 and 92 of the Constitution Act (1867) set out the distribution of
legislative powers to the federal parliament and the provincial legislatures. The
Government of Canada, through Section 91 of the Constitution Act has exclusive
legislative authority over several areas including matters relating to “Indians and
Lands Reserved for Indians”. Section 35(1) of the Constitution Act states “the
existing Aboriginal and Treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada are
recognized and affirmed” (Government of Canada, 1867).

The Constitution Act also sets out the various legislative heads of powers
distributed to provincial legislatures. Section 93 states “In and for each province,

7
the legislature may exclusively make laws in relation to education” (Government
of Canada, 1867). The Alberta School Act “affirms its commitment to one
publicly funded system of education in Alberta whose primary mandate is to
provide education programs to students and the preservation and continuation of
its publicly funded education through its two dimensions: the public schools and
the separate schools” (Alberta School Act, 2004).

Section 114 of the Indian Act authorizes the Government of Canada to enter into
agreements with the provincial governments concerning education for First
Nations children. Historically, arrangements are made with provincial and
territorial education authorities to integrate First Nations students into existing
school systems.

The current funding methodology of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is that
the federal government reimburses provincial and territorial school boards by
paying tuition on a per capita basis for elementary and secondary education for
First Nations students. Similarly, first Nations Education Authorities that deliver
education programs to its members on reserve also receive transfer payments
through various funding arrangements.

Fiduciary Responsibility to the First Nations of Canada

A fiduciary relationship can be characterized as a power imbalance where a

person or entity assumes power over the rights or interests of another. For
example, lawyers have this type of relationship with the clients they represent and
parents assume this responsibility with their children. Implied within this
relationship is that the person with power puts aside self-interest and acts in the
best interests of the beneficiary. In signing treaties with Canada’s Aboriginal
people, the government assumed obligations that included a fiduciary
responsibility to guarantee the promises the Crown made to the First Nations it

8
treated with The Supreme Court of Canada held in a series of court cases including
Sparrow, Simon, Guerin and Horseman that under the Indian Act, Canada is in a
fiduciary or trust like relationship with Indians and requires that Canada act
honorably and must consider what is in the best interest of the Indians as
beneficiaries.

This raises the jurisdictional issue of whether Section 93 of the Constitution Act
relating to provincial powers to enact education law conflicts with Section 91(24)
of the Canadian Constitution “Indians and Lands reserved for Indians”. It also
raises the broader issue of the fiduciary responsibilities that both the federal and
provincial governments have toward addressing the social, economical and
educational disparities facing First Nations.

It is important to remember that the Canadian courts have taken a hands-off

approach in delivering decision with regard to defining Aboriginal and Treaty
rights. Overall, Canadian courts have essentially advised governments to
negotiate, rather than litigate, existing Aboriginal and Treaty rights such as
education.

The Assembly of First Nations takes the position that education jurisdiction is
the responsibility of First Nations, under the principle of self-government.
However, the Assembly of First Nations also suggests that the federal and
provincial governments have an important role in establishing provincial
standards and processes and providing adequate funding support for all First
Nations students, regardless of residency.

Education Service Delivery to First Nations

While the Canadian Constitution states that “Indians and lands reserved for
Indians” is a federal responsibility, and there is no requirement for legislation or

9
statute with respect to the education of Indian children. There have been
numerous changes to the Indian Act since 1867 yet there has not been subsequent
federal legislation because education is a provincial issue. Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada receives its power through policy authority delegated from the
federal cabinet and program delivery delegated from the Treasury Board of
Canada. This authority creates obligations if Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
to provide education services to First Nations, some required and some
discretionary.

In operational terms, the federal cabinet has delegated authority to the Treasury
Board and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to provide education funding on
the basis of appropriation to First Nations Education Authorities to deliver
elementary and secondary programs for on reserve basic education. However,
First Nations programs and students located on-reserve are a federal
responsibility and need not comply with provincial legislation such as the Alberta
School Act.

The Alberta School Act defines “Indian” as meaning an Indian person as defined
by the Indian Act. First Nations Indian students attending provincial schools in
public and separate school boards are subject to all of the regulations under the
provincial School Act. With regard to who is responsible for First Nations
education, it is clear that neither the federal nor the provincial government is
prepared to “trespass” into the other’s jurisdiction. This is problematic because
of the uncertainty between the federal, provincial and local First Nations
governments, in determining who is accountable for monitoring of education
programs for First nations students. The current jurisdictional environment
promotes uncertainty in these areas:

10
 • Alberta and Canada seem to contradict each other by opposing
each other on this jurisdictional issue of First Nations education. Canada
cites constitutional arrangements that provide for education services to
the provinces as their responsibility. Alberta cites Section 91(24) of the
Constitution Act as the evidence of federal responsibility for “Indians and
Lands reserved for Indians”.

• Canada has been reluctant to pass legislation that would clarify its
roles and responsibilities relating to the First Nations of Canada. A failed
attempt was made in 2003 to implement a First Nations Governance Act
to provide legislation and regulation in program areas including
education, however, this legislation was scrapped in 2004.

• Typically, Canadian courts make decisions within the context of “rights”

and they have not clarified service or operational responsibilities relating
to federal or provincial delivery of services to First Nations.

• Issues surrounding the notion of self-government provide an opportunity

for First Nations to better define responsibilities in areas such as health,
child welfare and education.

• The Charter of Rights and Freedoms may influence federal/provincial

jurisdiction questions regarding First Nations education. First Nations
could challenge the provinces with unfair treatment in providing
education services.

The former Alberta Learning Minister Lyle Oberg’s position on First Nations
education in 2002 was that the federal government is ultimately responsible for

11
“Indians and Lands reserved for Indians” and that the provincial government
was reluctant to involve itself in this jurisdictional wrangling.

However, Alberta has extended services to the First Nations citizens who reside
within its boundaries with the implementation of the First Nations Métis and
Inuit Education Policy Framework.

Aboriginal Education Framework Agreements

The following is a comprehensive (but not exhaustive) list of examples of existing

education framework agreements between provincial, federal and First Nations
governments that are attempts to address the unique needs of First Nations
students in Canada.

• The James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975) resulted in a Cree
School Board that was established under the Government of Quebec’s
Education Act. This Act provides for special supports and resources for
the Northern Cree, which make up the majority of students in Northern
Quebec.

• The Northland School Division Act (1983) established the creation of a

uniquely provincial school board (with a 98 percent Aboriginal student
population) in Northern Alberta. The Northland School Division Act
recognizes the unique governance relationships that exist between Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada and the Government of Alberta.

• The Manitoba Framework Agreement (1994) stipulates that participating First

Nations in Manitoba will make decisions on their chosen forms of self
government that emerge from a government to government bilateral
process, in areas such as education.

12
 • The Mi’kmaq Education Act (1999) allows the Mi’kmaq First Nation Chief
and Councils in Nova Scotia the capacity to exercise education
jurisdiction through delegated authority. This legislation gives each of the
nine participating First Nations the power to make laws related to
primary, elementary, and secondary education that would be applicable
on their reserve lands. This agreement also created a corporation, the
Mi’kmaw Kina’matnewey (MK), to support them in the delivery of
education programs and services for First Nations in Nova Scotia.

• The Nisga Agreement (1999) allows the Nisga First Nations of British
Columbia’s North Coast to make laws in respect of pre-school to grade
12 education, and provides for students to transfer between education
systems at a similar level of achievement.

Federal Funding of First Nations Education Programs

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada provides $1 billion annually for elementary
and secondary programs to First Nations. This funding is distributed through
various funding arrangements between Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and
its recipients, the First Nations. Expenditures for elementary and secondary
education are among the largest of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
departmental allocations, consisting of 21 percent of its total departmental
budget.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has specific terms and conditions by which
transfer payments are made by the federal government for the delivery of
education programs and services to First Nations. Three types of such funding
arrangements exist are:

13
 • Comprehensive Funding Arrangements are basic one-year funding
arrangements where contributions and transfer payments are provided
from INAC to recipient First Nations.

• Alternative Funding Arrangements are funding arrangements to First

Nations recipients who can then re-allocate funding received from Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada between programs and redesign them.

• Canada First Nations Funding Agreements are block funding

arrangements between Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and First
Nations that allow the recipients First Nations to fund programs in their
own priority areas.

Typically, the most common funding arrangements are Comprehensive Funding

Arrangements and Canada Fist Nations Funding Agreements. Comprehensive
Funding Agreements are short-term financial arrangements that are reviewed
annually by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and provide little financial
flexibility for the recipients First Nation.

Conversely, Canada First Nation Funding Agreements are long-term five-year

arrangements that provide the flexibility to First Nations to manage, design and
deliver programs to their members. Canada First Nations Funding Agreements
between Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and First Nations recognize a level
of comfort that the department has with the financial health and stability of the
First Nation and allow for greater flexibility, autonomy, and capacity to manage
resources in their own priority areas.

However, too many First Nations in Canada and Alberta do not have the
expertise or capacity to manage their own finances. Many of these First Nations

14
in Alberta have third party or remedial financial arrangements where official
trustees are appointed to manage their day-to-day business operations.

15
 Alberta Education Funding

In 2004 – 2005, Alberta Education implemented a Renewed Funding Framework

for school funding provided to its 62 school boards. This new funding allocation
model has changed how Alberta Education provides funding to its school boards.
The foundation of this framework was based upon three pillars: Flexibility,
Accountability, and a new Funding Formula (Alberta Education, corporate
Services Division, 2005).

The Flexibility Pillar allows school boards to make decisions and allocate resources
that best meet their own local educational needs for students in their system.
Alberta Education has “targeted funding” in three areas where schools must
commit to spending in these provincial priority areas: the Alberta Initiative for
School Improvement funding ($68 million annually), implementation of high
speed networking to all school boards – Super Net, and the Student Health
Initiative. Provincial funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit programs is not
targeted or enveloped and is allocated in a lump sum with other enhanced
funding areas such as: English as a Second Language, rural and remote school
funding, and allowances for Socio-Economic Status in depressed areas in Alberta.

The Accountability Pillar requires school boards to be held accountable for the
school funding received by focusing on outputs, outcomes, deliverables, and
increased student achievement. All school boards must submit public documents
that include student achievement results and reporting, along with measures and
strategies for improvement.

The Funding Formula Pillar is based on a school board profile that considers and
acknowledges cost variances on some of the following factors: urban boards,
rural and remote school boards, northern allowances, enrollment growth,

16
enrollment decline, English as a Second Language, and First Nations, Métis and
Inuit funding. In Alberta, First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding is not targeted
and is allocated at $1150 per eligible student who voluntarily self-identifies as
being: Status Indian or Non-Status Indian living on-reserve (Alberta Education,
2009). Students living on-reserve and attending provincial schools are considered
federally funded or “tuition agreement” students and are not included in this
provincial First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding methodology.

Comparing Federal and Provincial first Nations Education Funding

There have been attempts by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada that attempt to
compare its funding of First Nations Education Authorities to Alberta Education
funding to provincial school boards (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada-
Assembly of First Nations, 2004). The goal of this study was to determine
whether current federal funding to band-operated schools on reserve was
adequate when compared to provincial education funding in Alberta. This Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada funding study compared funding to 53 Alberta on
reserve schools to Alberta Education funding to 62 public/separate school
boards, five Francophone school boards, and 14 Charter schools.

A challenge in making this comparison is that Alberta Education must work with
Alberta Ministry of Infrastructure and Transportation to make recommendations
on capital expenses such as building new schools. Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada funding to on-reserve schools is comprehensive and includes all
education costs including: capital expenses, school administration, operation and
maintenance, special programs, teacher salaries, professional development, and
training.

In addition, Alberta Education provides three types of funding to its school

boards: base or per-pupil student funding, enhanced funding (such as First

17
Nations, Métis and Inuit or ESL funding) and targeted or priority funding (such
as the Alberta Initiative for School Improvement). Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada funding to First Nations are lump sum payments that are specific funding
arrangements with the First Nations. With these limitations in mind, according
to the Alberta Regional Indian and Northern Affairs Canada funding study, it is
estimated that an additional $18.3 million would be needed to match provincial
education funding standards. The Indian and Northern Affairs Canada funding
study also estimates that an additional $5 million of federal funding is required to
match the increasing tuition agreement costs associated with educating First
Nations students in provincial schools.

Although the Indian and Northern Affairs Canada funding study fell short of
comparing a gap analysis between federal and provincial education funding for
First Nations education programs, it raises two questions: 1) what would be
defined as adequate funding levels for First Nations Schools to match provincial
education funding? 2) Would additional federal education funding result in
greater outcomes in student achievement for First Nations students?

Lack of Second and Third Level Support in First Nations Education

Programs

Comparing First Nations on-reserve education funding to provincial government

funding cannot be done meaningfully without mentioning what are known as
second and third level services and infrastructure provided to provincial school
boards. The infrastructure support provided to provincial school boards by
Alberta Education takes the form of funding regional bodies like the Alberta
School boards Association, the College of Alberta School Superintendents, and
the Association of School Business Officials of Alberta. Indian and Northern

18
Affairs Canada does not provide this enhanced funding support for second and
third level services to First Nations in Canada.

Another second level of provincial support can be described as services and

equipment provided within, or at the school level, to assist superintendents,
principals, teachers, support workers, technicians, and other employees of public
school boards. This infrastructure also includes technical, digital, electronic
support (such as a computer help desk), computer software access,
videoconferencing suites, provision of audiologists, speech and language
pathologists, and special needs consultants.

Still, another second level of provincial support can be described as governance

support designed to assist school boards fulfill their leadership responsibilities.
For example, school boards possess school board central offices and personnel to
support schools. Public school boards also elect school trustees and have local
school councils that provide additional leadership and governance to these
education systems.

The third level of infrastructure support can be described as organizations that

exist at a regional or provincial level to support school boards to fulfill their
governance, leadership and administrative responsibilities. In Alberta, the Alberta
School Boards Association supports the work of a local school board; the College
of Alberta School Superintendents provides support and leadership to
superintendents to fulfill their leadership responsibilities within their systems.
The Alberta Teacher’s Association provides advice, professional development,
and a collective bargaining mechanism for all teachers working in public and
separate school boards.

19
Unfortunately, the 44 on-reserve First Nations Education systems in Alberta do
not have access to these types of infrastructure supports and are often left in
isolation without regional or aggregated supports.

On the issue of whether or not Indian and Northern Affairs adequately funds
and resources First Nations schools, it is very difficult to determine what
additional funding would be required to bring First Nations schools to provincial
standards. Simply stated, the problem with analyzing this Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada funding study is difficult to carry out because of the lack of
comparative data. Alberta Education funding is provided to school boards with
multiple schools operating within their own jurisdiction, whereas Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada function is typically provided to a First Nation with one
on-reserve school.

In order for basic education programs to succeed on reserves, Indian and

Northern Affairs Canada must work with First Nations and Alberta Education to
complete a “gap analysis” on the cost of providing these additional supports
along with matching funding levels to First Nations and their education
authorities.

Reporting of First Nation Student School Performance and Achievement

In Alberta, every public school board must comply with Alberta’s provincial
educational standards that mandate public reporting and monitoring of its
programs. Each school board in Alberta is required to submit an Annual
Education Results Report that outlines its student achievement results on
Provincial Achievement Tests, Alberta High School Diploma Exams, and
Provincial High School Completion Rates.

20
School boards also must submit long range plans that take the form of Three
Year Education Plans that are submitted to Alberta Education that outlines their
long term strategic and operational plans for student and school performance
measurement, monitoring and reporting I their jurisdictions. It is expected that
Alberta school boards with significant First Nations student populations will
monitor their student achievement and develop strategies for improving
educational results for them.

By legislation, Alberta School Boards are required to submit these reports as they
are transparent public documents that are accessible to all concerned parents,
taxpayers, and the public at large. The purpose for these documents is to
demonstrate accountability to the public who send their children to these public
and separate schools boards.

The majority of Alberta School boards are only now gathering data on the
number of Aboriginal and First Nations students attending schools within their
jurisdictions. Under the Aboriginal Learner Data Collection Initiative, Alberta
school boards can ask the voluntary question of whether the students of First
Nations ancestry on the local student registration form.

First Nations Band Operated Schools in Alberta

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada provides education funding to all of the 44
First Nations in Alberta. Typically, most First Nations in Alberta have one band-
operated school located on-reserve. Some of the larger First Nations in Alberta
have several schools such as the Blood Tribe (Kainai) and the Siksika First
Nation. In total, Alberta has 53 band-operated schools. The role of Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada – Alberta Region is only to ensure that funding is
provided to its First Nations recipients. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
does require all First Nations to complete nominal roll compliance reviews where

21
department officials make on-site visits to determine if attendance records and
enrollments are accurate. Beyond funding and nominal roll compliance, Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada does not require the First Nations to provide
rigorous or extensive public reporting and compliance reviews that school boards
in Alberta are required to submit. In terms of accountability and monitoring their
education programs, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada does not hold First
Nations to the rigorous education standards that Alberta Education holds its
school boards to.

First Nations Student Participation and Achievement on Provincial

Achievement Exams

Alberta Education (2002) recently compiled a report entitled Participation and

Achievement Results for First Nations Students: Grades 3, 6, and 9
Achievement Tests – 1998-1999 to 2002-2003. This report analyzed First
Nations student achievement data for both on and off-reserve schools. This
report also assessed the student achievement levels of both band-operated
schools and provincial schools with significant First Nation student populations.
According to the Learner Assessment Branch of Alberta Education, 80 percent
of all Alberta students should meet or exceed the acceptable standards on
Provincial Achievement Tests.

Overall, First Nations students, on and off-reserve, participate and write exams at
a rate of 75 percent on the grade 3 and 6 Provincial Achievement Tests. This rate
fell to 55 percent in grade 9. On-reserve school participation rates on grade 9
Provincial Achievement Tests were 44 percent while First Nations students
attending provincial schools had participation rates of 63 percent. In general,
Provincial Achievement Test participation rates between First Nations and on

22
First Nations were almost equal in grades 3 and 6. However, the number of First
Nations students writing and participating in grade 9 exams fell off dramatically.

23
Achievement result data for First Nations students indicate the percentage of
First Nations students who met an “acceptable standard” in Grade 9 core
subjects was as follows:

Table One: Achievement and Participation of first Nations Students on

Alberta Provincial Achievement Tests for Grade 9, for Band Operated and
Provincial Schools

Band- Percentage Provincial Percentage

operated Meeting Participation School Off- Meeting Participation
Schools On- Acceptable Rate Reserve Acceptable Rate
Reserve Standard Standard

Social Studies 19% 55% Social Studies 39% 63%

Mathematics 4% 55% Mathematics 24% 63%

Language Arts 27% 55% Language Arts 53% 63%

Science 14% 55% Science 35% 63%

Overall, First Nations students performed poorly compared to other Alberta

students. The results show that First Nations students attending provincial
schools consistently performed higher in both achievement results and
participation rates than students on attending schools on reserve, although the
overall student achievement results for both systems were discouraging.

Current First Nations Education Initiatives in Alberta

As part of its commitment to assisting the First Nations in areas like education,
the Government of Alberta created an Aboriginal Policy Initiative called
Strengthening Relationships (Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development, 2000).
Under this Aboriginal Policy Framework, government departments such as:
Aboriginal Relations, Education, Human Resources and Employment, Children’s

24
Services, and Health have implemented cross-ministry initiatives to support the
needs of Aboriginal Albertans. Alberta Education is actively engaged in the
implementation of two major policy framework initiatives, the First Nations, Métis
and Inuit Education Policy Framework (Government of Alberta, 2002) and specific
recommendations of the Alberta Commission on Learning (Government of Alberta,
2003).

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework

In 2002 the Ministry of Learning released the First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education Policy Framework. Implementation of the First Nations, Métis and
Inuit Policy Framework has resulted in the Government of Alberta committing
an additional $5.6 million in education funding to support Aboriginal learners in
Alberta. Some of the implementation highlights of the First Nations, Métis and
Inuit Education Policy Framework are as follows:

• T
he Alberta Aboriginal Apprenticeship Program has resulted in an
additional 75 registered apprentices participating in 11 different trades
from 2002 to 2006.

• A
lberta Education has added five education managers to work in the
following areas: Special Programs, Literacy, Curriculum, Learning and
Teaching Resources, and Field Services. A highlight of this added
capacity within the department has been the development of Aboriginal
Studies 10-20-30 textbooks that were developed in collaboration with
Duval House Publishing, Northland School Division, Treaty 6, 7 and 8
organizations, and the Métis Nation of Alberta.

25
 • A
miskwaciy Academy is a $12 million partnership between Alberta
Education and Edmonton Public Schools that has established an
Aboriginal public high school within the City of Edmonton that uses
provincial curriculum standards and course offerings that reflect
Aboriginal traditions.

• T
he First Nations, Métis and Inuit School Community Learning
Environment Project has injected $1.5 million in one-time funding to 16
pilot school boards to develop and implement school programs that
target enhanced parental and community engagements, embracing and
valuing Aboriginal cultures and history.

• A
boriginal Teacher Education Programs have been developed at the
University of Alberta and the University of Lethbridge that have
partnership agreements with First Nations Tribal Colleges with Blue
Quills Tribal College, Saddle Lake Cree Nation, and Red Crow
Community College on the Blood Tribe Reserve. These Aboriginal
Teacher Education Programs will provide an additional 50 certificated
teachers in Alberta.

The Alberta Commission on Learning

In 2003, the Alberta Commission on Learning released its report Every Child
Learns, Every Child Succeeds. The Commission’s report was the outcome of
consultations with thousands of Albertans on the state of Alberta’s basic and

26
post-secondary education system. The learning commission made
recommendations on Aboriginal children and youth. Following is a summary.

• Equity in funding levels for on and off-reserve education

programs;

• Increased parental role in school governance;

• Initiating discussions with Treaty regions on the jurisdiction

issue;

• Incentives to encourage more Aboriginal teachers;

• Identify at risk Aboriginal children at earlier ages;

• Smoother transitions between basic education to post-

secondary education;

• Smoother transitions from on-reserve and Métis schools to

provincial school;

• Requiring all schools with large Aboriginal populations to

have well trained home school liaison workers;

• Expanded Aboriginal language and culture programs for First

Nations students;

• Development of more relevant curriculum/learning and

teaching resources;

27
 • Providing choice in education programs for Aboriginal
parents for educating their children; and

• Establish a Regional Centre of Excellence in Aboriginal

Education.

“Aboriginal education gets a failing grade as our education system has failed these
students. It has failed their communities, it has failed the next generation of
children who will be born poor and disadvantaged because their parents haven’t
completed high school and cannot provide for their needs. The public education
system must do better by these students and we must stop the cycle”
(Government of Alberta, 2003).

Alberta Commission on Learning (2003)

Problem Area

The devolution of the federal government’s responsibility for on-reserve

education in the 1980’s means that the First Nations of Canada received
delegated management for providing on-reserve education for their members.
This delegated management from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada permits
First Nations to manage their education programs, tut it is very different than the
vision of Indian Control of Indian Education that was articulated by the National
Indian Brotherhood and the Assembly of First Nations to have the power over,
to exercise directing influence, whereas, to “operate” means to manage, or to
keep in operation. It is predictable that the difference would lead to
misunderstanding and false expectations of the original principles of Indian
Control to Indian Education policy (Kirkness, 1985).

There is also no formal understanding of the relationship between Indian and

Northern Affairs Canada and the First Nations themselves, regarding education
programs and services on reserve. According to the Auditor General:

28
“There are some departmental officials who feel their job is just to write cheques;
other feel the department has a role in running schools. Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada has still not clarified its role and responsibilities in improving
education achievements of First Nations. Doing this is an important first step in
necessary improvement”

(Auditor General, 2004).

29
 Chapter 2

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

First Nations education authorities and schools do not face the pressures of
compliance, reporting, providing meaningful and accurate data, implementing
improvement plans, and developing performance measurement strategies that
provincial school boards accept as part of their obligation to their students,
parents, taxpayers, and to the Alberta Ministry of Education. A suggested
solution would be for First Nations education authorities to collaborate with
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and provincial governments, to creating
joint solutions. This would mean that treaty groups, provincial ministries of
education and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada would work on tri-partied
initiatives to begin a process of developing accountability and performance
measures for their students, parents, chiefs and councils in order to close the gap
in student achievement.

Interviews

The method of this study was conducting interviews with school superintendents,
educators, and education managers working within federal and provincial
government environments or with First Nations communities. Interviews were
conducted with ten education expert practitioners in the area of First Nations
education in Alberta, and this sample represented a cross section of education
practitioners in First Nations education programs in Alberta.

Overview and Approach

30
The nature of this study was best suited to a qualitative research approach. This
research uses a hermeneutic phenomenological approach in the examination of a
vulnerable group, the first Nations of Canada. This approach is an attempt to
articulate the claim that the First Nations of Canada have been treated unjustly by
the federal government, and by the Catholic and Anglican missionaries, who
attempted to assimilate the First Nations into the Canadian mainstream.

The six core questions asked by the researcher are the important starting points
of the research process, not the method as such. This phenomenological
approach is part of an overall pedagogic strategy that asks education practitioners
why is First Nations education achievement so far behind other Canadian? This
thesis takes a human science research approach to investigate First Nations
education in Canada, in an ethnographic manner.

It was determined that ten current or former expert education practitioners

involved First Nations education, from a cross-section of
federal/provincial/school boards/First Nations educators would be selected for
interviews. The selection pool of these interview candidates was based upon
their professional working experience in senior positions of leadership in First
Nations education in Alberta.

Each participant was contacted by phone and the initial request was made for a
semi-formal interview. During this conversation, all participants were advised
that any comments, insights, points of view, or perspectives would be a matter of
public record and would be recorded, in keeping with important ethical research
considerations. All individuals agreed to participate without anonymity and
consented to the publication of their names without hesitation.

31
 Interview Participants and Biographies

The following individuals who agreed to take part as participants and are listed
below, along with a brief biography of their involvement in First Nations
education in Alberta.

Dr. John Brosseau: Dr. Brosseau is the current superintendent of Mother

Earth’s Children’s Charter School. Mother Earth’s Children’s Charter School is
the only Charter school in Alberta that is recognized and funded with a primary
focus on Aboriginal and indigenous education. Dr. Brosseau is also the former
Chief Superintendent of Edmonton Catholic Schools. Dr. Brosseau is of Native
ancestry.

Delbert Dahl: Mr. Dahl is the former manager of education of the Alberta
Region of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Mr. Dahl was also a member of
the Native Education Policy Review Advisory Committee that developed the
First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework in 2002, for Alberta
Learning with the Government of Alberta.

Dr. Colin Kelly: Dr. Kelly is the current Director of Education for the Treaty 8
Education Commission. Dr. Kelly is also the former Superintendent of Schools
for the Northland School Division in Alberta. Dr. Kelly was the College of
Alberta School Superintendents representative on the Native Education Policy
Review that was responsible for the development of the First Nations, Métis and
Inuit Education Policy Framework for the Alberta Government.

Donna Crowshoe: Miss Crowshoe is currently an education manager with the

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Services Branch of First Nations, Métis and Inuit

32
and Field Services Sector, Alberta Education. Donna is a member of the Piikani
First Nation of the Blackfoot Confederacy in southern Alberta.

Terry Fortin: Mr. Fortin chaired the Native Education Policy Review in Alberta.
This committee developed the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy
Framework for the Ministry of Learning with the Government of Alberta in
2002. Terry Fortin is also the form Chief Superintendent of Edmonton Catholic
Schools. Mr. Fortin is of first nations Cree ancestry.

Jacqueline Skytt: Mrs. Jacqueline Skytt is the Director of Professional

Development for the Alberta Teachers’ Association and led the formation of the
First Nations, Métis and Inuit Executive Committee Specialist Council.
Jacqueline Skytt was also a member of the Native Education Policy Review
Advisory Committee that developed the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education
Policy Framework for the Ministry of Learning for the Government of Alberta.

Don Zech: Mr. Zech is currently the Board Chair of Palliser School Division in
southern Alberta. Don is an active member of the Alberta School board
Association and the Public School board Trustees of Alberta. Mr. Zech is the
author of a report entitled One People, Two Worlds: Schooling for the Children on the
Blood Reserve.

Michael Davenport: Mr. Davenport was a Commission Member on the Report

and Recommendations of Alberta’s Commission on Learning: Every Child Learns,
Every Child Succeeds, 2003. This report brought forward fifteen recommendations
to improving education outcomes for Aboriginal children and youth. Mechael
Davenport is the former Superintendent of the Fort Vermillion School Division
in northern Alberta.

33
Curtiss Pilling: Mr. Pilling is the former Secretary Treasurer of the Kainai
Board of Education on the blood Indian Reserve in southern Alberta. Curtiss is
also the former Secretary Treasurer of the Westwind School Division and a
member of the Association of School Business Officials of Alberta.

Brian Wildcat: Mr. Wildcat is the Director of Education for the Miyo
Wahkotowin Community Education Authority of the Ermineskin First Nation.
Mr. Wildcat is a member of Ermineskin First Nation of the Hobbema Cree
Nation of Treaty 6.

List of Questions

Each interview consisted to the following six questions:

1. W
hat is the current status of First Nations education in Canada?

2. H
ave point of progress been made in First Nations education?

3. W
hat are the roles of provincial, federal governments and other education
stakeholders in improving educational success for First Nations students?

4. I
n what ways are First Nations and provincial school boards accountable
in ensuring the success of First Nations students attending schools in
their jurisdictions?

34
 5. I
s there adequate funding for First Nations education programs being
provided?

6. W
hat are some of the potential solutions to closing the gap between First
Nations students and other students in Alberta?

These questions were deliberately open-ended in order to provide the researcher

with the opportunity and flexibility to probe and engage in subject areas that may
require greater depth.

This qualitative research exercise is an attempt to allow the researcher to gather

the insights and observations of other educators currently involved in improving
outcomes for all First Nations students in Alberta and synthesize them with the
researcher’s own personal experiences as a First Nations educator. The
knowledge that emerged from this investigation will hopefully add to the research
and development of improved education strategies, programs, and outcomes for
all First Nations students.

Format, Transcription and Validity

In keeping with the qualitative approach, interviews were face to face of a semi-
formal style, and involved a series of six non-director and open-ended questions.
This qualitative method is especially useful in the generation of categories for
understanding human phenomena and the investigation of the interpretation and
meaning that people give to events they experience.

The study’s approach was consistent with general qualitative interpretive

philosophies that emphasize the emergence of themes. The process used by the

35
researcher was data collection transcription. Following a transcript review,
significant and interesting passages were noted and organized by categorization.
This provided the required need of consistency, known in qualitative research as
validity.

This process required discretionary actions on the part of the researcher to pick
and choose information that was regarded as relevant and significant. This meant
that the data was analyzed and interpreted and searched for meaning and
significance from these interviews. Qualitative research is somewhat subjective
and requires due diligence to minimize researcher bias. All research information
in the study was completed with sequence that would permit the researcher to
analyze and review the information and draw conclusions. The interview data
transcription analysis process was completed in a way that did not prevent ideas
and themes from emerging on the targeted subject areas being examined by the
researcher.

Personal Epistemological Perspectives

With qualitative research, the researcher is bound by the limitations of interview

participant and researcher perceptions. The nature and evolution of one’s own
worldview has a significant bearing on interpretations and the manner in which
research is conducted. Listed below is an incomplete summary of personal view
points that may have had an impact on the researcher’s interpretation and
method of conducting research.

The researcher has been involved in Native education for over 20 years as a
teacher, principal, and in other related positions as a school administrator. The
researcher’s current role is Deputy Superintendent of Education and Business
Affairs with the Kainai Board of Education on the Blood Tribe (also known as
the Kainai First Nation).

36
As a former Director of the Aboriginal Services Branch, currently the First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Services Branch, it was noted that the Government of
Alberta has made a significant commitment to providing enhanced learning
supports to Aboriginal students with the implementation of the First Nations,
Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework in 2002. The First Nations, Métis
and Inuit Education Policy Framework has led to advancements in new teaching
and learning resources, including the Aboriginal Studies 10-20-30 textbooks, and
a new social studies curriculum that is inclusive of Aboriginal and Francophone
perspectives, in a Canadian context.

37
 Trust

The process of gathering of data through interviews meant that the ten
participants needed to trust the integrity of the research being done. Interview
participants had to feel secure that there was no hidden agenda or any attempts to
sensationalize comments that they were to make. Trustworthiness is essential in
order to ensure data integrity and it was my responsibility to ensure that the
interviews participants felt comfortable and at ease when being asked these
questions.

All interview participants were asked the same six questions. This consistency
enhanced the reliability of the results. The fact that the interviews were
conducted in locations that were mutually agreed to, added to the comfort and
trust for the interview participants.

Another aspect of the trust factor was the need to establish a non-threatening
setting and relaxed interviewee/researcher relationship. As well, all of the
interviewees were colleagues that the researcher has current or had previous
working relationships with. All interviewees were asked whether they would like
a copy of an executive summary of this research and were notified of the
measures that the researcher would use to ensure confidentiality.

Assumptions

During the carrying out of the interviews several critical assumptions were made
to avoid bias. The meant:

38
 • T
hat the interviewees selected would be willing and honest participants in
this research; and

• T
hat the interviewees would be able to communicate effectively in the
English language. With several participants, there were differences in
cultural background (for example Blackfoot and Cree) but not in
language.

To further the possibility of completing a successful research project, it was

essential that the researcher:

• R
ecognize and respect the interviewees’ formal and informal culture and
backgrounds;

• C
onduct the research in a manner that ensured total comfort for the
participants, recognizing the diversity of their current lifestyle, personal
and work circumstances; and

• C
onduct the research in a scholarly manner, with academic rigor, ethics,
and dedication.

This study approach was conducted according to the Conjoint Faculties Research
Ethics Board Guidelines and the Graduate Division of Educational Research
Doctoral Candidacy Guidelines of the University of Calgary.

39
 Limitations of the Research

In the course of completing this research, the researcher observed several

limitations. One limitation of this research was the difficulty in comparing and
contrasting the Alberta Learning system, with entrenched legislation and
regulation that has existed for over 100 years, with First Nations education
authorities that have been operational without legislation and regulation for just
over 20 years.

Another limitation was that the education practitioners interviewed have worked
for either the federal or the provincial education system, and each interviewee
approached their views of education from experiences within this perspective.
Therefore, this study was limited to the perceptions of the educators surveyed,
and was in keeping within the context of their own educational experiences.

This research may also have been limited by the researchers own unintentional
biases related to personal background and previous work experience with the
First Nations education authorities, the Government of Alberta, and the
Government of Canada.

Ethical Considerations

All of the participants interviewed were individuals who were known to the
researcher, while working as an education practitioner. Therefore, it was possible
to utilize the benefit of a formal relationship with each of these experts
interviewed. Each interview participant was provided with a formal oral
presentation of the purpose and method of the research. Each participant was
reminded that they were free to withdraw at any time without consequences.
Therefore, each participant exercised his or her own free will to be involved,

40
knowing that their identities would be revealed and their answers exhibited in the
public record. Anonymity for the researcher was not intended.

41
 Chapter 3

LITERATURE REVIEW

The following literature review identifies and discusses the major developments
in Aboriginal education in Canada. Furthermore, this exercise probes into what
has worked and what has not worked in First Nations education in Canada. This
section also analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of basic education programs
(kindergarten to grade 12) offered to Aboriginal students in Canada.

This section also discusses and assesses Aboriginal education in post-secondary

areas such as teacher training, access, tribal colleges, programs at public
institutions, and apprenticeship training programs. It is important to analyze
these programs because repairing or updating First Nations education programs
requires a holistic approach and the full engagement of the resources of tribal and
public post-secondary institutions.

The goal of this literature review is to 1) provide, for contextualization purposes,

a background of recent National Aboriginal Education policy since 2000; 2)
discuss and assess the implementation of recent government initiatives for First
Nations students in the past decade, with emphasis on the overall failure of band-
operated schools in Canada; 3) provide recommendations and key directions on
system and school improvement for Aboriginal education in Canada for the
various stakeholders – government, community leaders, teachers, administrators,
and students; and 4) present the case that a window of opportunity exists for
improving First Nations education in Canada in the 21st Century.

The recommendations offered in this dissertation will be relevant to only

Aboriginal education programs and systems in Canadian provinces – south of 60,

42
and do not address the education needs and circumstances facing the Inuit or
Dene north of the 60th parallel.

Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable on Education – A Missed

Opportunity

In 2004, Prime Minister Paul Martin met with national Aboriginal leaders in
Ottawa to begin a Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable on Strengthening the
Relationship. The objective of this Roundtable was to fundamentally change the
relationship between the federal government, the provinces and territories, and
the Aboriginal peoples of Canada.

During this process, Prime Minister Martin announced a series of roundtable

meetings where the intention was to explore innovative ideas through which the
Government of Canada and national Aboriginal leaders would collaborate and
work together to close the quality of life gap between Aboriginals and all
Canadians. Two of these sessions were on lifelong learning (kindergarten to
grade 12 and post-secondary education skills development). Other sessions
included discussions in priority area including health, housing, economic
opportunities, negotiations and accountability.

The Canada-Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable consisted of the national Aboriginal

organizations including the Assembly of First Nations, the Congress of
Aboriginal Peo9ples, the Métis National Council, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and
the Native Women’s Association of Canada; as well as key federal departments
and agencies including Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Industry Canada,
and the Treasury Board Secretariat.

After the completion of the Roundtable, the Prime Minister and his cabinet met
in 2005 at the spring retreat with representatives of these national Aboriginal

43
organizations along with provincial territorial representatives. The next step in
this process was a 2005 First Ministers Meeting (FMM) on Aboriginal issues.

The on-going Roundtable process also provided the opportunity to engage in a

renewed dialogue contributing to real change in improving the lives of the
Aboriginal peoples in Canada. History now calls this the Kelowna Accord. During
this time, the political will did exist between governments and the Aboriginal
people of Canada to develop action plans towards closing this quality of life gap.

With the federal election in 2005, and the Conservative victory was the beginning
of the end of the Kelowna Accord and the end of the Roundtable process. Under
the leadership of Prime Minister Stephen Harper, the Kelowna Accord was put on a
shelf and new policy directions were tables, along with a new policy agenda for
the First Nations of Canada. To many educators, this new policy direction of the
Harper Government was a disappointing missed opportunity to create systemic
change and give the First Nations of Canada the opportunity to assume greater
responsibility for their education.

Reforming First Nations Education Initiative – Budget 2008

Since the late 1960s and early 1970s, Aboriginal communities in Canada have
rejected residential schools and assimilation education models imposed on them,
and they have asked for local control in the systems that educated their children.
In 1972, the National Indian Brotherhood began advocating for Indian Control
of Indian Education. In 1973, the federal government accepted these objectives
as the guiding principles for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s policy
approaches to First Nation education.

This period, between 1967 and the entrenchment of Aboriginal rights in the
Canadian Constitution in 1982, witnessed a major change in how issues of

44
education were understood and expressed. There was a move from thinking of
education as means of assimilation to thinking of it as a means for the
revitalization of Aboriginal cultures and economies (Castellano, Davis, and
Lahache, 2000).

National Aboriginal education policy discussions focused on the need to transfer

decision making authority over to local communities in order to give Native
parents and First Nations organizations greater control over the education of
their children. A broad consensus emerged between the federal government and
Aboriginal communities, that greater control and self-determination for
communities and parents would make Indian education more effective.

Indian Self Government and Aboriginal Education in Canada

In the 1980s, the Penner Report (Canada, 1983) recommended the implementation
of some form of self-government for First Nations in Canada. The Penner Report
also provided a definition of self-government a belief that First Nations in
Canada should determine their own futures, in areas such as health, child welfare,
and education (Penner, 1983).

In 2008, the Assembly of First Nations produced an education policy paper

Tradition and Education: Towards a Vision of the Future that further advanced the
notion beyond Indian Control of Indian Education to self-government and
jurisdictional control. The AFN took the position that it was the right of First
Nations to exercise the self determination over education, and that these
education rights had to be recognized by all levels of government (AFN p.3).
Jurisdiction over education would mean that each First Nation had the inherent
right to make decisions in the following areas:

• Development of their own education laws and policies;

45
 • Management methods and approaches;

• Curriculum and language programs

• Program quality standards

• Delivery of services; and

• Adequacy of funding levels needed for their education programs.

The Assembly of First Nations also suggested that not one size would fit all
(Assembly of First Nations, p.7) and that each First Nation in Canada would
determine when and how this jurisdiction would be exercised over the education
of its members. To the Assembly of First Nations, community ownership and
autonomy in decision-making were key factors in creating effective and successful
school systems and programs for First Nations (Assembly of First Nations, p.7).

During this period, the Assembly of First Nations and other national Aboriginal
organizations were very successful in lobbying the federal government to change
its approach to the delivery of Aboriginal education programs in Canada. This
federal government policy shift meant the delegated authority of education
programs to First Nations, and the devolution of Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada. At the same time, the Assembly of First Nations was lobbying for policy
that went further than INAC devolution of education programs to thinking in
terms of self-government and self-determination for First Nations.

46
 Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples

The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples released its final report and
recommendations in 1996. According to Tom Flanagan:

The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples recommendations were too

sweeping and too expensive for the cautious economy minded government of
Jean Chretien. In early 1998, the Liberal government announced an Aboriginal
Action Plan that cost far less than the FCAP proposals and avoided formalizing
Aboriginal government as a third order of government in the federalist system.

(Flanagan, 2000)

The federal government’s response to Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples

focused on the legacy of residential schools and the need for healing within
Aboriginal communities. The Government of Canada responded to the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples by establishing a $350 million Aboriginal
Healing Fund, where communities could make submissions for local education and
healing programs for victims of physical and sexual abuse in residential schools.
While the Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Minister, Jane Stewart, endorsed
the broad principles of the report, the Liberal government’s sustained
commitment to the implementation of the report, beyond the healing fund, was
very weak.

The nature of reports of this nature is that they are essentially ad hoc knee jerk
political reactions to placate the public into believing that real government action
is taking place. Once a commission delivers its report, it is dissolved. In the
absence of any apparatus to follow up its recommendations, the implementation
is left up to the government. The Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples
created very high expectations for the Aboriginal peoples of Canada and the
Aboriginal Healing Fund fell far short of these expectations.

47
In her book, Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise Marlene Castellano and
others (2000) posed the question “In what way will the quality of education
improve for Aboriginal people as a result of the recommendations of the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples?” (Castellano, p.8). Years later, the Auditor
General of Canada would agree with the researcher that the quality of Aboriginal
education in Canada is not improving but deteriorating and spiraling to a national
crisis.

2000 and 2004 Auditor General Reports on First Nations Education

In 2000, the Auditor General of Canada harshly criticized federal education

programs, stating that they could not demonstrate their objective of assisting First
Nations students living on-reserve in achieving their educational needs and
aspirations. At the current rate of progress, it will take over 20 years for the First
Nations of Canada to reach parity in academic achievement with other Canadians
(Auditor General’s Report, 2000).

By 2004, the Auditor General again drew attention to First Nations education
programs, and stated that the progress in closing the education gap for Indian
students living on reserves was in fact widening. The Auditor General estimated
that, at the current rate of progress, it would take over 28 years for First Nations
students to reach parity in academic achievement with other Canadians (Auditor
General’s Report, 2004).

In recent years the Auditor General has been very critical about the lack of
accountability for expenditures, both to First Nations education authorities and
to Parliament though the responsibility of the Minister of Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada (Auditor General, 2000). Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
currently spends $10,833 per student annually on basic education programs, or
more than $1.3 billion, to education 120,000 Aboriginal children. The Auditor

48
General asks the question “What is the quality of the education that Aboriginal
students are receiving for the $1.3 billion”? (Auditor General p.3) The Auditor
General has described accountability measures for this spending as completely
inadequate: The department (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada) has still not
clarified its role and responsibilities in improving the education achievement of
First Nations. This is an important first step in necessary improvements (Auditor
General of Canada, 2000 p.7).

Maintaining the status quo would be to the detriment of both First Nations and
Canada as a whole. The First Nations population is a youthful one with more
that 50 percent under the age of 25. In addition, the next ten years will see a
great increase in First Nations children passing though the education system
(Statistics Canada 2001 Census). If the system fails to meet their needs, it will put
too many members of this generation at risk and deprive Canada of valuable
human resources (INAC, 2005).

Band Controlled Education Systems in Canada

The development of band controlled schools and the gradual downsizing of

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada began in the late 1970s, after the acceptance
of the guiding principle of Indian Control of Indian Education. Virtually all of the
schools located on-reserve lands are managed by First Nation Education
Authorities established and incorporated by the local chief and council.

The transfer of local control of education programs from Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada to First Nations was accepted and supported in principle by most
First Nation educational practitioners as a sound concept in the 1980s. Upon
critical reflection, this researcher would suggest that there were inherent flaws in
the transition from acceptance in principle, to acceptance in operational terms.
Control implies that one has the ability to change, experiment, develop and grow;

49
it implies that one can readily identify needs and then plan and implement
strategies to meet those needs it also implies that one can control income and
expenditures, establish criteria for success, and have direct governance of one’s
own affairs.

This is not the case when one refers to band controlled education systems
(Goddard, 1993). Goddard points out that bands can manage their operational
funding, but they have no say in the level of funding received. Bands can adapt
and alter their curriculum to any degree, but grade 12 provincial high school
requirements means the prior completion of approved provincial curricula at the
grade 10, 11 and 12 levels. Bands can localize teaching staffs but must hire
provincially certified teachers if programs are to be accredited. In essence, bands
have been given the right to control the management of their education systems
within parameters established by the federal and provincial governments. This is
not Indian control of Indian education in the accepted sense of control
(Goddard, 1993).

Lack of Government Support for Band Operated Schools

When the policy decision was made by Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to
devolve of education responsibilities to First Nations, the department did not
provide First Nations with the capacity of school board type support services for
band operated schools. As noted earlier, band operated schools do not have
second and third level infrastructure supports that provincial school boards have.
For example, band-operated schools did not have the required support services
and organizational structures provided to provincial school systems. Typically,
school boards have important resources such as curriculum specialists, district
program computer technicians, communications specialists, special education

50
coordinators and learning and teaching resource consultants, speech and language
consultants, and education psychologists.

Leadership and Governance On-Reserve Education Systems 21st Century

Indian Agents

Another systemic challenge faced by most First Nations communities relates to

the one-dimensional nature of leadership and governance on reserves. Jean
Allard, a form senior official in the Manitoba government concludes:

…Chiefs and (band) councils today have a great deal of money to work with.
The funds for housing, welfare and education and other services flow through
their hands. Since there is no real separation between politics and administration
on reserves, everything is politicized. Whoever is elected is in control of just
about everything on a reserve. The result is elections colored by bitter rivalries
and ugly disputes.

…Reserves are one-dimensional systems. Elsewhere in Canadian society,

multiple voices act as checks and balances on each other… There are no such
other voices on reserves, leaving the single dimensions of politics in which to work
out solutions to social, economic and political problems…

…On the reserves, the chiefs and councils who play ball with Indian Affairs
obtain more and more control over budgets and services. But the checks and
balances to keep chiefs and councils on the straight and narrow are not there.
People could not pick up and go to a band with a better administration. And
since the money funding the band did not come from band members, they had
no means to hold their chiefs and councils accountable.

(Allard 2001, p.72)

51
According to University of Lethbridge Sociologist, Menno Boldt, “Indian leaders
tend to view self-government in terms of taking over the (Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada) authority and structures on their reserves” (Boldt 1993, p.75).
Boldt is critical of this approach, pointing out “that institutional structures have
their own logic and that a mere change of personnel is no guarantee that the
entrenched norms of paternalism, authoritarianism, self-interest, and self
aggrandizement of office holders will be eliminated” (Boldt, p.75).

According to Boldt, Indian Agents controlled the activities on Indian reserves up

until the 1960s and exercised full legislation, executive, and judicial power over
the residents of these communities. Those powers have now been transferred to
chiefs, band councils, and senior administrators. Even the Department of Indian
Affairs has withdrawn much of its administrative supervision.

Superintendents and directors of First Nations Education authorities often take

on the dominant role of the Indian Agent in their capacity as education leaders.
School administrators on First Nations communities do not have the systemic
checks and balances that exist in provincial school systems. For example, it is
common practice on many First Nations to terminate teacher contracts without
just cause or due process. In British Columbia or Alberta, the British Columbia
Teachers Federation or the Alberta Teachers Association can protect and support
teachers in the public system and file grievances against unjust or unfair treatment
by school boards. No such protection or support exists for teachers in band-
operated systems. The approach used by elected leaders on First Nations
schools, translates to unlimited and unchecked power and control with little
accountability to parents and reserve community members.

52
 Absence of Teacher Quality Standards on Band Operated Schools

Band-operated schools have no formal relationship as members of provincial

teacher’s federations or associations and this compromises and hurts teaching
quality standards in all band-operated schools. For example, the Alberta
Teachers Associations Teacher Growth, Supervision and Evaluation Policy aims
to ensure that each teacher’s actions, judgments, and decisions are in the best
interests of the students and supports optimum learning (Alberta Teachers
Association, 2003). Typically, teachers in band-operated schools are not required
to submit teacher growth and professional development plans. As a result, many
of these teachers may not meet the requirements of provincial teaching quality
standards.

The nature of leadership and governance within band-operated schools may

explain the reluctance of highly qualified teachers, experienced and motivated
school administrators, and graduates of teacher training institutions from
applying for teaching positions on First Nations communities. This circumstance
may also explain the challenges of teacher recruitment, staffing and retention
within band-operated schools and the high teacher5 turnover rates in on-reserve
schools.

Student Achievement and Performance Measurement in Band-Operated

Schools in Alberta

Over the past 20 years the number of First Nations students in Alberta that are
enrolled in school has risen at a rapid rate. However, this increase has not been
reflected in the number students who enter grade 12 on the reserve. Instead,
many Indian parents send their children to provincial schools in the belief that
bad schools serve to ghettoize Indian students (Goddard, 1993).

53
There is still a significant gap in student achievement between First Nations
students and the general population. In Alberta, the current high school
completion rate for First Nations students is 37 percent. This compares with the
high school completion rate of all other Albertans of 71 percent.

The annual drop-out rate of students aged 14 to 18 for First Nations students is
11 percent compared to 5 percent for all other Alberta students (Alberta
Education, 2009). Granted, band-operated schools have been successful in
finding jobs and lowering the unemployment rates of band members who can
work as teachers, administrative support, or janitors within these schools.
However, Goddard’s assessment is poignant “As Indian educators face the 21st
century; it is now time to critically evaluate how Indian education should meet the
new millennium. Indian Control of Indian Education as envisaged 20 years ago
has not occurred. It is time to question the whole concept of band-controlled
schools and to determine whether in fact they are an idea whose time has gone”
(Goddard, 1993, p.89).

Amiskwaciy Academy A First Nations High School Edmonton Public

Schools

In the late 1990’s Alberta Educations Minister, Dr. Lyle Oberg and the
Edmonton Public School Board recognized the growing disparity in student
achievement between students of First Nations, Métis and Inuit decent and all
other students in this jurisdiction. Indicators of this disparity were in low results
on provincial achievement tests, diploma exams, and exceptionally low high
school completion rates for First Nations students.

54
As Aboriginal education became a district priority, Edmonton Public Schools
formed partnerships with the urban Aboriginal community, the First Nations of
Treaty 6 and Alberta Education to open a predominantly Aboriginal high school
within Edmonton’s inner city. Amiskwaciy Academy opened as a public
provincial high school at the former Edmonton Municipal Airport after a $12
million retrofit and the school began with an enrolment of 300 students offering
programs for students in grades 10, 11 and 12.

In September 2003, Amiskwaciy Academy grew to over 420 students, of which

167 were at the junior high level and 250 were at the senior high level (Edmonton
Public Schools, 2004). A large number of Amiskwaciy students receive ongoing
support through government services to address social needs, such as the lack of
student housing, which often are barriers to student success. To meet the
complex needs of their student population, Amiskwaciy Academy is
concentrating on developing student’s literacy and numeracy skills, and on
assisting students in meeting the acceptable standard in courses and completing
high school.

It is difficult to assess the overall progress of student achievement at Amiskwaciy

Academy and of other First Nations students in Edmonton Public Schools, as
there were some increases in the percentage of students completing courses and
an increase in the percentage of students achieving a high school diploma.
However, it is difficult to identify trends, as the number students represented in
these percentages is sometimes small (Edmonton Public Schools, 2003 – 2004).
At this time, this data has not been shared by Edmonton Public Schools.

One of the criticisms of First Nations education programs in Alberta is that they
lag behind the First Nations developments and student data collection in British
Columbia. As the former First Nations Education Coordinator for School

55
District No. 22 (Vernon), the researcher is familiar with many of the programs
and services offered to First Nations students in British Columbia. The next
portion of the dissertation presents the education landscape, as it exists for First
Nations education programs in British Columbia and is outlined on the following
pages.

Aggregation: Success for First Nations Students in British Columbia

In February 1999, a Memorandum of Understanding on Aboriginal Education

was signed in British Columbia acknowledging that Aboriginal earners were not
experiencing school success in British Columbia. This agreement was signed by
the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs, the Assembly of first Nations –
B.C., Chiefs Action Committee, the B.C. Ministry of Education, the B.C. First
Nations Schools Association, the B.C. College of Teachers, the B.C. Principals
and Vice Principals’ Association, the B.C. School Trustees Association, and the
B.C. Teachers Federation (B.C. Ministry of Education, 1999).

This Memorandum of Understanding states:

“We the undersigned, acknowledge that Aboriginal learners are

not experiencing school success in British Columbia. We state
our intention to work together within the mandates of our
respective organizations to improve school success for
Aboriginal learners in British Columbia”

(B.C. Ministry of Education, 1999).

The Memorandum of Understanding recognizes that British Columbia schools

had not been successful in ensuring that the Aboriginal students receive a quality
education, one that allows students to succeed in the larger provincial economy

56
while maintaining ties to their First Nations cultures. The outcome of the
Memorandum of Understanding process on First Nations education in British
Columbia was that First Nations and provincial school boards were required to
develop and sign local education agreements, in order to receive provincial
program funding.

Education Enhancement Agreements in British Columbia

In British Columbia, this memorandum of Understanding has facilitated the

framework agreement for the creation of Aboriginal Education Enhancement
Agreements. As of 2004, eleven agreements have been established, and more
school districts and Aboriginal communities throughout British Columbia are
expressing an interest in developing their own agreements. Encouraged by this
process, the British Columbia Ministry of Education has set a goal to have
agreements signed or in process in all 60 school districts by the end of 2005.

An Enhancement Agreement is a working agreement between a school district,

all local Aboriginal communities, and the Ministry of Education. Enhancement
Agreements are intended to establish collaborative partnerships between British
Columbia First Nation's communities and school districts that involve shared
decision making and specific goal setting in meeting the needs of First Nations
students. Enhancement Agreements highlight the importance of academic
performance and more importantly, stress the integral nature of Aboriginal
traditional culture and languages to Aboriginal student development and success.
Fundamental to Enhancement Agreements is the requirement that school
districts provide strong programs on the culture of local Aboriginal peoples on
whose traditional territories the districts are located. The BC Ministry of
Education requires that all school districts envelope or target this funding for the
self-identified Aboriginal students in their jurisdictions.

57
 First Nations Education Steering Committee

In the mid 1990’s the First Nations Education Steering Committee and the First
Nations Schools Association were established in British Columbia to facilitate
discussion about education matters affecting First Nations in British Columbia.
The First Nations Education Steering Committee and the First Nations Schools
Association provide relevant and up to date information to First Nations about
federal and provincial policies and programs.

The First Nations Education Steering Committee and First Nations Schools
Association also undertake research to support First Nation's education, and
communicate with the federal and provincial governments to ensure that First
Nations concerns are being addressed. The First Nations Education Steering
Committee provides support to First Nations on professional development,
teacher recruitment, and capacity building (INAC, 2005). The first Nations
Schools Association also provides support to parent advisory committees, local
school committees, elected First nation School board members, and trustees in
fulfillment of these governance and leadership responsibilities.

According to the Executive Director of the First nations Education Steering

Committee, Christa Williams “In B.C., we have made significant progress in First
Nations student achievement, because of the leadership and organization of First
Nation's people in the province." However, progress was only realized when this
leadership translated into effective partnerships” (Williams, 2005, p2).

Student Achievement and Data Collection in B.C.

In 1999, the British Columbia Ministry of Education undertook an Aboriginal

Learner Data Collection Initiative that identified the number of Aboriginal
students in B.C. Public Schools, on or off-reserve, between 1999 and 2004.

58
Estimates from this data collection initiative indicate an on reserve school
population of 11,000 and an off-reserve population of 40,000 students. This data
collection initiative was based on the principle of providing voluntary self-
identification of Aboriginal ancestry.

During this time, the Ministry of Education presented information to school

superintendents, school boards, First Nations communities and parents, showing
school district level information for the performance of Aboriginal and non-
Aboriginal students. Some districts showed disappointing results, but in terms of
equity and overall achievement, other did quite well. For example, students’
progress through secondary school is monitored to determine the length of time
to complete grade 12. Tracking a cohor5t of students year by year permits the
calculation of the percentage of a cohort who started in grade 8 and completed
grade 12 within six years.

Data and results for Aboriginal students in British Columbia show steady
improvement in Aboriginal high student completion rates over the past five
years. Statistics from the B.C. Ministry of Education indicate the number of
Aboriginal graduates that received a Dogwood (university entrance high school
diploma) in 1994 was 675. In 2003 the number of Aboriginal graduates receiving
a Dogwood increased to 1400. It is estimated that the rate of high school
completion for First Nations students was 60 percent (B.C. Ministry of
Education, 2004).

Mi’kmaq Education Agreement in Nova Scotia

In 1999, the Mi’kmaq Education Agreement was legislation completed in Nova

Scotia by federal law. This legislation gave each of the nine participating
community’s power to make laws related to primary, elementary, and secondary
education that would be applicable on their reserves. This agreement also created

59
the Mi’kmaw Kina’matnewey Development Corporation that supports the
delivery of education services to First Nations in Nova Scotia. There are
potential lesions to be learned from this agreement including the readiness of
First Nations on governance, accountability, pedagogy and financial management
(INAC, 2005).

The Mi’kmaq Education Agreement has developed learning and teaching

resources to teach the Mi’kmaq language to these First Nations in Nova Scotia
and new infrastructures and retrofitted schools have been constructed. This
agreement between the Mi’kmaq First Nations, the Province of Nova Scotia and
the Government of Canada has been extended for another five year period to
March 31, 2010.

Developments in First nations Post Secondary Education

“Each university has a moral and ethical responsibility to make affordable and
accessible to all sectors of society the educational opportunities they afford”

Ethel Gardiner – First Nations House of Learning

(University of British Columbia, 1988, p.194)

In 2002, a special Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs Working Group on

Education was established. Our Children – Keepers of the Sacred Knowledge
found that a significant gap exists in achievement among university graduates. In
2001, less than eight percent of the Aboriginal population had a university
education, about half the rate for the general population (INAC, 2002). The
federal working group recommended that the Minister of Indian Affairs,
Aboriginal leaders, and the Association of University and Colleges of Canada
identify immediate and long-term strategies to achieve the following:

60
 • I
mprove access for Aboriginal students to academic programs;

• E
xpand opportunities for Aboriginal students to pursue lifelong learning;

• W
ork in partnership with Aboriginal leaders to improve educational
services; and

• D
evelop strategies by which more Aboriginal students can enter university.

Opportunities for Aboriginal people to access post-secondary programs that have

strong support services and culturally relevant learning experiences are crucial in
addressing the demographic, employment, and economic issues facing the
Aboriginal population of Canada (Frideres, 2003, p.3).

In response to this challenge, many universities and colleges in Canada have

developed programs designed to facilitate and recruit more Aboriginal students.
It is premature to determine whether or not these public post secondary
institutions have been able to draw post secondary representation to
proportionate levels, based on the percentage of Aboriginal people in Canada.

Equity and Increased Access for Aboriginal Post Secondary Students in

Canada

One of the success stories of Aboriginal education in Canada is the increased

access of students to public institutions and tribal post-secondary institutions.
Equal educational outcomes require that the proportion of First Nations

61
university graduates match the general population (Hampton, 2000). In
Saskatchewan, the University of Regina has an Aboriginal enrollment of
approximately 15 percent, while the Aboriginal population of Saskatchewan is 14
percent

At the University of British Columbia’s First Nations House of Learning, it was

estimated that 250 First Nation's students were registered in 1993. If their
numbers were proportionate to their numbers in general population, then there
should be closer to 1500 first Nations students registered. By 2000, the
University of British Columbia’s First Nations House of Learning had met its
self-imposed target of having 1000 First Nations students.

At the University of Calgary, there are 300 self-identified Aboriginal students

attending the University of Calgary. This is out of an estimated body of 30,000
students. The Aboriginal student population represents one percent of the
overall student population (Frideres, 2003). This figure indicates that the
University of Calgary and Alberta Advanced Education need to be more
proactive in admitting and retaining Aboriginal students from across Alberta. As
a result, both the University of Calgary and the University of Alberta have
identified this as a priority in their respective business plans. Through a
partnership between the Alberta Ministry of Advanced Education’s Access
Growth Fund, the University of Calgary has begun two strategic initiatives aimed
at increasing their Aboriginal student population: the Aboriginal Access Program
and the International Indigenous Studies Program (Frideres, 2003).

NorQuest College – A Public Institution First Nations Success Story

Equally important is the accessibility of Aboriginal students to post-secondary

public institutions offering one-year certificate and two-year diploma programs.
NorQuest College, located in Edmonton, is a board-governed public college

62
operating under the authority of the Post-Secondary Learning Act in Alberta.
NorQuest College has over 10,000 full-time, part-time and distance education
students and has over 2000 graduates annually. Twenty-five percent of the
learners at NorQuest are self-identified as Aboriginal and they have designed an
extensive network of services tailored specifically to meet the needs of this group,
including Aboriginal Student Support Services and access to Aboriginal elders.
NorQuest’s Aboriginal programs and services provide opportunities to enhance
academic abilities and upgrade their students’ education within the context of an
Aboriginal cultural heritage. Some examples of NorQuest’s Aboriginal programs
are the Aboriginal University Transfer Program (in partnership with the
University of Alberta), the Ben Calf Robe Upgrading Program, the Aboriginal
Policing and Security Program and the Aboriginal Family and Support Program.

Teacher Training Programs in Western Canada – Success Stories

Since the establishment of the Native Indian Teacher Education Program in

British Columbia in 1974, Aboriginal teacher education programs have been
developed in many other provinces, including Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and
Alberta. These teacher-training programs are meeting the objective to increase
the number of Aboriginal teachers in both provincial and on-reserve schools.
The Native Indian Teacher Education Program model is based on the critical
components of 1) directive involvement of First Nations people in the design and
delivery of programs; 2) the development of courses and programs that reflect
the philosophies and values of First Nations; 3) the provision of a “home-away-
from-home” support function for students, staff, their families, and friends; and
4) the on-going assessment of programs (Gardiner, 2000).

The Gabriel Dumont Institute in Saskatchewan has developed a four-year teacher

education program leading to a Bachelor of Education degree designed
specifically for Métis students. The Saskatchewan Urban Native Teacher

63
Education Program trains Native teachers to meet the needs of Native students
and is developing and delivering culturally relevant training and education
programs in Métis communities all across Saskatchewan (Dorion and Yang,
2000). Similar Aboriginal teacher training programs exist at Brandon University,
the First Nations University of Canada, and the University of Saskatchewan.

The success in Aboriginal teacher training programs has had a very positive
impact on the development and expansion of teacher education programs in
other universities and has led to the development of improved practices in
Aboriginal teacher education. As well, more Canadian universities give priority to
the recruitment of Aboriginal persons to initial teacher education programs as
well as specialized and advanced degree programs. One example of graduate
research in Aboriginal teacher education is the Ts’’kel Administration Program
(Med) at the University of British Columbia. Ts’’kel has responded to a need for
advanced educational leadership training for First Nations teachers, principals,
directors and superintendents of Aboriginal education. The showcase at the
University of British Columbia is the First Nations House of Learning, which is
the leading research and development resource of First Nations education
materials in Canada.

Apprenticeship Programs in Alberta

The Alberta Aboriginal Apprenticeship Program is a joint venture between

Alberta Advanced Education, business and industry, the federal government and
the Aboriginal communities. The Alberta Aboriginal Apprenticeship Program
assists First Nations people interested in learning a trade to become apprentices;
assists Aboriginal people who enter apprenticeship programs complete their
programs, and promotes the hiring of Aboriginal apprentices to employers.
Alberta has over 100 registered apprentices participating in over 23 different
trades (Alberta Advanced Education, 2005). The Alberta Aboriginal

64
Apprenticeship Program is active in five Alberta communities, Edmonton, Fort
McMurray, High Level, Calgary, and Lethbridge.

In basic education programs, the Registered Apprenticeship Program provides

opportunities for high school youth to begin preparing for apprenticeship
programs in Grade 10. The youth are paid by their employer during the on the
job training and earn high school credits for this training. The Youth
Apprenticeship Program is a project that assists students; starting in Grade 7 and
continuing to Grade 12, explore career options through integrated learning
activities that include academic and applied learning.

First Nations University of Canada

Some implemented programs in Aboriginal education have been both successes

and failures at the same time, such as the First Nations University of Canada
(formerly the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College). It appears that its
strength of strong political ties to the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations
has also become its biggest weakness and area of vulnerability. In 1976, a small
but determined group of Indian educators in Saskatchewan were successful in
establishing an affiliation with the University of Regina, and the Saskatchewan
were successful in establishing an affiliation with the University of Regina and the
Saskatchewan Indian Federated College began with less than 100 students. In
2000, the Saskatchewan Indian Federated College changed it name to the First
Nations University of Canada and has a current enrolment of 1,600 students.
The First Nations University of Canada is still the only First Nations institution
recognized by the Association of Universities and Colleges in Canada as offering
university level education (Hampton, 2000). The tremendous enrolment growth,
success and rapid expansion of Aboriginal students is due, in part to the
University of Regina’s federation with the First Nations University of Canada and
the political will and support of the Federation of Saskatchewan Indian Nations.

65
The success was highlighted with the grand opening of the First Nations
University of Canada Campus in 2003. First Nations University of Canada
Campus attracts Aboriginal students from all provinces and territories with
programs in First Nations Studies, a First Nations National School of Dental
Therapy (in Prince Albert), First Nations Education, First Nations Social Work,
First Nations Language Training, and various Graduate Programs at the Masters
and Doctorate levels. First Nations University of Canada Campus also has
university campuses in Regina, Saskatoon, Prince Alberta, and LaRonge and
offers access and a variety of programs and courses throughout Saskatchewan.

In 2005, three senior First Nations University of Canada Campus staff, including
the Vice President of Finance and the Dean of Academic Affairs were suspended
by the Chair of the First Nations University of Canada Campus Board of 57
Governors. This Board Chair is also a Vice-Chief of the Federation of
Saskatchewan Indian Nations. Governance of the First Nations University of
Canada includes a formidable presence of the FSIN, that make up the majority of
the 32 member board of governors, with a reported $600,000 a year price tag to
the Province of Saskatchewan (Windspeaker, 2005, p.17).

As a result of the dismissal of two of the three senior administrators from First
Nations University of Canada Campus, a Task Force on the Future of the First
Nations University of Canada released an Interim Report and Discussion Paper
in October 2005. One of the findings in the report was that the FSIN Vice-Chief
and FNUC Board Chair acted unilaterally and interfered with the day to day
administration of the university when he arrived on campus February 17, 2005
and suspended three senior administrators. Two of those three administrators
were subsequently fired. Another one of the findings of the task force report was
that “the board should not include active politicians” (Windspeaker, 2000, p.17).
The FNUC Task Force Report also was extremely critical of “Questionable fiscal

66
controls and an outdated accounting system that provides little management
support and the lack of fiscal mechanisms may permit individuals to conduct
themselves improperly”. Also singled out were questionable human resource
practices at FNUC where thirteen grievances are currently pending against the
university and where personnel policies were either inadequate or not followed.

Most importantly, the FNUC report also pointed out “that academic freedom
was a bedrock of university life and was also a condition of certification with the
Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada. The task force believes that
the issue needs a full airing to clarify what ‘academic freedom’ means and how it
can be protected and encouraged within the unique setting that is FNUC”
(Windspeaker, 2005). The Canadian Association of Universities and Colleges did
a report and they put the FNUC on __________ since it did not address and
________ the issues.

Aboriginal Education Strategies in Alberta

In 2002, the Government of Alberta released the First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education Policy Framework, which was the outcome of an extensive public
consultation process involving over 5,000 participants. Since the development of
the Framework, work has been guided by five priority strategies/actions
recommended by the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Advisory Committee:

• To increase First Nations, Métis and Inuit learner access to post-

secondary and other adult education and training opportunities and
support services (Strategy 1.5);

• To increase the attendance, retention and graduation rates of First

Nations, Métis and Inuit students attending provincial schools (Strategy
2.1);

67
 • To increase the number of First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers and
school institution personnel (Strategy 2.2);

• To facilitate the continuous development and delivery of First Nations,

Métis and Inuit courses and professional development opportunities for
aspiring and existing administrators, teachers/instructors and school
institution personnel (Strategy 2.4); and,

• To build working relationships that will contribute to quality learning

opportunities for First Nations, Métis and Inuit learners (Strategy 4.2).

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Policy Implementation

In response to the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework,
Alberta Education and other stakeholders have made progress in enhancing the
educational opportunities of Aboriginal peoples in the province. Some of the
highlights of the work that is on-going or completed as part of the First Nations,
Métis and Inuit implementation include:

• Aboriginal Language Courses: Blackfoot and Cree Programs of Study

and Guides to Implementation have been developed in partnership with
Cree and Blackfoot educators.

• Aboriginal Studies 10-20-30: The first provincial program in Aboriginal

studies has been developed in partnership with elders, educators and
Alberta Education staff. The course content for Aboriginal Studies 10-
20-30 deals with First Nations, Métis and Inuit history and contemporary
issues in Alberta from a diverse Aboriginal perspective;

68
 • Social Studies K-12 Curriculum: The new Social Studies Program of
Studies has been overhauled to include governance, history, treaty and
Aboriginal rights, lands, cultures, and language perspectives, that are
being infused into this new Social Studies program;

• The First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch with Alberta
Education has increased its capacity by adding five new full-time
equivalents to the branch to work in the following area: Special
Programs, Literacy, Professional Development, Aboriginal Studies and
the Infusion of Aboriginal perspectives into all core subject areas;

• The First Nations, Métis and Inuit School Community Learning

Environment Pilot Project: Alberta Education dedicated $1.5 million to
support 16 school boards with significant Aboriginal populations to
develop and implement projects that target increased student
achievement, enhanced parental/community engagement, valuing
Aboriginal cultures and history, and that includes professional
development for staff in order to identify effective practices that will be
shared provincially; and,

• Aboriginal Teacher Education Modules: In partnership with the

Universities of Lethbridge, Calgary, and Alberta, Alberta Advanced
Education had developed instructional modules to be delivered to all
student teachers/interns of teacher education programs that address the
specific needs of First Nations learners.

Aboriginal Student Funding to Provincial School Boards in Alberta

Funding is available to assist school boards in Alberta to provide programs of

First Nations, Métis and Inuit students. In recognition of the difficulties in the

69
self-identification of First Nations, Métis and Inuit students, Alberta Education
funding to school boards is based on both Statistics Canada data and self-
identification with a phase in period of five years. By 2009, total funding for First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students was based on self-identification (Alberta
Education, 2005). The current First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding allocation
is $1,150 for each student in grades 1-12.

The implementation of the Renewed Funding Framework from Alberta

Education to school boards provides them with the flexibility required to address
local needs and priorities. The funding model is a method of distributing funding
only and does not dictate how school boards must spend their funding.
Although funding is allocated based on specific formulas, boards have the
flexibility to use their funds I whatever manner best meets their local needs. This
flexibility pillar funding from Alberta Education to school boards also applies for
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students. As of 2004 – 2005, Alberta Education
First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding allocations amounted to $30,778,500
(Alberta Education, 2005).

A critical reflection on the Alberta Education First Nations, Métis and Inuit
funding process is that school boards may choose not to spend their funding
allocations on Aboriginal students. There is the distinct possibility that f First
Nations, Métis and Inuit funding for Aboriginal students and programs may be
spent on other local priorities such as the rising costs of teacher salaries, or to
prop up existing programs because of declining enrolments, especially in rural
and remote areas of Alberta. However, provincial school boards in Alberta insist
on this flexibility as part of the new Alberta Education Renewed Funding
Framework.

70
 Input Model vs. Output Model in First Nations Education

On caution of the former Minister of Alberta Learning, Dr. Lyle Oberg identified
was:

“We (Alberta Learning) are no longer interested in being an “input-model” where

we are providing automatic funding increases to school boards and take our
chances to see if the overall Alberta education system improves. We are
interested in an “output model”, where the learning system works in partnership
with universities and colleges, trades people, school boards, Aboriginal
communities, and all other stakeholders, to facilitate increased student
achievement, higher rates of high school completion, and university and college
graduation. This is the new measure of educational success in Alberta”.

(Government of Alberta, 2004)

It is the view of the researcher that the new reality in First Nations education in
Canada has an emphasis on data collection/gathering and the need to assess and
analyze data relating to the performance of First Nations students in kindergarten
to grade 12 basic education programs. This output model will drive any future
funding of First Nations education programs with particular emphasis on
government investments based on First Nations student success and
partnerships.

Current Status

Participants felt that First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education in Canada is
becoming a more pressing and urgent issue and this is a reflection of today’s
society to improve the educational conditions for First Nations, Métis and Inuit
communities. Most participants felt that provincial programs, especially in British
Columbia, were much further ahead than anywhere else in the country. One
participant felt that this was not a priority of this current federal government,
because of the failure of support for the Kelowna Accord. Another participant

71
said that the expectations that came with First Nations control of their own
education systems have not been met. Another participant mentioned that there
has been incremental change in getting data on student achievement and
development of learning and teaching resources but that systemic changes needed
to be made within both the federal and provincial governments.

All participants agreed that the Government of Alberta and the Ministry of
Education was making a concerted effort to improve Aboriginal education with
the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework that was accepted
as government policy in 2002. Some highlights in Aboriginal education in
Alberta were the formation of an First Nations, Métis and Inuit urban high
school in Edmonton, the creation of an Alberta Charter School with an
Aboriginal focus and philosophy, the First Nations, Métis and Inuit per pupil
learner grants provided to provincial school boards. With the First Nations,
Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework, the government was implementing
many of the recommendations of the report and making considerable
investments in First Nations, Métis and Inuit learners.

However, on a regional basis, Indian and Northern Affairs was not keeping up
with these same investments and was lagging behind the Government of Alberta
in providing resources and supports, especially to First Nations education
systems on reserves.

72
 Discussions and Interpretation of Data
Table 2: Question 1 - What is the Current Status of First Nations, Métis
and Inuit Education in Canada?
Stakeholder Category
Represented
Mother Earth’s Children’s
Charter School
Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada
Treaty 8 Education
Commission
Alberta Education, First
Nations, Métis and Inuit
Services Branch, Treaty 7
First Nations, Métis and
Inuit Education Policy
Framework
Alberta Teacher’s
Association
Alberta School Board
Association
Alberta Commission on
Learning
Association of School
Board Officials
Treaty 6 Education
Interview Summary Comments and
Participant Responses
Strong in Alberta, weak in federal
J.B. programs to First Nations
Strong investments made in
D.D. Alberta, lagging behind federally.
High expectations with First
C.K. Nations control has not been met.
British Columbia leads the way in
D.C. First Nations, Métis and Inuit
education
Systemic changes needed but
T.F. incremental change has occurred
More mainstream educators
J.S. making First Nations, Métis and
Inuit a higher priority
All over the place, excellent in
D.Z. some area, lacking in other areas
Good intentions and people
M.D. working hard to help First
Nations, Métis and Inuit education
In Alberta, First Nations
C.P. struggling to keep up with
provincial programs financially
Not a priority of this current
B.W government
73
Table 3: Question 2 – Have There Been Points of Progress in First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Education?

Stakeholder Category Interview Summary Comments and

Represented Participant
Mother Earth’s Children’s
Charter School
Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada
Treaty 8 Education
Commission
Alberta Education, First
Nations, Métis and Inuit
Services Branch, Treaty 7
First Nations, Métis and
Inuit Education Policy
Framework
Alberta Teacher’s
Association
Alberta School Board
Association
Alberta Commission on
Learning
Association of School
Board Officials
Treaty 6 Education
Responses
Yes, strong in Alberta in
J.B. innovative programming
Charter/urban First Nations, Métis
and Inuit education
Strong in Alberta with First
D.D. Nations, Métis and Inuit learner
grants, weak federally in matching
education funding
Strong provincially with the
C.K. implementation of the First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Policy
Framework
Many advancements made on the
D.C. provincial landscape, not federally
A high priority in the Alberta
T.F. Education 2010 – 2013 Business
Plan
First Nations, Métis and Inuit
J.S. Teacher Training Models at
Alberta Universities
A priority item in working with
D.Z. School Boards and First Nations –
Tuition Agreements
ACOL report praises the First
M.D. Nations, Métis and Inuit Policy
Framework
$1060 per First Nations, Métis and
C.P. Inuit student provided to Alberta
School Boards
Sharing of data between School
B.W Boards and First Nations on
student achievement

74
 Points of Progress

All interview participants mentioned that a real and genuine commitment was
being made by the provincial government to improve First Nations, Métis and
Inuit education in Alberta. It was agreed that many positive developments had
taken place with the Government of Alberta in its implementation of the First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework (2002).

Universities have partnered with First Nations Tribal Colleges to train additional
teachers in First Nations cohorts at Red Crow Community College (University of
Lethbridge) and the Blue Quills College (University of Alberta). In addition, the
Alberta Teachers’ Association has published new resources for teachers to assist
them in their teaching and learning activities with all First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students (ATA Publication, Education is Our Buffalo).

The First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework has lead to
additional funding to all self-identified First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
attending provincial public and separate school boards ($1,150 per self-identified
First Nations, Métis and Inuit student in 2009 – 2010). This First Nations
student funding is allocated by Alberta Education to all public, separate and
charter school boards.

Another point of progress was inclusion of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in the Alberta Education Business Plan for 2010 – 2013 as one of four
priority items. Alberta’s First Nations, Métis and Inuit students are provided with
high quality learning opportunities and supports to enable successful learning.
This means that Alberta Education will support First Nations, Métis and Inuit
student cusses by raising the awareness of First Nations, Métis and Inuit student
needs and developing culturally relevant learning resources and programming

75
opportunities that will focus on continuous improvement for First Nations, Métis
and Inuit learners.

The Alberta Ministry of Education has also added a critical mass of Aboriginal
Education Managers into its First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch,
Aboriginal Policy Branch, Curriculum Branch, and its Learning and Teaching
Resources Branch. This added capacity of Alberta Education First Nations,
Métis and Inuit Education Managers has lead to new teaching resources such as
the Aboriginal Studies 10-20-30, i First Nations, Métis and Inuit infusion into
curriculum in all subject areas and the inclusion of the Aboriginal and
Francophone perspectives into the new Alberta Social Studies Curriculum. This
has also meant that First Nations, Métis and Inuit students have more relevant
curriculum where they can see themselves in these prescribed and learning and
teaching resources.

Another point of progress was the creation of an First Nations, Métis and Inuit
High School, Amiskwaciy Academy, in Edmonton and the start of an Aboriginal
focused Charter School, Mother Earth’s Children’s Charter School, that provides
educational options for students who could attend either provincial, band
operated, charter or private schools.

The Alberta Commission on Learning’s Report, Every Child Learns, Every Child
Succeeds, contains 15 recommendations relating to Aboriginal students and the
Government of Alberta has accepted all of these recommendations with a
commitment to their implementation.

76
Table 4: Question 3 – What is the Role of the Federal and Provincial
Governments in Improving Educational Success for First Nations
Students?

Interviewee Summary of Comments and Responses

The role of Alberta Education is to adequately fund all school boards
J.B. and Charter schools and ensure that they are accountable to parents,
communities, children, and the Minister of Education
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s current role is that of a funding
D.D. source and enabler of First Nations Education Authorities on reserve.
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is not in the business making First
Nations accountable for the funds or education programs that they
deliver. This is a problem.
I am unclear as to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s role in working
C.K. with the First Nations. They are only a funding source and have not
provided leadership to the First Nations of Canada.
The Government of Alberta and the Ministry of Education has provided
D.C. tremendous leadership to provincial First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students attending provincial schools. This is not the case with Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada.
First Nations schools in Canada and Alberta have not received proper
T.F. resources from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, in either funding,
leadership/strategic direction or second and third level services.
The role of the ATA is to ensure that all teachers in Alberta are
J.S. competent and meet provincial standards and processes in the teaching
profession. Because of jurisdiction issues, teachers on First Nations
communities are second class and not the employment of choice.
Alberta School Boards ensure that all students, including First Nations,
D.Z. Métis and Inuit students, receive a quality education and report results
and outputs. INAC is only accountable to Parliament in reporting on its
spending but is not accountable to Canadians or the First Nations.
Canada and Alberta need to show more leadership in negotiation of “Big
M.D. Picture” items like ensuring funding equity between federal and
provincial schools. They have allowed First Nations and provincial
school boards to fight among themselves in funding disputes.
INAC has fallen short in areas such as comparability. This means that
C.P. First Nations education programs on-reserve do not compare with
provincial education systems because they do not receive comparable
resources.
On-reserve education is not a priority of this Conservative Government
B.W. and First Nations have not moved forward with the death of the Kelowna
Accord.

77
Role of the Federal and Provincial Government in Improving Educational
Success for First Nations Students

All interview participants agreed the role of Alberta Education to provide

leadership, curriculum, learning and teaching resources, field support, policy
funding, program monitoring, strategic direction, and provincial standards to
school boards for all students, regardless of their ancestry.

All interview participants agreed that Alberta has a world-class education system
that is comprised of the Ministry of Education, and all other stakeholders e.g.,
that are equally important to the learning system. Some of the stakeholders
mentioned were the Alberta School Boards Association, the College of Alberta
School Superintendents, the Alberta Teachers’ Association, the Association of
School Business of Officials of Alberta. All participants agreed that First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students were marginalized and not reaping the benefits
of the world-class education system in Alberta.

The assessment of the federal government’s role in supporting First Nations,

Métis and Inuit students was unclear. Most participants understood that because
“Indians and lands reserved for Indians” was a federal jurisdiction. Therefore,
First Nations education program funding came from Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada. Most participants understood that the federal government had
turned over the program management of education in the 1980’s to the First
Nations through a process known as “devolution”. However, the assessment of
the federal government was that it was doing a poor job in assisting First Nations
in offering comparable education programs to provincial schools.

Participants said that the federal government was not providing the leadership,
strategic direction or comparable funding levels to First Nations, Métis and Inuit

78
education programs and agreed that the federal government did not have a
coherent approach to working with First Nations in the area basic education
(Kindergarten to Grade 12).

79
Table 5: Question 4 – What is the Role of the Provincial School Boards
and Other Stakeholders in Ensuring Accountability in Education
Programs for First Nations, Métis and Inuit Students?

Interviewee Summary of Comments and Responses

First Nations, Métis and Inuit
J.B.
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is not accountable to First
D.D. Nations. They do not monitor or report on any education
outcomes of First Nations Education. INAC is accountable to
Parliament and the Treasury Board.
The role is to ensure quality education for all students, including
C.K. First Nations, Métis and Inuit students. It is unclear as to what
role INAC has for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students beyond
that of a funding source.
Alberta Education is accountable to Albertans, the Minister of
D.C. Education and to the public to ensure that all students, including
First Nations, Métis and Inuit receive a quality education.
Government discourages partnerships with First Nations, Métis
T.F. and Inuit communities because it wants to maintain control in a
“motherhood” type of way that does not have First Nations,
Métis and Inuit personnel in senior decision-making positions.
School boards and governments are accountable to the elders and
their ancestors who signed the treaties.
Accountability comes in the form of the Teaching Professional
J.S. Act and the responsibility to provide quality education for all
students of Alberta. First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers are
not members of the ATA.
School boards are accountable to taxpayers, parents, students, and
D.Z. the Minister of Education. There are few accountability
mechanisms in First Nations education programs on-reserve and
this is a problem.
School boards and other stakeholders are accountable to the
M.D. parents, community members, students, and the Minister of
Education.
First Nations education systems are accountable to parents and to
C.P. the membership, and the Chief and Council of that First Nation
to ensure that students receive a comparable education regardless
of whether students attend schools on or off-reserve.
First Nations education systems are accountable to their
B.W. membership, parents, students, and the leadership to provide a
quality and comparable education. First Nations education
systems should strive to be the preferred choice of First Nations,
Métis and Inuit parents for their children.

80
 Accountability

All participants agreed that school boards, school superintendents, secretary-

treasurers, teachers, the Government of Alberta and Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada have a role in ensuring accountability for First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students. It was generally agreed that the provincial education system in Alberta
has many checks and balances and a constructive tension exists between each of
the stakeholders that keeps everyone accountable. It was also agreed that First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students are now a priority of all of the stakeholders
mentioned. This is evidenced by the fact that all stakeholders listed First Nations,
Métis and Inuit students as a priority within their business plans, three-year
education plans, and annual education reports.

Conversely, the view of most participants was that First Nations education
systems were trying hard to meet provincial standards and processes, but were
largely isolated entities without support from either Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada, Tribal Councils, Treaty organizations, professional development
consortiums, or provincial education stakeholders groups. In addition, education
systems on reserve are vulnerable to the larger needs of the Aboriginal
communities where education funding is spent in other areas such as housing,
social services, self-government and governance initiatives, and other priority
areas.

Without accountability mechanisms, participants agreed that First Nations

education would not move forward. These accountability mechanisms ought to
include data collection of student achievement results, attendance and
participation results on provincial achievement exams, high school completion
rates of First Nations, Métis and Inuit students and parental engagement of First
Nations, Métis and Inuit communities.

81
Table 6: Question 5 – Is there Adequate Funding for First Nations
Education Programs?

Interviewee Summary of Comments and Responses

Yes, there is adequate provincial funding for First Nations, Métis and
J.B. Inuit education. There is adequate funding for the Aboriginal Charter
School. First Nations education systems are under-funded and cannot
offer comparable programs, and there are tuition payment arrears to
neighbouring school boards.
Provincial funding is adequate, federal funding is lacking. The First
D.D. Nations, Métis and Inuit learner grant has helped provide programs for
students attending off-reserve.
Provincial funding is adequate, especially to school boards like the
C.K. Northland School Division. Federal funding to First Nations is
inadequate and does not provide for second and third level services that
provincial school boards take for granted.
There is adequate funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
D.C. attending provincial schools, largely because of the implementation of
the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework and the
implementation of the Alberta Commission on Learning’s
Recommendations: “Success for Every Child”.
There is adequate funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
T.F. attending provincial schools but more should be done. On reserve
education programs are totally underfunded. First Nations, Métis and
Inuit funding should follow the model of how Francophone education is
funded in Alberta.
Provincial schools with First Nations, Métis and Inuit students are now a
J.S. priority and receive adequate funding. I cannot comment on First
Nations education on-reserve because I am not qualified to do so.
There is adequate funding provincially. There should never be excessive
D.Z. funding because this would lead to abuse. There may be adequate
funding federally to support First Nations education systems on-reserve.
There may be too much bureaucracy.
Canada does not adequately fund its First Nations. Provincial funding is
M.D. only now recognizing that it needs to invest in First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students, and to include them in their long-term business plans and
annual reports.
First Nations on-reserve education is not adequately funded. Provincial
C.P. funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students appears to be
adequate. First Nations and INAC need to find a funding model that
provides equity with provincial education systems. The First Nations,
Métis and Inuit learner grant should be provided to every First Nations,
Métis and Inuit student whether they live on or off-reserve.
First Nations education systems like ours are adequately funded. We
B.W. must live within our means and not have high administrative costs.

82
 First Nations, Métis and Inuit Funding Adequacy

All participants agreed that the Government of Alberta and its Ministry of
Education have provided adequate funding to provincial First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students. It was the consensus of participants that the Government of
Alberta has invested funding, learning and teaching resources, additional
Aboriginal capacity within its school boards and Ministry of Education, and
provided First Nations, Métis and Inuit parents with choice, including charter
schools and urban First Nations, Métis and Inuit congregated schools.

Most participants agreed that there is inadequate funding for First Nations
students attending schools on-reserve. One participant disagreed and said that
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada was providing adequate funding but that
there was bad management of resources and excessive costs to First Nations
administration of education, including too many directors, school administrators,
and central office staff.

One participant added that First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding comparisons
between Alberta Education and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada was like
capering “apples to oranges”. Although attempts have been made to compare
funding levels, these exercises have been convoluted and incoherent.

Another participant suggested that First Nations, Métis and Inuit education on-
reserve did not have the required support for second and third level services that
are built into the provincial education infrastructure. Teachers on-reserve do not
have the support of membership in the ATA, school superintendents do not
have membership into the CASS, and secretary-treasurers do not belong to the
ASBOA.

83
One participant suggested that a detailed cost analysis of funding levels needed to
take place where participants from the treaty areas, Alberta Education, Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada and the Association of School Business Officials of
Alberta and engage in a cost analysis exercise.

84
Table 7: Question 6 – How do we Close the Educational Gap Between
First Nations and Non-First Nations Students?

Interviewee Summary of Comments and Responses

First Nations Education Systems on-reserve should model after
J.B. Francophone education. The goals of preserving language and culture in
Francophone education are the same ones First Nations, Métis and Inuit
communities have.
First Nations education on reserve has not worked because INAC has
D.D. funded schools on-reserves and not education systems. This must
change along with funding methodologies used to adequately resource
on reserve schools. INAC needs to re-think its relationship with First
Nations.
This might be a “lost generation” and we may have to invest in the next
C.K. generation. Relationships between First Nations and Alberta Education
need to be formalized ones along with the formation of a regional First
Nations education consortium or co-op. First Nations schools need to
aggregate and share resources with other schools.
First Nations, Métis and Inuit education must continue to be a priority of
D.C. the Government of Alberta and is one of the goals of Alberta
Education’s 2010 – 2013 Business Plan. First Nations, Métis and Inuit
education on-reserve issues of funding, jurisdiction, and accountability
need to be addressed.
Partnerships, partnerships, partnerships. There must be systemic change
T.F. where governments, federal and provincial, must become true partners
with First Nations. There has been enough consultation, and too many
reports written on First Nations, Métis and Inuit education. The First
Nations know where the solutions are and need to be empowered.
First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers need some kind of tenure and
J.S. membership to a professional association like the ATA. Unless this
happens, teachers on First Nations reserves will always be second-class
and the employment choice of the last resort.
On reserve schools are workable under provincial school boards like
D.Z. Christian schools, Hutterite schools, and Mennonite Schools under the
authority of a provincial school board (Palliser School Division).
First Nations schools could all become charter schools under the
M.D. authority of Alberta Education. Initiate discussions with treaty region
governments and the federal government to address the governance of
education to First Nations students.
Ensure that, when a First Nations student who reside on-reserve attends
C.P. a provincial school, he or she is funded at the same level as any other
student.
First Nations education systems need to become the schools of choice
B.W. for First Nations’ parents and children and not the choice of the last
resort.

85
 Closing the Educational Gap

All participants agreed that more formalized relationships need to occur between
First Nations, provincial governments, provincial education stakeholders, and the
federal government. First Nations need additional levels of support with a
context of aggregation where they would not be working in isolation or in a
vacuum. All agreed that the notion of Indian Control of Indian Education is a
sound concept but that governments were not truly supporting this concept with
adequate resources.

All participants agreed that there was a need for changing the current relationship
between First Nations and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and all agreed
that INAC needed to review its current role as only a funding source and an
enabler of First Nations education systems.

All participants agreed that the Winds of Trust were blowing as there is more
diversity among student in our public and separate school districts including:
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students, immigrant students, religiously diverse
students, and students with various ethnic and cultural backgrounds. This
diversity has made school boards look to meeting these diverse needs of students.

It was agreed that some of the best practices for closing the gap between First
Nations, Métis and Inuit and non- First Nations, Métis and Inuit students would
include visionary leadership, equal stakeholder ownership, respecting the
authority and role of each stakeholder, creating a shared vision of long-range
goals and commitments, having a common understanding of the current state of
affairs in First Nations, Métis and Inuit education, stakeholder support – with
strategic action plans, and public trust among all partners and stakeholders.

86
All participants were concerned about the attendance and participation of First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students who were “not in the schoolhouse”, and this
was a problem. All agreed that First Nations, Métis and Inuit education ought to
have higher expectations of First Nations, Métis and Inuit students with targets
of daily attendance of 90 percent or better.

Analysis and overview of Current Initiatives Addressing First Nations

Education in Alberta

The experts participating in this research study seemed frustrated with the fact
that First Nations students were not succeeding at the levels of other Canadians
and Albertans in an education system that is the envy of most other countries
globally. However, all participants agreed that it was now a priority of all
Canadians and Albertans to fix the current educational inequity facing the First
Nations people of Canada. All participants agreed that the sentiment of the
citizens of Canada and Alberta was there to support and improve all aspects of
life for First Nations people of Canada. All participants agreed that the sentiment
of the citizens of Canada and Alberta was there to support and improve all
aspects of life for First Nations peoples, including education. All participants
agreed that this is a priority for all Canadians as a social justice issue and that the
solution to the plight of First Nations peoples was through education.

This was mentioned by former Prime Minister Paul Martin when he made the
following statement: “there is a level of indifference to so much of the unfairness
Aboriginals have suffered from historically, but I have never spoken to an
audience of Canadians who haven’t immediately risen to the fact that Aboriginals,
First Nations among them, are not receiving the same level of primary and
secondary school education.” (Globe and Mail, July 2009, p.4).

87
All participants were encouraged by the election of Shawn Atleo, who has a
graduate degree in education, as the Grand Chief of the Assembly of First
Nations. Chief Atleo’s election in the summer of 2009 was encouraging for all
First Nations educators (including this researcher) as he has said that it is his first
priority to improve First Nations’ education for First Nations peoples. Grand
Chief Atleo has a graduate degree in distance learning education and he is acutely
aware of the challenges and barriers in First Nations education for the estimated
700,000 First Nations people in Canada.

88
 Chapter 5

The previous chapter presented data and summaries of data findings by question.
This chapter focuses on three priority areas that the researcher has identified as
the key to addressing the current challenges in First Nations’ education:
jurisdiction, resources (funding) and accountability. As is the case in many
research and academic exercises, interpretation is not free from the influence of
the researcher’s personal background, experience, and formal education training.
However, the researcher’s educational background and experiences in First
Nations education have allowed a significant degree of understanding. This
understanding should enhance First Nations, Métis and Inuit education to meet
the needs of First Nations, Métis and Inuit learners and their communities.

Jurisdictions

According to international law, jurisdiction can be defined as “The right of a

sovereign state to determine rights and duties of persons by legislation and to
enforce those rights and duties. The 1994 United Nations Declaration of Rights of
Indigenous Peoples states, “All indigenous peoples have the right to establish and
control their educational systems and institutions by providing education in their
own languages, in a manner appropriate to their cultural methods of teaching and
learning” (United Nations Indigenous Rights Declaration, 1994, p.2).

This researcher suggests that in order for First Nations in Canada to exercise
jurisdiction over education, they must have full fiscal operational control. The
First Nations must also be able to determine their needs and allocation of
resources among programs and services.

As well, First Nations must be able to negotiate with the Government of Canada
and the provincial governments, if they choose to do so. In a recent 2009 paper,

89
Michael Mendelson, a research fellow at the Caledon Institute of Social Policy,
wrote on the need for a First Nations Education Act. This researcher supports
this concept; however, any legal mechanism to replace the Indian Act must be
done in partnership with the First Nations of Canada. In addition, this proposed
action must recognize the federal government’s Treaty obligations to First
Nations and must enhance the First Nations’ ability to govern their own affairs
within a context of self-government and preservation of language and culture.

The National Indian Brotherhood’s 1972 policy statement was the foundation for
Indian Control of Indian Education. This thirty six year old policy statement was
clear in its assertion that the First Nations of Canada, and not the federal
government, have jurisdiction over First Nations education. This policy asserted
a vision of teaching and learning for all First Nations learners within an
appropriate, respectful, comprehensive framework.

Currently, First Nations recognize that this visionary philosophy of Indian Control
of Indian Education services as the foundation and guiding principle of First
Nations education. Today, the vast majority of First Nations communities in
Canada manage their own schools. A number of First Nations have established
regional organizations that support on-reserve schools through a variety of
activities.

Despite progress in overall education outcomes, however, there remains a

significant gap between education results of First Nations students, and those of
the general population. What is the next step in the advancement of Indian
Control of Indian Education? Where are the solutions? Here are some possible
answers.

90
Formalized Relationships of First Nations and Provincial Governments

Strategically, it is in the best interests of First Nations to work towards more

formalized relationships between themselves and provincial governments. There
are examples of successful and meaningful partnerships between First Nations
leadership (chiefs and councils), provincial Ministries of Education, Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada. Here are some examples:

In British Columbia, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed in 1999 that

committed all partners to working together to improve schools cusses for
Aboriginal learners in British Columbia. This MOU has lead to the First Nations
Jurisdiction over Education in British Columbia Act, which has laid the
foundation for the negotiation of individual Canada – First Nations Education
Jurisdiction Agreements with interested First Nations In B.C. The First Nations
Education Steering Committee has lead First Nations in the development of
framework agreements between First Nations and school districts with the
creation of Aboriginal enhancement agreements, where the province has made
additional investments to improve educational success of Aboriginal students in
provincial schools.

These closer and formalized relationships between First Nations and school
boards in B.C. have led to the provincial government providing expertise and
assistance in areas such as First Nations school and teacher standards and
certification, curriculum development, and data sharing. Current activities that
have resulted from this MOU include: reverse tuition agreements and associated
provincial recognition of First Nations school assessment and certification,
alignment of provincial and First Nations student data systems, and dispute
mediation in First Nations local education agreements.

91
In Alberta, the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Advisory Committee was
established to inform and guide provincial school districts in their
implementation of strategies. These strategies intended to improve the learning
outcomes of Aboriginal students. Committee memberships include the following
stakeholders: Alberta Teachers’ Association, Alberta Education, Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada, and First Nations directors of education.

As well, Alberta Education has established a process with First Nations schools
that allow the province to certify the schools in terms of verifying that employed
teachers have certification and that provincial curriculum is being followed. All
Albert on-reserve First Nations schools participate in the annual School Program
Declaration.

In Saskatchewan, a bi-lateral Memorandum of Understanding was developed

between the Province of Saskatchewan and the Federation of Saskatchewan
Indian Nations. This Memorandum of Understanding call Shared Standards and
Capacity Building Council is focused largely on improvements to Aboriginal
education in the provincial system. This Saskatchewan Memorandum of
Understanding focuses on improving outcomes in areas such as continuous
improvement frameworks, teacher certification, professional development and
student assessments.

In Manitoba, the Manitoba First Nation Education Resource Centre has lead
initiatives such as a Provincial School Improvement Project that focuses on
student achievement, baseline testing, professional development, teacher training,
and student transitions between First Nations and provincial schools.

In Quebec, a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between Indian and

Northern Affairs Canada and the Quebec First Nations Education Council in
joint efforts to support students in areas of accountability, teaching quality,

92
creating and stimulating school environment and strengthening school
administration.

In New Brunswick, a senior government Memorandum of Understanding

Concerning Education and First Nations Students and Communities in the Province of New
Brunswick, has been signed by the First Nations, Ministry of Education and Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada. This Memorandum of Understanding agrees to
have all parties work together collaboratively, and as expeditiously as possibly
toward improving educational outcomes for First Nations students in New
Brunswick.

Education Funding in Alberta

“In Alberta, we must ensure that when a First Nations student who resides on a
reserve attends a provincial school, he or she is funded at the same level as any
other student”.

Alberta Commission on Learning

Recommendation 28

As the former Director of the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch
of Alberta Education, this researcher can categorically state that Alberta has one
of the best education system in the world. This is because of excellent teachers,
high quality curriculum, excellent learning and teaching resources, and an
effective standardized testing program. The success of students in basic public
education programs in Alberta is reflected in international student achievement
results, which demonstrates that Alberta students consistently perform among
the best in Canada and around the world.

In Alberta, spending on kindergarten to grade 12 is approximately $6.3 billion for

the 2009 – 2010 fiscal year. That means that the provincial government will

93
spend $31.7 million every school day on the education of children in Alberta. Of
this amount 95 percent is direct support to school boards. The other five percent
include targeted funding programs to school boards, school facilities, basic
education programs, private schools, and program and department support
(Government of Alberta, 2009). From 1999.00 to 2009/10 the total government
support for the education funding had almost doubled.

Alberta teachers are the highest paid, on average across the country. On average,
a teacher in Alberta earns a salary of $80,865 plus benefits of $6,323. More than
34,500 active certificated teachers are employed in Alberta’s K-12 system (Alberta
Education Funding Manual, 2009).

Alberta has 2097 public, catholic, francophone, charter, private and home school
programs in Alberta, with a total student population of 596,113. The funding for
the Alberta Education system comes from the general revenue of the province
($4.6 billion) and the rest through education property taxes ($1.7 billion).

Alberta’s funding framework for K – 12 education is a collection of 25 different

grants and is simply a method to distribute funding to school jurisdictions in a
consistent and equitable manner. This means that 95 percent of funding is
flexible, meaning that school boards can have discretion to use these funds to
meet the needs of their students and only a few grants are targeted and must be
used for the purpose for which they were provided and the government does not
direct how funding is to be used.

In Alberta, there are four main categories of funding provided: base funding,
differential funding, targeted funding and capital funding. Differential funding is
enhanced funding over and above base funding on the unique circumstances of
each school authority. First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding is categorized
under differential funding. This funding is provided based on the number of self-

94
identified First Nations, Métis and Inuit students. Alberta Education has
introduced a new focus to support First Nations, Métis and Inuit students. Every
self-identified First Nations, Métis and Inuit student is funded at the rate of
$1,155 in provincial schools and $808.50 in private schools. In 2007-2008 the
total Alberta Education First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding was $30,446,197
for students attending provincial, charter, and private schools.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Education Funding Methodology

The education budget for a First Nation band-operated school is established in

each Indian and Northern Affairs Canada regional office. Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada provides education funding to First Nations in five areas: First
Nations band-operated schools, student support services, provincial tuition,
private schools, and post-secondary education. For purposes of comparison, the
researcher will focus on the state of affairs on First Nations band-operated school
and provincial; tuition students livi9n on reserve and attending provincial schools.

Funding is then calculated on a unit cost based on the number of students (units)
enrolled in the school; this number is established through the nominal roll (an
annual information database compiled each autumn that establishes an annual
census of students whose education whether directly or indirectly is funded
through Indian and Northern Affairs Canada. Therefore, Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada controls the amount of funding any band-operated school
receives by establishing the unit cost and determining the number of students
eligible to be funded.

First Nations attending provincial schools were funded based on the Alberta
school boards previous years audited financial statement that provided a base unit
cost per fulltime employee of First Nations student within jurisdiction. In
Alberta there were 6,655 First Nations students attending provincial schools in

95
2007 – 2008 (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Regional Funding
Methodology, 2007).

The Need for Comparability and Cost Analysis Between Canada and
Alberta

It is critical that a comprehensive exercise in cost analysis take place to compare

provincial First Nations, Métis and Inuit funding to provincial school boards and
First Nations funding from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to First Nations
in Alberta. This cost analysis exercise could involve representation from Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada, Alberta Education, Treaty representation from
areas 6,7 and 8 and the Association of School Business Officials of Alberta. This
analysis would include an assessment of the management characteristics between
the federal government, and its relationship to First Nations, and the provincial
government, and its relationship to provincial school boards. It would also be
critical to complete an expenditure analysis on how provincial school boards
spend their education budgets, compared to how First Nations spend their
education budgets.

Accountability in Alberta’s Education System

As mentioned previously, the Government of Alberta has introduced a Renewed

Funding Framework that is based on three pillars, one of which is accountability.
This Accountability Pillar provides all Alberta school boards with a broad range
of data on how they are performing compared to other school divisions.

This accountability framework focuses on a comprehensive examination of

performance that includes: student achievement, safe and caring schools,
parental involvement, and satisfaction with the education experience. All of these
considerations are measured and provide a more complete perspective on the

96
school boards overall learning environment (Government of Alberta, 2009). As
well, school boards report these results to their communities and thee data
provide a picture of where they are now, including areas of success and
challenges that lie ahead. In order to complete the picture, school boards must
analyze this detailed data that underlies this accountability pillar evaluation and
the many variables that may affect results.

The sharing of provincial and school authority results is an important part of the
accountability framework. School boards share their results publicly with their
communities through their Three-Year Education Plans and their Annual
Education Results Report. Much of the data collection and measurement is
completed through surveys with parents, teachers, board members, students,
principals and superintendents.

The accountability pillar has a very detailed breakdown of the goals are:
measurement categories, measurement category evaluation, and measures for a 3-
year period. These measure are also color coded with evaluations of either good
(green), blue (improved significantly), yellow (status-quo), orange (at ease), and
red (declined significantly).

Accountability in First Nations Band-Operated Schools

In Budget 2008, the Government of Canada announced the Reforming First

Nations Education Initiative, that dedicated $268 million over four years and $75
million ongoing to improve First Nations student education outcomes. This
initiative has created two optional, proposal-based initiatives, 1) The First Nations
Student Success Plan and 2) The Education Partnerships Initiative.

The purpose of this education reform initiative by the Government of Canada

was to make a commitment to First Nations education by putting “particular

97
emphasis on improving education for First Nations in partnership with the
provinces and First Nations communities” (Government of Canada, 2008, p.1).

The First Nations Student Success Plan’s objectives are aimed at focusing on
three priority areas literacy, numeracy, and student retention. These Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada First Nations student success plans are comprised of
three components, First Nations school success plans, student learning
assessments, and performance measurements. Although these new initiatives
mirror some of the requirements of provincial school boards in reporting to
Alberta Education, they are attempts to implement accountability mechanisms in
First Nations band-operated schools. As these new Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada education initiatives are very recent, it is too early to tell if they are having
an impact on First Nations student achievement and accountability.

Financial Accountability

First Nations, or their designate, manage schools on behalf of the Crown, Indian
Affairs “provides funding to band councils or other First Nation education
authorities to support instructional services” (Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada, 2004, p.17). A particular concern is the quality of educational services
that First Nations are able to provide for their students when financial
administration, for a variety of reasons, including the escalating costs of First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students in provincial schools, have been placed by
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada within a financial recovery plan. The worst
case scenario is third party management to address a financial recovery plan “in
the event of a default by the Chief and Council’ (Indian and Northern Affairs
Canada, 2003).

98
 Educational Accountability of First Nations Band-Operated Schools

Financial accountability must go hand in hand with educational accountability

where the educational programming by both First Nations and Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada work together to address the educational attainment
gap identified by the Auditor General in both 2000 and 2004. In 2004 the
Auditor General suggested that the “gap between First Nations people and the
rest of the Canadians had not narrowed and that First Nations high school
graduation rates have actually declined from 34 percent in 1996 to 29.6 percent in
2002” (Auditor General, 2004, p.5).

A former high-ranking official with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Sheila
Carr-Stewart, 2006, raised the issue of “Systemic Educational Inequalities”
between First Nations Band-Operated schools and provincial school boards.
Although Canada and First Nations entered into an educational partnership
through Treaties, quality educational services for First Nations students and
equitable educational programming with that provided in provincial schools had
not evolved.

Unlike the provinces, Canada did not enact a First Nations Education act, where
there could be educational and professional regulations, governance mechanisms,
funding manuals, programming guides to implementation, and proper curriculum
support initiatives. Rather, over the past century, Canada’s provision of
educational services has been limited to sections 114 – 122 of the Indian Act.
The Act has been amended from time to time, though the last significant
amendment was in 1951 (Carr-Stewart, 2006).

99
 A First Nations Education Authority Act

As mentioned previously, the Caledon Institute of Social Policy Fellow, Michael

Mendelson, suggests the passing of a First Nations Education Authority Act
which would replace sections of the Indian Act. This proposed Act could be an
effective vehicle to gather political momentum and public support for major
reform and improvement in First Nations education.

This Act could be a rallying point that would allow First Nations opting in to get
out from the obsolete sections of the Indian Act. The Act would also provide an
enforceable mechanism for adequate funding of First Nations educational
authorities that meet the conditions of the Act. Initially, this Act would be
voluntary, allowing First Nations to opt in if they wish to do so (Caledon
Institute, 2008). This new Act would also provide a national framework for
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada to fund and recognize First Nations with
statutory and regulatory authority.

Kainai Government Agreement

Another possibility is for tri-lateral framework agreements to be negotiated with

Her Majesty the Queen, in Right of Canada, as represented by the Minister of
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, First Nations, and provincial governments.
One proposed agreement exists between the Blood Tribe of the Blackfoot
Confederacy of Treaty 7, the Government of Canada, and the Government of
Alberta.

The Kainai Government Agreement is an agreement in principle where the

Blood Tribe has now taken over jurisdiction over child welfare matters on the
Blood Indian Reserve and the funding thereof. The next step in the Kainai

100
Government Agreement is to move towards taking over education legislation
respecting the exercise of jurisdiction over education matters by the Blood Tribe
and its membership residing on and off-reserve. This agreement would mean
that the Blood Tribe would assume full control over matters relating to education
and replace all sections of the Indian Act relating to schooling of Indian children.
The vision of the Blood Tribe is to enact legislation for its members in the same
way that the Government of Alberta has its own School Act.

101
 Chapter 6

RECOMMENDATIONS

With respect to the completion of this dissertation, the following twenty-three

recommendations are offered to improve outcomes for First Nations students in
Canada, along with their accompanying roles and responsibilities. These
recommendations are based on the data collected and analyzed during the
research phase of this thesis. They are made to the following stakeholders.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada

Implement a new First Nations Education Authority Act that would replace the
dated education section of the Indian Act. This new statute would outline the
vision, mission, strategies, and priorities for all involved including federal and
provincial governments, First Nations education authorities and band-operated
schools.

Review the current First Nations education funding methodologies in

consultation with First Nations to address treaty, regional and geographical
differences in the delivering of basic education programs to First Nations
students.

Develop federal compliance guidelines and documents in the following areas:

Aboriginal student performance measurement and reporting, First Nations
education funding manuals, and guides to First Nations Education Authority
planning and provide the necessary training for First Nations education
authorities.

102
Complete a “gap analysis” exercise to determine adjusted funding levels of First
Nations, if they were funded based on the basis of the Alberta Education
Funding Manual to Provincial School Boards.

Complete a comparison of the respective management regimes and

characteristics of both the provincial government and their relationships to
school boards and the federal government and their relationship to First Nations,
in the area of education.

Complete a cost comparison analysis between the expenditures of First Nations

education authorities and schools and the expenditures of school boards.

Provincial Governments – Departments of Education

Facilitate greater First Nations participants, where significant numbers of

Aboriginal children attend provincial schools, a meaningful role in the
governance of those schools, through school board appointments.

Ensure that First Nations funding is a provincial priority and require that First
Nations, Métis and Inuit funding be targeted or enveloped and must be used for
this purpose.

Require that all provincial school boards with significant Aboriginal student
populations, hire First Nations and Métis administrator, teachers, and other
administrative support personnel at the equal percentage of their overall
Aboriginal population in the district.

Ensure that each province target, designate, and financially support one post-
secondary institution as an Aboriginal centre of excellence to provide research
and development to assist with regional Aboriginal education initiatives.

103
Ensure that each provincial government lead discussions with provincial teacher’s
federations/associations, superintendent associations, school board associations,
secretary-treasurers associations, and First Nations, towards the goals of signing
Memorandum of Understandings to improve Aboriginal and First Nations
education in each province.

Provide additional funding to business and industry to facilitate greater access and
involvement of Aboriginal people to employment, skills and training facilities in
apprenticeship, industry and trades. Training opportunities for journeymen and
apprentices in the labor force areas that lack Aboriginal workforce participation
are construction, electrical, plumbing, woodworking, cosmetology, welding,
machinery, and other trades.

Make legislative changes to provincial school acts to allow First Nations teachers
to become members of provincial teachers associations or federations and/or
allow the formation of First Nations Teachers Associations.

Teachers

Ensure that all perspective students in teacher training programs be required to

take instructional modules in First Nations, Métis and Inuit education as part of
their education components at all universities and colleges offering teacher
training programs.

Require that all on-reserve teachers have professional growth, supervision and
evaluation plans to comply with provincial requirements of teacher quality
standards.

Encourage all First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers to self-identify to provincial
federations and associations to complete an inventory of teachers who can assist

104
the professional development of teaching and learning strategies for First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

Encourage all First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers to consider membership
status within all provincial teachers’ federations and associations to gain access to
training opportunities offered by professional development consortia.

Facilitate the development of “First Nations, Métis and Inuit Specialist Councils”
that can assist all First Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers in their own growth and
development in the teaching profession, in concert with provincial teachers’
associations/federations.

Engage a comparative analysis exercise of teacher compensation and benefit

packages offered to teachers working on reserve and those working in provincial
school systems.

First Nations Leadership

Ensure the establishment of regional/provincial education umbrella

organizations, such as the First Nations Education Steering Committee in British
Columbia. These regional organizations would align with the respective
provincial education ministry and would provide support and provincial
leadership to all First Nations education authorities as part of their membership.

Establish a provincial First Nations School Board Association to provide regional

and provincial support to board members and parent advisory committees of
First Nations education authorities as part of their obligations.

Work with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada in the establishment of First
Nations education data collection and performance reporting systems.

105
Initiate discussions with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada on the
development of joint “co-management” education programs for the operation
and maintenance of First Nations Education Authorities, where they lack the
current capacity to function independently.

Explore the idea of tri-party self-government agreements between First Nations,

the federal government, and the provincial governments where First Nations
School Acts would be signed as a part of advancing First Nations education and
self-government initiatives.

Provincial School Boards

Ensure that when a student who lives on-reserve and attends a provincial school
they are funded at the same level as any other student.

Initiate discussions with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, First Nations
Education Authorities, and Ministries of Education on the development of
templates for tuition agreements for on-reserve students attending provincial
schools, to address funding inequities between First Nations students attending
provincial schools and band-operated schools.

Initiate discussions working towards formal working agreements between First

Nations’ school boards and provincial school boards to build relationships and
work collaboratively on areas of common concern.

106
 Chapter 6

CONCLUSION

In 2008, the Assembly of First Nations Chiefs, Committee on Education

National Indian Education Council released a position paper entitled First
Nations Jurisdiction of Education: A New Indian Control of Indian Education
Policy – Preparing Our Children for the Future. This paper was a reminder to all
the First Nations Peoples of Canada that the goals, dreams and aspirations of the
Indian Control of Indian Education Policy Paper of the Nation Indian
Brotherhood of 197 remained the same today:

“Indian parents must have the Full Responsibility and Control of Education.
The Federal Government must adjust its polity and practices to make possible
the full participation and partnership of Indian people in all decisions and
activities connected with the education of Indian children. This requires
determined and enlightened action on the part of the Federal Government and
immediate reform, especially in the following areas of concern; responsibility,
programs, teachers and facilities.”

(NIB, 1972, p.27)

Almost four decades later, the fulfillment of these aspirations is still waning (Carr-
Stewart, 2006). This issue does not go unnoticed international. Educational
attainment and equitable participation in Canadian society are significant issue,
ones that have received the attention of the United Nations. The United Nations
publishes an annual ranking of the Wellbeing of Nations, a survey that ranks 180
countries by measuring such terms as living conditions and the ecosystem
(United Nations, 2001). “Whereas, once Canada was ranked number one as the
best place in the world to live, Canada has now dropped to eighth place… one
reason given for the drop was Canada’s failure to provide proper living
conditions for its Aboriginal peoples” (London Free Press, 2003, p.72). It is the

107
hope of the researcher that this thesis will draw attention to these three priority
areas that must be addressed in order to address the needs of First Nations
education in Canada and Alberta. In conclusion, the researcher offers a final
word on the three topic areas of this dissertation, jurisdiction, resources, and
accountability.

There is reason to be encouraged by recent discussions about the development of

regional First Nations school boards to govern First Nations schooling based
upon Treaty regions in Alberta. It is encouraging to see the possible formation of
a regional First Nations education organization in Alberta. The possibility of a
First Nations Education Authority Act would allow First Nations schools to
aggregate and organize themselves in districts that model themselves on public
and separate school districts and have functions similar to school boards. This
important topic will be an agenda item by the Assembly of Treaty Chiefs in
Alberta in 2009. It is important to send the critical message to all of the First
Nations of Canada that provincial and third party involvement will not jeopardize
their existing Treaty and Aboriginal rights that are entrenched in the Constitution
Act, 1982.

On average, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has continued to fund First
Nations education authorities with budget increases of two percent per year. In
Alberta, the growth rate exceeds five percent per year. A new First Nations
Education Act or other agreements like the Kainai Government Agreement
would address issues of funding adequacy and funding support for second and
third level services. Consistent with the recommendations of the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, it is here recommended that the
establishment of second and third level services, including regional centres of
excellence in Aboriginal education, and the creation of a national First Nations
Education Institute, which would provide national functions, including a central

108
clearinghouse for the preservation of Aboriginal languages and cultures. The
current funding methodology and business practices of Indian and Northern
Affairs are inadequate. According to Brian Wildcat

“The current Indian and Northern Affairs Canada regime is inadequate. It is

piecemeal, proposal driven and short term. This approach has schools focusing
on the wrong things, wasting time on writing proposals and reports. Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada has a simplistic understanding of how schools work,
treating each of the estimated 650 schools as a stand-alone operation. They are
driven by compliance with no shared vision for an education system focused on
learner success.”
(Wildcat, 2007)

One of the comments of the Auditor General was that Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada, provincial governments, and First Nations must be committed to
“working together with First Nations and all other stakeholders, regardless of
financial stability, to ensure the provision of quality education for First Nations
learners” (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, 2004, p.1). The time for system
changes appears to be now.

Canada cannot continue to ignore the educational gap that exists between the
First Nations students and other Canadians. In 1969, the federal government
came forward with a White Paper on Indian policy, which Indians rejected and the
government subsequently withdrew it. Public controversy concerning the policy
was widespread, but much of it centred on the secretive fashion in which the
policy was prepared.

Concluding Remarks...Last Word

With the rejection of the Kelowna Accord, the current Harper Conservative
government’s Reforming First Nations Education Initiative is more of the same
proposal driven and short term thinking that has not worked for previous
governments in assisting First Nations education in Canada. First Nations

109
education system improvement and student success will fall short with these
current initiatives that commit $268 million over five years and on-going funding
of $65 million each subsequent year. Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is not
an expert in basic education and has a poor understanding on how to operate a
school system. The First Nations of Canada need to work with the expertise and
capacity of provincial school systems, and aggregate with other First Nations to
achieve better outputs and student achievement results.

In Sally Weaver’s Making Canadian Indian Policy: The Hidden Agenda 1968 – 1970,
she talked about the federal government have a “hidden agenda” regarding the
Aboriginal people of Canada. Today, many First Nations educators have the
same fear that Prime Minister Harper has a hidden agenda in his current
education policy with regard to the First Nations of Canada. This fear relates to
the current Conservative government’s corporate “speak” of accountability
mechanisms, outputs, and investment worthiness that are required of all
Canadian, including the First Nations of Canada.

These are the new catch phrases and realities of First Nations education
programming in Canada. First Nations education in Canada is driven only by
policy because of the absence of federal government legislation and regulation.
More importantly, First Nations education policy is also driven by the political
ideology of the government of the day. Reforming First Nations education in
Canada will require systemic change with required government legislation and
regulation, in partnership with First Nations and provincial governments. Only
then will First Nations see student success, school improvement, and
accountability for their children in elementary and secondary programs.

110
 REFERENCES

Alberta’s Commission on Learning. (2003). Every Child Learns, Every Child

Succeeds. Alberta Learning Publication, Edmonton.

Alberta Education. (2008). First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework.

Alberta Education. (2005). Renewed Funding Framework. School Finance Branch,

Corporate Services Division.

Alberta Education. (2005). Renewed Funding Framework. School Finance

Corporate Services Division.

Alberta Learning. (2004). First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework:
A Progress Report. Alberta Government.

Alberta Learning. (2003). First Nations Achievement and Participation on Provincial

Achievement Tests, Grades 3, 6, and 9. Learner Assessment Branch,
System Improvement and Reporting.

Alberta Learning. (2002). First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy Framework.
Government of Alberta.

Alberta Teachers’ Association (2006). Education is Our Buffalo: A Teachers’ Resource

for FNMI Education in Alberta. Barnett House. Edmonton, Alberta.

Alberta Teachers’ Association. (2003). Certification of Teacher Regulation and Teacher

Quality Standards for Teachers in Alberta.

Allard, F. (2001). The Rebirth of Big Bear’s People – The Treaties: A New Foundation
for Status Indian Rights in the 21st Century. University of Manitoba.

Assembly of First Nations. (1988). Tradition and Education: Towards a Vision of

Our Future, Chiefs Committee on Education – National Indian
Education Council.

Auditor General (2004). Report of the Auditor General of Canada in the House of
Commons, Chapter 5: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada –
Elementary and Secondary Education. Ottawa: Minister of
Public Works and Government Services Canada.

111
Boldt, M. (1993). Surviving as Indians: The Challenge of Self-Government. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.

Boldt, M. and Long, J.A., eds. (1988). The Quest for Justice: Aboriginal Peoples and
Aboriginal Rights. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2004). Aboriginal Education Enhancement

Agreements.

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (1999). A Memorandum of Understanding

on Aboriginal Education.

British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2003). How are we doing Demographics and
Performance of Aboriginal Students in British Columbia Public Schools, 2002
– 2003.

Canada Council on Learning (CCL, 2007). Redefining How Success is Measured in

First Nations, Inuit and Métis Learning, Summary Report.

Canadian Education Association (1996). How Schools Succeed: The National Report
of the Exemplary Schools Project, Applied Research Bulletin, Vol. 2, N. 1.

Canada – Aboriginal Peoples Roundtable Report (2004). Strengthening the

Relationship. Government of Canada’s Privy Council’s Office (PCO).

Carr-Stewart, S (2006). First Nations Education: Financial Accountability and

Education Attainment. Canadian Journal of Education 29, 4, 998 –
1018.

Castellano, M.B., Davis, L., and Lahache, L. (2000) Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling
the Promise (1st Edition). University of British Columbia Press.

Cowley, P & Easton, S. (2004). Studies in Education Policy; Report Card on Alberta’s
Elementary Schools. Fraser Institute.

Dorion, J. and Yang, R (2000) Métis Post-Secondary Education: A Case Study at

Gabriel Dumont Institute, Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise.
Castellano, M. Davis, L. and Lahache, L.

Dosdall, E, (2009) Using Data to Improve Results for Aboriginal Students. Closing the
Gap Education Symposium, Alberta School Boards Association.

112
Edmonton Public Schools (2003-2004) Amiskwaciy Academy: Annual Education
Results.

Flanagan, T. (2000) First Nations, Second Thoughts. McGill University Press.

Frideres, J.S. (1993) Native Peoples in Canada: Contemporary Conflicts. Fourth

Edition. Scarborough, Ontario. Prentice Hall.

Frideres, J.S. (2003) University of Calgary: Aboriginal Access Proposal for Alberta
Learning.

Friesen, J.W. and Friesen, V.L. (2002). Aboriginal Education in Canada: A Plea for
Integration. 8,13, 137 – 138. Detselig Enterprises Ltd.

Gardiner, E. (2000). First Nations House of Learning: A Continuity of Transformation.

Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise. Castellano, M. Davis, L. and
Lahache, L. University of British Columbia Press.

Globe & Mail (2009). Chief Shawn Atleo’s Tough First Assignment: Fixing Native
Schools.

Goddard, J.T. (1993). Band-Operated Schools: Considerations for the Future.

Canadian Journal of Native Education. Volume 17, No. 2, 220 – 223,
University of Alberta.

Government of Canada (1867). Constitution Act.

Hall, D.R., (1992). FED-BOS: The Federally Controlled Band-Operated School and the
No-Policy Policy. Canadian Journal of Native Education. Volume 10,
No.1. 57 – 63, The University of Alberta.

Hampton, E. (2000). First Nations Controlled University Education in Canada

Aboriginal Education: Fulfilling the Promise. Castellano, M. Davis, L. and
Lahache, L. University of British Columbia Press.

Hawthorn, H.B. (1966, 1967). Survey of the Contemporary Indians of Canada.

Indian Act (1996). Revised Statues of Canada.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (2008) Reforming First Nations Education
Initiative.

113
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (2007). Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
Alberta Region Program Funding Methodologies 2007 – 2008.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada (2005). In Response to the Auditor General’s
Observations and Recommendations. Chapter 5 of November 2004
Report.

James Bay and Northern Quebec Agreement (1975). Government of Quebec’s

Education Act.

Kainai Government Agreement. (2009). Framework Agreement for the Negotiation of

an Agreement Respecting the Jurisdiction Over Child Welfare and Education
Legislation by the Blood Tribe.

Kirkness, V.J. (1979). Implementation of Indian Control of Indian Education Policy

Paper.

Kirkness, V. and Bowman, S. (1992). First Nations and Schools: Triumphs and
Struggles. Toronto: Canadian Education Association.

Matthew, N. (2007). Education Funding from a First Nations Perspective. Discussion

Paper prepared for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.

Mendelson, M. (2009). Improving Education on Reserves: A First Nations Education

Authority Act, Caledon Institute of Social Policy.

Mendelson, M. (2009). Aboriginal Peoples and Postsecondary Education in Canada,

Caledon Institute of Social Policy.

Mendelson, M. (2006). Improving Primary and Secondary Education on Reserves in

Canada, Caledon Institute of Social Policy.

Mi’kmaq Education. (1999). Mi’kmaq First Nations Education Agreement Department

of Education, Government of New Brunswick.

NorQuest College (2005 – 2006) Calendar and Inventory of Aboriginal Student

Programs.

114
National Indian Brotherhood. (1972). Indian Control of Indian Education. Ottawa:
National Indian Brotherhood.

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Report of the Royal Commission

on Aboriginal Peoples – Volumes 1 – 5. Renewal: A Twenty-five year
Commitment. Ottawa Canada Communications Group.

Raham, H. (2007). Issue and Options for First Nations Program Renewal.

Raptis, H. & Fleming, T. (2003). Reframing Education: How to Create Effective

School. Education Policy Research.

Richards, J. (2006). Creating Choices: Rethinking Aboriginal Policy, C.D. Howe

Institute

Richards, J. (2004). Testing Reading and Writing and Arithmetic: A Modest Nest Step
for Aboriginal Education.

Seale, C. (1998). Researching Society and Culture. SAGE Publications. London.

Thousand Oaks. New Delhi.

School Act. Government of Alberta (1988)

Special Committee on Indian Self-Government. (1983). Indian Self-Government:

Report to the Special Committee (Penner Report). Ottawa, Queen’s
Printer.

Statistics Canada. (2006). Census Data, Information of Aboriginal Peoples of Canada.

Statistics Canada. (201). Census Data, Information on Aboriginal Peoples of Canada.

Van Maen, M. (1997). Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for Action
Sensitive Pedagogy. Althouse Press. University of Western Ontario.

Weaver, S. (1981). Making Canadian Indian Policy: The Hidden Agenda, 1968 –
1970. University of Toronto Press.

White, J. (2007(). Enhancing Educational Attainment for First Nations Children.

Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.

Wildcat, B. (2007). School Success Planning: An Opinion Paper. Brian Wildcat

115
 Consulting, Unpublished.

Williams, C. and Matthew, N. (2005). First Nations Education Steering Committee.

Simon Fraser University. Public Policy Program.

Windspeaker Magazine (2005). Interim Report on First Nations University of Canada.

Aboriginal Multi-Media Society.

Zech, D. (2002). One People, Two Worlds. Unpublished.

116
 APPENDIX A

Interviews with First Nations Education Experts

The data analysis results have been summarized by interviews from a sequence of
the first interview to the tenth. For purposes of convenience, issue have been
summarized by key phrases and paraphrased in bullet form, and each interview is
summarized in approximately five pages. The identification of the interviews are
abbreviated by the interviewee’s initials:

1. Dr. John Brosseau (JB) – Superintendent, Mother Earth’s Children’s

Charter School. A member of the College of Alberta School
Superintendents

2. Delbert Dahl (DD) – Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, Alberta

Region.

3. Dr. Collin Kelly (CK) – Director Treaty 8 Education Commission. A

member of the College of School Superintendents.

4. Donna Crowshoe (DC) – Alberta Education, First Nations, Métis and

Inuit Education Branchy.

5. Terry Fortin (TF) – First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy
Framework, Alberta Education. A retired member of the College of
Alberta School Superintendents.

6. Jacqueline Skytt (JS) – Professional Development Coordinator, the

Alberta Teachers’ Association.

117
7. Don Zech (DZ) – Board Chair, Palliser School Division. A member of
the Alberta School Boards Association.

8. Mike Davenport (MD) – Member, Alberta Commission on Learning.

9. Curtiss Pilling (CP) – Member, Association of School Business Officials

of Alberta.

10. Brian Wildcat (BW) – Director, Ermineskin First Nation, Miyo

Wahkotowin Community Education Authority, Hobbema Cree Nations
of Treaty 6.

118
 INTERVIEW 1: Dr. John Brosseau

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit

Education in Canada/Alberta?

• There have been significant improvements in the last five

years with the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy
Framework in Alberta. This has brought the focus down to individual
schools and is a powerful indicator of the direction of the Alberta
Government. The government has also recognized the problem of lack
of student achievement of Aboriginal students.

• Also, the federal government’s involvement in Native

education has lagged behind the Government of Alberta in addressing
the needs of Aboriginal students with high rates of absenteeism and non-
completion. Federally, it is a very difficult situation.

• Urban schools such as Ben Calf Robe, and Amiskwaciy

Academy are attempts to focus on the needs of the urban Aboriginal
population, especially in Edmonton.

• The difficulty is the mixing up of so many things such as the

cultural disintegration of the Native society because of assimilation, the
input of the white population, residential schools, and poverty. These are
all mitigating factors in the lack of success of native students.

• We need to work without young Native students to create a

greater sense of personal responsibility and personal ownership of their
own lives by making certain choices that are positive.

119
 • However, I am encouraged by the rising enrolment figures in
post-secondary schools in universities, colleges and technical schools for
Native students.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress in First Nations, Métis

and Inuit Education?

• The concept of the governance of Native schools by the

Native population is very sound. However, on-reserve there has been
political interference of the chief and councils in providing education
programs on reserve.

• Mother Earth’s Children’s Charter School (the first

Aboriginal Charter School in Alberta) is a step in the right direction;
however, severe problems exist because of the governance model that
exists.

• There is largely not independent budgeting authority on most

reserve education authorities. Financially, there are no checks and
balances.

• The lack of tenure for teachers on-reserve is problematic and

creates a lack of security and an environment of instability in schools.

• The issue of the urban Aboriginal population in Edmonton

where Native education will increasingly be taking place largely in the
urban areas and not on reserves.

• To what degree do we want to transmit the Native culture

into education programs, in areas such as traditional culture, language,

120
 and spirituality? The issue of a growing urban Aboriginal population is
becoming an emergent issue. Does this change the culture of a group
that used to be rural and land-based to one that is urban?

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• The closer you are to the people, the more effective you can
be delivering education programs. The costs of education in Alberta are
far greater than that of other regions in Canada and adjustments needs to
be made to reflect these regional differences. Indian and Northern
Affairs Canada must recognize the expenses and higher costs in Alberta
in adjusting their funding formula.

• There is a need for greater dovetailing of provincial

educational systems with Indian and Northern Affairs Canada in
providing education programs to First Nations communities.

• There is also difficulty of the governance of First Nations

education institutions and attracting board members and retaining them.

• You cannot have seventeen chiefs trying to run a school.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in educational programs for First

Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

121
 • There is a far more positive atmosphere in working with
provincial school boards and First Nations communities. Aboriginal
people are coming out of the closet because it is far more acceptable to
be identified as an Aboriginal person.

• Doe we make excuses for Aboriginal students and

employees? There are frequent absenteeism and lateness, from an
employability point of view. We are dealing with a very difficult
population. This is part of a culture.

• There is a far more positive atmosphere in trying to help

Aboriginal students by the mainstream because it is far more acceptable
to hire Aboriginal people because they are functioning successfully in the
dominant culture.

Question 5: Is there adequate funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• There is adequate provincial funding for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs. There is a discrepancy in federal funding of two or
three thousand dollars less. There is not adequate funding for federal
First Nations education programs.

• First Nations do not have the fiscal capacity that provincial

school boards have in providing adequate funding for Aboriginal
students.

• If equivalent funding is not received from both federal and

provincial sources, then it is a problem.

122
 • Aboriginal education analysts could look to the francophone
models where there are seven school boards in Alberta as a possible
model for First Nations education in Alberta where each elects their own
school boards and establishes these school boards.

• Transportation is a major problem because of fuel costs and

the lack of bus drivers in getting Aboriginal students to school.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non- First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• This will be difficult. We cannot give up on Native students.

Some students will fall be the wayside because of drugs, alcohol, and
suicide.

• In Japan, students who did not measure up to their standards

often commit suicide.

• There is a need to develop more relevant learning and

teaching resources for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• Does the Native population learn differently? Yes, they are

more visual learners and artistic. There should be greater emphasis on
videoconferencing, and the use of smart-boards. Teaching must be
exciting or Aboriginal students get bored and they get into trouble.

• We are in the early stages of a new development of education

where Aboriginal students “have their own place” in an education system
such as the Native Centre at the University of Alberta.

123
• Aboriginal students must be able to see themselves as part of
the education system where they are engaged and valued in that
institution.

124
 INTERVIEW 2: Mr. Delbert Dahl

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• I think it is fair to say that the education of First Nations

students is still lagging behind the general population. There are a
number of issues primarily because of the social issues in First Nations
communities, such as the high incidents of drug and alcohol problems.

• There have been significant advances and efforts to improve

education in the form of targeted initiatives in area like special education
and parental involvement in schools.

• There have been efforts federally, provincially and by First

Nations to have appropriateness of education programming for First
Nations students. However, it is difficult to measure these short-term
gains and will require a more long-term analysis over many years.

• The Auditor-General’s report of 2000 mentioned that First

Nations students will take over 20 years for First Nations to catch up
with general population in the area of education.

• There have been efforts by the federal government to

improve accountability of education programs on-reserves, as a response
to the Auditor-General’s report.

• One of the criticisms of the Auditor-General was that Indian

and Northern Affairs Canada did not have a good understanding of how

125
 much of the money provided for education was really being spent on
education on reserves.

• There has been improved disclosure in the Audited Financial

Statements of First Nations to identify how much is being spent on
education programs on reserves and clearly separating how much is being
spent on provincial tuition.

• There are not clearly outline and defined standards nationally

on education by individual First Nations and to roll this up to report to
Parliament on how much was being spent on various elements of
education, such as teacher salaries.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• There is now discreet identifiable funding for First Nations,

Métis and Inuit students provided for provincial school boards by Alberta
Education, where they are required to report on the First Nations, Métis
and Inuit student achievement related to this student learning grant.

• This has meant that provincial school boards must report on

how this funding was spent on First Nations students and not blend this
in with other normal (non- First Nations, Métis and Inuit programs)
programming dollars.

• This First Nations, Métis and Inuit learner grant is likely to

lead to identifiable results of better student achievement for First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

126
• Without these accountability requirements, provincial school
boards could not report on improved student achievement of First
Nations students by provincial school boards.

127
Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s relationship with First

Nations is that of being an enabler.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s goal has been to

support First Nations to develop control of education within their own
communities.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has a responsibility to

report to Parliament on how these First Nations education funds are
being spent.

• The federal government’s role is to ensure that there is

adequate funding for education. To know how money is being spent and
how students are achieving.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is also the funding

source for provincial tuition of First Nations students attending
provincial schools.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s primary responsibility

is to respect the desire of its First Nations clients.

128
Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• We must always respect the wishes of First Nations to ensure

that there are processes in place for First Nations to assume control over
programs like education.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada’s relationship with the

provincial government is a delicate matter because our primary clients are
the First Nations. The federal government cannot be seen to have too
cozy a relationship with provincial governments, as this may be seen as
not respecting their own relationships with provincial governments.

• Successful tuition agreements are the ones that have strong

and direct relationships between First Nations and school boards, where
Indian and Northern Affairs Canada plays a minor role.

• School boards will often take a righteous stand without trying

to work with First Nations and complain to the Ministry of Education,
school boards need to engage First Nations communities.

• All First Nations education authorities must complete an

independent and comprehensive school evaluation once every five years
and these reports are provided to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
These evaluations may identify areas of improvement that can be
addressed through phase II funding.

129
Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• The Province of Alberta is adequately funding First Nations,

Métis and Inuit education programs.

• The Alberta Renewed Funding Formula does provide

flexibility of school boards to adequate support cultural and language
programs to enrich the education of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students.

• Federally, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada pays tuition of

students attending provincial schools, this is adequate provided that there
is adequate planning done by provincial school boards.

• Federal funding to First Nations programs on reserve is a

problem.

• One of the challenges of trying to resource First Nations on a

national basis in such a way to provide comparable programs in
provincial schools. There are competing pressures for finite dollars. This
is a challenge for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada Alberta Region to
provide funding in areas such as education, social and capital.

• In Alberta, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has not been

able to match, dollar for dollar, the funding provided by the Government
of Alberta for provincial schools with First Nation, Métis and Inuit
learners.

130
 • Band-operated school programs have suffered and this hurts
on-reserve First Nations education programs. One response of the
federal government is to provide targeted funding initiatives such as, New
Paths, Teacher Recruitment and Retention, and Parental and Community
Engagement to provide support to band-operated schools.

• There needs to be a funding approach to enable Indian and

Northern Affairs Canada Alberta Region to provide comparable funding
to provincial education.

• Most First Nations schools tend to be smaller and more

isolated compared to provincial schools and this is problematic for these
schools.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada requires that student

attendance be documented through Nominal Roll Compliance where
department officials will make on site visits to First Nations schools to
ensure data integrity.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• We need to provide comparability analysis funding using

provincial funding models in area such as special education, teacher
salaries to justify a case for additional funding and supplement First
Nations to meet the teacher salaries of provincial school teachers.

131
• This comparability analysis will assist us in justifying a larger
investment in on-reserve education programs to support the building of
First Nations education systems.

• We need reporting on overall performance on aggregate

results for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students both on and off-reserve
to ensure privacy of not releasing individual student data.

• There is potential for a First Nations School Act, which

would update current clauses in the Indian Act that addresses mandatory
attendance of school age children from ages 6 to 16.

• The Ministry of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada has

been permissive in not enforcing the student attendance clauses in the
Indian Act. Clauses in the Indian Act are old and date back to when
students were in day schools, religious schools, and provincial schools.

• The federal government funds individual schools and not

systems. The provincial government funds systems. This is a problem in
funding one school with respect to economies of scale.

• First Nations schools should contemplate aggregation with

other schools where smaller First Nations can work together particularly
at the High School level, where student achievement drops off.

• This is a long process where there is a sense that there is a

lost generation. Currently, we need to ensure that there are appropriate
resources at the elementary levels.

132
• We need stronger accountability and attendance requirements
in First Nations schools, especially at the higher grades where success in
based upon attendance.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada cannot be hands off in

the work with First Nations Education Authorities and needs to ensure
that they are responsible to their communities.

• It is key for the department to assist in the development of

broad based education systems in First Nations communities to not
disadvantage First Nations leadership compared to provincial systems.

133
 INTERVIEW 3: Dr. Colin Kelly

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit

Education in Canada/Alberta?

• When this current generation of First Nations students

finishes their education, the next generation will do better. We are not
doing as well in the whole area of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
education.

• There was an expectation that when First Nations took over

education, things would be better, this has not materialized. It still hasn’t
met the expectation of First Nations communities with respect to the
treaties and the dreams put forth by the vision of Indian Control of Indian
Education.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• Alberta Education and the First Nations, Métis and Inuit

Education Branch and the Aboriginal Policy Branch have taken
significant steps to engage First Nations communities with the
Government of Alberta. These have been significant steps in developing
relationships.

• There is a real desire that federal and provincial jurisdictions

want a level of involvement in supporting First Nations, Métis, and Inuit
education.

134
Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• The elders of Treaty 8 said that they wanted to build a

comprehensive education system for all students. This would be an
education system that grew from the grass roots and involved the
community in local decisions.

• They wanted a system that was accountable and performed

on par with the provincial system.

• The Northland School Division model is unique in that it has

its own legislation that adopted a governance structure that is different
from other school boards in Alberta.

• In Northland School Division, there are 23 school trusties

and their primary success was getting people involved.

• There was a slight and steady trend line heading north in

areas of student achievement in Provincial Achievement Tests. Students
did well in grade three and six Provincial Achievement Tests and then fell
off in grade nine achievements.

• Northlands School Division needs to really take a look at

what it needs to do, to the point where they have outgrown their current
governance structure.

135
 • The College of Alberta School Superintendents perceived
Northland School Division as the worst performing school division in
Alberta as the “kick-around” school division.

• The College of Alberta School Superintendents became quite

supportive of Northland School Division, as did the Alberta School
Boards Association, who also supported our activities.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in educational programs for First

Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• Stakeholders looked to Northland School Division to

participate along with them in their professional activities.

• There is much more awareness of First Nations education

activities such as funding formulas in areas such as small schools but
necessity.

• Northland School Division received exemptions in areas such

as school councils in provincial school boards. This meant that these
schools were not required to establish governance entities like school
councils that was required of all other public and separate schools.

• Northland School Division raised the profile of First Nations,

Métis and Inuit education and all organizations were supportive in raising
the issues of First Nations, Métis and Inuit education, especially the
Association of School Business Officials of Alberta.

136
 • This is a good thing and it is a bad thing. School
superintendents and secretary treasurers would propose quick fixes
without consultation with First Nations communities and this is not the
right approach.

• First Nations education programs are accountable to their

membership to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, and to the
provincial government in meeting provincial standards and processes.

• First Nations Education Authorities want to be accountable.

They want to be able to compete on a level playing field, from a funding
point of view and apply the pressures to get this additional funding.

Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit education programs?

• Initially, there was adequate funding in the days of requisition.

Northland School Division had all of the unorganized territory in Alberta
as provincial crown land.

• This would mean revenue increases in the mill rate, which

would raise the level of funding, along with oil and gas permits, that also
increase revenue.

• However, costs of high needs students began to rise along

with the rising costs of education and this meant that Northland School
Division had to fall in line with provincial funding formulas. This took
away from progams that Northland School Division could offer to its
students.

137
• Northland School Division had approximately a $12 million
surplus in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s.

• Northland School Division did not fall within Alberta’s new

Renewed Education Funding Framework model. The issue is that
Northland School Division would need to draw from their surpluses to
maintain programming levels.

• As a result, Northland School Division received additional

funding to support their school board in the implementation of the
Renewed Funding Framework.

• First Nations have control of a school but this does not

reflect the vision of Indian Control of Indian Education. We have missed the
boat where it is always an aspect of someone having the upper hand
where someone else always has control.

• There needs to be a critical look at how grassroots education

can be reflected in First Nations education.

• There is no adequate funding for First Nations education in

band-operated school. In the Yukon, the government supported each
student with an average per pupil base cost of $16,000 per student.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada funding levels are

deplorable for on-reserve education programs.

• Treaty 8 Education Commission cannot pay for their

principals to meet, this would be unacceptable in provincial school
boards.

138
 • Funding levels for northern school boards in Alberta such as
High Prairie and Fort Vermillion provide for levels are head and
shoulders above First Nations Education Authorities.

• Indian and Northern Affairs is not putting it as a corporate

priority to genuinely investigate the needs of First Nations on-reserve
education.

• Comparable results cannot be achieved without comparable

funding and First Nations Education on reserve is suffering.

• Kudos to the Government of Alberta for investing more

money into education, however, they are ignoring the First Nations,
Métis and Inuit component of student programs and supports.

• The information that First Nations is providing to

governments is anecdotal information. Government bureaucrats want
statistical data. Government officials want facts and figures.

• The response of society in general, is that we will demand

statistical data. It is not enough that the Auditor-General says that First
Nations are 20 years behind other Canadians. Communities need to look
at their own backyard and determine what is happening with local First
Nations that they do business with.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• Resources and Human Resources need to be provided to

First Nations Education Authorities. This costs money.

139
• Learning and teaching resources need to be provided to all
Canadians about residential schools, cultural disintegration, to provide
everyone with history lessons to provide answers as to why First Nations
in Canada are in this current circumstance.

• First Nations students need education in an education

context that is familiar. Culture camps need to exist where students get
to experience education on the land.

• We need to fund our First Nations schools adequately. I am

an optimist that the controls for education have to happen from within
the First Nations communities.

• Partnerships need to be established with Ministries of

Education and other stakeholders such as CAS, ASBOA, and ASBA.
This can be done without First Nations giving up their autonomy.

• The Government of Alberta needs to step up and engage

with First Nations communities. It is not enough to establish a First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Education branch unit. This trivializes First
Nations, Métis and Inuit Education in moving forward with genuine
education initiatives.

• We need to move from linear thinking that there is an answer

for everyone.

• Superintendents know that 80 percent of factors dealing with

the success (or failure) of students, are factors beyond our span of
control. However, we can make use of relationships and partnerships
between First Nations and governments.

140
• In Alberta we take in more revenue from gambling than we
do from oil and gas and we find ourselves in a situation where our
infrastructure is crumbling, including schools. There was a neglect of our
capital structures of the schools.

• When First Nations are given the resources and supports,

then they will succeed. Governments need to work with First Nations
communities so that the leadership can facilitate and navigate them to
solutions.

• What needs to be said, has already been said, what was

written a long time ago by First Nations leadership is still very relevant
today.

141
 •
INTERVIEW 4: Donna Crowshoe

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• In British Columbia, the First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs are further ahead in terms of data collection in
student achievement and retention.

• In British Columbia there is more engagement than in

Alberta in empowering First Nations to make local decisions involving
students from their own communities. This is powerful and needs to be
done in Alberta.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• Define progress in the area of curriculum, Aboriginal Studies

10-20-30 and the infusion of the Aboriginal perspective in the new Social
Studies curriculum and the infusion of history, culture, and language and
programs into all subject areas.

• There have been meaningful advances beyond beads, arts,

and crafts towards academic achievement, student retention and success
plans for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• The funding of provincial school boards means more dollars

because of the Renewed Funding Framework, and how the Ministry of

142
 Education is providing more funding and additional support to First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students in attending provincial schools.

• The Government of Alberta now has added capacity in the

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch, Aboriginal Policy
Branch. The Ministry of Education has made a genuine effort in capacity
building to acquire expertise from the First Nations, Métis and Inuit
communities.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• The role of the Government of Alberta and the Ministry of

Education needs to ensure that all First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
achieve educational success because we are not achieving the success that
other Albertans do.

• Alberta Education does work with First Nations Education

Authorities to ensure that they are following provincial teaching and
learning standards in area such as teacher certification and meeting
minimum requirements of teacher instruction through the use of School
Program Declarations that are required to be completed by First Nations
schools on-reserve, in order to be recognized as private schools in
Alberta.

• Alberta Education provides curriculum updates, requests for

learning and teaching resources, and programs of study.

143
 • The First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Branch does
meet with school districts twice a year to discuss three-year (long-term)
education plans to ensure that they are including the First Nations, Métis
and Inuit education programs. Another meeting is held to discuss First
Nations, Métis and Inuit progress on Annual Education Results Reports
to determine what is being done in the area of First Nations, Métis and
Inuit initiatives.

• Money that school boards receive is flexible and does not

necessarily have to be spent on First Nations, Métis and Inuit initiatives
because of the pillar of flexibility that is built into school board funding
allocations.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• Provincial school boards are just now beginning to share

results of student achievements on Provincial Achievement Tests, such as
the High School Diploma Exams because this data is just now being
gathered.

• School boards are now just disaggregating these results and

giving them back to school boards to share with First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students.

• First Nations Education Authorities ought to be accountable

to their parents, communities, and memberships. Parents don’t really
know that this information exists.

144
• First Nations Education Authorities need to have high levels
of reports to their communities by producing long-term education plans
and short-term education success plans that address results and outputs
of First Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• Planning in First Nations Education Authorities is necessary.

There is a need to plan for long-term goals and strategies.

145
Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• Alberta Education is adequately funding First Nations, Métis

and Inuit education programs. However, if school boards have other
priorities besides First Nations, Métis and Inuit programs, then they see
this as unfair. The area of contention is the flexible nature of this funding
that is not targeted, and is spent at the discretion of the school board.

• Federal funding is not adequate.

• This funding gap means that provincial school boards have

more resources to provide a larger choice of courses and options than
First Nations schools.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• Data is important today. Data collection needs to take place

where First Nations, Métis and Inuit students are tracked to provide
programs that are tailored to meet their educational needs.

• Without data, we will never know what the problems are and
how we can provide learning supports to address these problems. All
programs and learning supports are data driven.

• We need to not only collect data but report it as well. This

hard data on student achievement is necessary and illustrates a new
reality.

146
• Alberta Education needs to start partnering with First
Nations in areas beyond education into areas such as health, social
services, and children’s services.

• First Nations need to come together collectively to provide a

voice. In Treaty 7 it is difficult to move forward without supporting each
other and this will not happen until we are unite. A stronger voice might
lead to collective actions on the part of Treaty 6, 7 and 8.

• First Nations leadership does not fully understand the value

of aggregation and the need for a collective voice.

• First Nations educators are not being heard. All of the

answers are in the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy
Framework that summarizes the views, visions, and goals of their
communities.

• First Nations need to be included in the initial discussions

about the challenges and strategies needed to close the gap of education
that currently exist.

147
 INTERVIEW 5: Terry Fortin

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• This status of Native education is still not an important issue

across Canada. We do so that political advances where the Ministers of
Education in the provinces and territories of Canada have made this an
area of discussion. We are starting to see this issue become a priority
among ordinary Canadian, who see Aboriginal issues as an area of
importance.

• Other than British Columbia, there is very little evidence or

data collection to suggest advancements in Aboriginal student
achievement, participants or high school graduation rates.

• The First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education Policy

Framework allowed the First Nations and Métis to write their own
reports and do extensive consultations with Aboriginal communities.
This policy framework allowed all Aboriginal communities to be heard.

• The Government of Alberta did not act on the

recommendations of the report.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• T
here was a move by the Government of Alberta to implement some of

148
 the recommendations of the First Nations, Métis and Inuit Education
Policy Framework.

• T
here was not systemic change in the Department of Education and the
government cherry-picked the recommendations that they wanted to act
on.

• F
irst Nations leadership does not see education as a priority. The
Government of Alberta does not have Aboriginal persons in positions of
leadership. The Alberta Government takes a motherhood approach in
working with First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities.

• N
on-Aboriginals are making paternalistic decisions about Aboriginal
education.

• T
he government has moved to develop language resources.

• T
he Government of Alberta has taken a consultative approach rather than
a partnership approach in working with First Nations, Métis and Inuit
people.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

149
 • T
he two key stakeholder groups that are needed in improving Aboriginal
education are the College of Alberta School Superintendents and the
Alberta School Boards Association. They need to have an educational or
business plan approach where they are measuring Aboriginal education
outcomes.

• W
e need data on who our Aboriginal students are. We need data on who is
teaching Aboriginal students. We need data on spending on First
Nations, Métis and Inuit education and we need to report this data to the
proper authorities, this is the Aboriginal community.

• S
takeholders need to have proactive, collaborative, partnerships with
Aboriginal communities.

• G
overnments have the idea that they are in charge of everything and
discourage the words of partnerships in order to maintain power and
control. It is the government that makes the final decisions.

• S
ystemic change is needed and incremental change is occurring.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

150
• I
n general, there is no accountability for the funding received by school
boards to First Nations, Métis and Inuit education programs.

• T
he British Columbia model is a good model that has targeted funding and
this is tied to signing of Memorandums of Understanding between school
boards and First Nations to ensure a high level of engagement.

• T
here is reporting on Aboriginal students achievement through shared
agreements.

• T
he role of school boards is to facilitate parental participation.

• A
boriginal parents want representation on school boards and school
councils.

• S
chool board legislation in Alberta is permissive legislation that does not
guarantee Aboriginal representation on school boards. This needs to be
required legislation. School boards need to find out how to get
representation on school boards, as is the case in Ontario.

• A
boriginal people want to be at the table when decisions are made.

151
Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• F
unding is never adequate and there is never enough. The funding needs
to be designated targeted or desegregated funding.

• T
here is no doubt that on-reserve schools are totally underfunded.

• F
irst Nations School Boards and Authorities in Alberta are second-class
citizens that are not funded adequately or justly regarded.

• I
ndian and Northern Affairs Canada continues to try to have a national
funding formula for everyone that does not work in Alberta and this is a
flawed methodology.

• A
lberta School Boards insist on flexible funding and did want desegregated
funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit education programs.

• F
irst Nations, Métis and Inuit funding ought to follow a francophone
education model in funding.

• W
hen Treaties 6, 7, and 8 were signed with a comparable education system
to at least the Alberta Funding Formula plus 20 percent for second and

152
 third level services. There is provincial funding in areas such as school
board funding, special education funding.

• F
irst Nations are asking basically for the same principles as francophone
education, language and culture and a workable, effective education
system.

• D
ata collection on Aboriginal student achievement will hold school boards
accountable.

• F
irst Nations are accountable to their ancestors to preserve languages and
culture, parents, and to the children today, tomorrow and in the future.

• F
irst Nations must also be accountable to elders because they are the
owners and keepers of the culture.

• T
here needs to be transparency in both data and funding.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• Aboriginal communities want desegregated results and

student achievement data, even if the results are disappointing.

153
• This will lay the groundwork for partnerships where school
boards will share resources with First Nations, Métis and Inuit
communities.

• The key partners in improving Aboriginal student

achievement are school boards and neighbouring First Nations.

• Subsidiary and solidarity are key principles where the federal

and provincial governments need to give power to lesser authorities and
connect the First Nations and the school boards without blame.

• Partnerships are key at the provincial level. This would mean

signing agreements by senior government officials at the highest levels,
the Minister of Education, the Minister of Advanced Education, and
Treaty 6, 7 and 8 representatives.

• There would then be a provincial report card on First

Nations, Métis and Inuit education on measures and results. After the
release of these results, with transparent data, then the education plan of
action can respond to these results.

• There is the political will and we must realize that this is just
good business for Canadians and Albertans.

• Transparent data exists in other jurisdictions in England and

Ontario and this should be the case in Alberta.

• We have made incremental progress but more needs to be

done in the area of leadership capacity and informed leadership. This is

154
 fine but systemic changes need to occur to truly advance First Nations,
Métis and Inuit education.

• An executive director of Aboriginal education needs to be

there to add value to the existing education in key decision make
structure.

• We definitely want Aboriginal people in key leadership and

senior positions in government, where they are actually present and
consulted when these important decisions are being made.

• The chiefs of First Nations need to make resolutions with

meat and potato actions to deal with education.

• We really need an Alberta First Nations education co-op and

clearinghouse that provides services and available to them to buy if they
wish, with a governance board with respected First Nations individuals.

• This co-op or clearinghouse would give the First Nations

leadership in the development of position papers to advance First
Nations, Métis and Inuit education.

• To move forward we cannot blame the chiefs or First

Nations leadership.

• Aboriginals in Alberta are disenfranchised from the Alberta

economy and the Alberta advantage.

155
• If the Government of Alberta does not act then they will pay
in another way like the penal system or areas like civil disobedience and
violence. It isn’t a matter of whether you will pay but where you will pay.

• The Auditor-General has a major role to play in monitoring

government in areas such as First Nations, Métis and Inuit education.

• Aboriginal people have been consulted enough. They need

governments and other stakeholders to read what has already been
written.

• We need to get the systemic triggers for Aboriginal people to

lead and be supported in the area of education.

156
 • INTERVIEW 6: Jacqueline Skytt

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• It is dynamic and is an area that is evolving and we will see

changes and enhancements in First Nations, Métis and Inuit education
that is a reflection of society’s view that in Canada and Alberta that we
support First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• M
ainstream educators needed to be educated on First Nations, Métis and
Inuit education and they then can become advocates.

• T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association has become involved in asking what is
being done to improve student achievement of First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students.

• T
he First Nations, Métis and Inuit students are in our schools and we are
not doing a good job in educating them.

• T
he public and teaching profession’s attention has turned up the head on
poor Aboriginal student achievement and we are focused on strategies on
how to improve these results.

157
 • A
ll stakeholders including the Alberta Teachers’ Association are focused on
dealing with this and everyone is seeing the need and wanting to make
progressive changes in this area.

• W
e see more Aboriginal teachers in the Alberta Teachers’ Association and
having them become more engaged in improving results for all First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• O
ur First Nations, Métis and Inuit Alberta Teachers’ Association resource
is not for student but it is for teachers to become more aware of First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students

• S
chools are genuinely trying to work with First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students and communities.

• T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association has made available inclusive school
grants and there are several grants in the area of First Nations, Métis and
Inuit education; this shows that schools are making the effort. These
grants are for elders, or student field trips to First Nations communities.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

158
• P
rovincial teachers’ associations and federations do not have jurisdiction in
working with First Nations; however, there is a real awareness of the
need to do something from an equity point of view of how we make First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students and communities feel like they are part
of the system.

• I
n order to achieve equity for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students we
need to pay more attention to them and give them more support because
they have been disadvantaged for so long.

• C
hange happens on two levels, structurally through policies and practices,
and at the relationship level.

• R
elationships need the development of trust in other and trust in the
process to getting to the point of believing in the work.

• I
n policy, we have seen some substantial changes to create movement
around the implementation of the First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education Policy Framework and what were the things that needed to be
done by the Alberta Teachers’ Association.

• O
ne of the changes that the Alberta Teachers’ Association was heavily
involved in was the need to provide university teacher preparation

159
 programs in First Nations, Métis and Inuit education and publications
such as the First Nations, Métis and Inuit education.

• F
irst Nations, Métis and Inuit education is a priority area and we have
demonstrated this in our publications, teacher preparation and
development of a First Nations, Métis and Inuit specialist council.

• T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association is also mentoring teachers and First
Nations, Métis and Inuit teachers.

• T
eachers can self-identify as Aboriginal teachers to assist in professional
development for all of the membership of the Alberta Teachers’
Association.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• T
here have been more teachers hired by school boards; there are also more
teaching positions.

• T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association bylaws and the Teaching Professions
Act would need to be changed. This limits our involvement with First
Nations communities.

160
 • T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association supports private and charter schools in
becoming part of our association.

• T
he Alberta Teachers’ Association is not interested in organizing unions on
First Nations communities. This is a matter for teachers on First Nations
communities and schools to decide.

• T
eachers come and go in First Nations communities and part of this has to
do with re-numeration, pension and the lack of benefits in comparison to
salaries and benefits offered by provincial school boards.

Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• A
lberta Education’s initiative is to provide funding to school boards where
students self-identify as Aboriginal students. This was a very good move.

• M
ore accountability is needed on how these funds are being spent and on
what programs are put into place.

• S
chool boards have insisted on flexibility and the First Nations
communities need to be involved in the decisions on how these funds are
being spent and on what programs are put into place.

161
 • S
chool boards have insisted on flexibility and the First Nations
communities need to be involved in the decisions on how these funds are
spent and on what kind of programs are required.

• T
here is adequate funding but the larger question is the accountability of
how these funds are being spent.

• T
here is a lack of Aboriginal member representation on provincial school
boards in Alberta, this is a problem.

• F
irst Nations people need a voice in their relationships with school boards.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• We need to ensure that First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students have access to technology. Technology is an equalizer in
education, but if you do not have access to it, it creates an even wider
educational gap.

• Technology like Super-Net and is a big lever in increasing

student achievement and needs to be available or First Nations, Métis and
Inuit student will be disadvantaged.

• Aboriginal students are citizens of Alberta even though they

have funding agreements with the federal government.

162
• On this premise, we must view First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students as healthy contributing members of Alberta.

• We need to all say that we are all part of the problem and that
we will all be part of the solution.

• The Alberta Teachers’ Association is committed to creating a

First Nations, Métis and Inuit Specialist Council to support First Nations,
Métis and Inuit teachers, and this supports First Nations, Métis and Inuit
education in general.

• Sometimes First Nations, Métis and Inuit students fear

success and I don’t want that to happen to First Nations students. There
may be peer pressure with First Nations students. We all want First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students to walk across the stage and graduate.

• Politicians need to listen to First Nations people and there are

many other issues besides education. Maslow’s hierarchy of needs is not
a new concept but one that applies to First Nations, Métis and Inuit
communities and students.

• First Nations, Métis and Inuit students may be vulnerable and

are not getting their basic needs met and this prevents them from being
successful in school.

163
 INTERVIEW 7: Don Zech

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• It is all over the place. In some areas the quality of education

is excellent and in other areas it is lacking. To some extent it is the luck
of the draw or it is the related to the people running the education
system.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• D
efinite progress has been made. When public school board began
accepting Native students there was not cultural awareness. This was one
step removed from the residential schools

• F
irst Nations, Métis and Inuit students have very specific needs and learner
supports to address their needs. School boards must never give up on
students.

• T
he movement of schools has been to create a homogeneous environment
that treats everyone as equal. School boards should be going in the
opposite direction.

• P
alliser School division had created segregated schools within our

164
 jurisdiction, like Christian and Hutterite schools, that honour and respect
the individuality o communities and cultures. This could be done for
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students, within the boundaries of public
school boards.

• W
e have so much diversity in our communities that we need to
accommodate their needs. Jewish schools and other ethnic and religious
groups want to protect their language and identities. This is not different
from what the Natives are after.

• M
ission statements must react to the fact that the world is changing for the
Mexicans, Mennonites, Hutterites and we have to walk the edge of the
knife that remembers that past and looks to the future to have a healthy
education system.

• T
his might be called One People, Two Worlds.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• T
he role is to properly support all students.

• I
t is critical for senior bureaucrats and politicians to meet with Native

165
 educational leaders and listen to the people. Sometimes that message gets
lost.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• S
chools boards should set the parameters of where funding and supports
go, in conjunction with the senior administrators.

• S
chool boards have an important role. The largest block of
recommendations of the Alberta Commission on Learning was on Native
students. This is critical as it is the fastest growing population in Canada
and we must address this.

• T
here is an exclusiveness of what you want in education but there is also an
inclusiveness of all. This is a mixed message of public education.

• T
here are examples of several school boards in Alberta that have
Aboriginal representation on their school boards: Northland School
Division, Wetaskiwin School Division, Westwind School Division and
Livingstone Range School Division all have trustees that are Native.

• S
ome First Nations, Métis and Inuit students do not self-identify. Native

166
 students need to be proud of their heritage, culture and history. This is
sad. However, these students make up the fabric of the school.

• S
chool boards need to be accountable to the parent and the community
and we are responsible to both whether they are Native, Low German or
Christian.

• T
his accountability means being accountable to the local problems but also
implement the policies and programs of the Minister of Education.

Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• Y
es, money being directed towards First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
with the provincial government’s learner grant.

• T
here needs to be a balance of spending in areas such as First Nations,
Métis and Inuit school administration. In Palliser School Division we
ensure that there is only five percent allocation on school administration.

• P
alliser School Board’s view is that as much money as possible needs to be
spent on students.

• I
t would be unfair and unethical if school boards were using First Nations,

167
 Métis and Inuit funding to prop up other programs in their jurisdictions.
I am unaware of any of this happening in school boards in Alberta.

• S
chool boards don’t like enveloped money because it limits their flexibility
to spend in local priority area.

• I
n the business of education, there has never been excessive funding, nor
should there be. If this is the case, then this leads to abuse.

• S
chool boards and First Nations need to be fiscally conservative and they
have to be. We cannot always go back to our funding sources and should
constantly be asking about this.

• W
e have approximately 75 to 80 self-identified First Nations, Métis and
Inuit students.

• F
irst Nations Education Authorities are getting adequate funding but their
accountability mechanisms are different.

• T
he issues of bussing and transportation are still there. First Nations have
expensive operations.

168
 • R
egardless of what we do, there is a finite amount of money and we must
account for it.

• T
he Government of Alberta has made considerable investments in First
Nations, Métis and Inuit education.

• M
ore money needs to be directed at the student and less money to the
bureaucracy.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• There needs to be some consistency in a governance model in

First Nations communities.

• In provincial schools, there are two levels of services:

principals and superintendents.

• First Nations would be wise to share services in areas of

technology, Blackfoot instruction, and aggregate.

• First Nations can learn a lesson from the francophone

community and see how much political clout they have.

• The risk is that this political clout can lead to alienation.

169
• I am a believer in technology to close this educational gap.
We have to address this. You can put the technology in but you need to
have the people to use this technology. You need to put these two things
together.

• In maintaining First Nations culture, it is important that it is

embedded and infused in everything that you do.

• F
irst Nations, Métis and Inuit students in provincial school systems get
exposed to the dominant culture. This is what I see as both good and
bad.

170
 INTERVIEW 8: Mike Davenport

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• T
here is a great deal of good intention in First Nations, Métis and Inuit and
Aboriginal education with a strong professional attitude to help children.

• A
boriginal high schools in Edmonton along with congregated schools like
the Ben Calf Robe School are supportive in efforts to assist Aboriginal
students in the urban areas.

• W
e are doing particularly well in advancing Aboriginal education.

• W
e are trying to do the right thing but these efforts are being road-blocked
by a conservative education leadership that is resistant to change, by
nature.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• O
ne of the great things in First Nations, Métis and Inuit education is that
non-Aboriginal educators are saying that we have not served these

171
 students well in providing a quality education and we have failed as
educators with this community.

• T
his has caused change in schools, teachers, and school boards and the
Ministry of Education. There has been a shift in attitude of non-
Aboriginal educators to make concerted efforts to support First Nations,
Métis and Inuit learners.

• I
t is now a huge blip on the radar. First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
have been marginalized and left out and this has social implications.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• T
he federal and provincial governments are the problem. They put small
school boards and small neighbouring First Nations in difficult positions.
Governments should focus on developing provincial tuition agreements
where the money is taken care of and then we can focus on the outputs,
measures.

• S
enior governments should lead the process of taking care of the funding
involving First Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

172
• R
egarding the implementation of the recommendations of the Alberta
Commission on Learning well, with some of the recommendations they
have done well and others they have paid lip service to.

• T
he Alberta Commission on Learning recommendations may have been
too nice and we did not hold the government and politicians accountable
or their feet to the fire.

• R
ecommendations regarding the connection between home and school
were not acted on.

• W
ith respect to the role of parents and the need to have them act as
partners and the need to have an attitudinal change, this had not been
understood.

• T
he implementation of ACOL has been done in areas like class size,
special education, and early education services.

• T
he amount of money that was provided to school boards has been
minimal and this may only reflect keeping up with inflation.

173
Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• T
he College of Alberta School Superintendents is a tremendously loose
organization, far more so that the school boards or the secretary-treasurer
organizations. It is a loose conglomerate of educators, working isolation
from other organizations.

• C
ASS is not a governing body like the Alberta Teachers’ Association or the
Alberta School Boards Association.

• C
ASS is a forum to deal with problems with other school superintendents
in areas like First Nations tuition issues.

• C
ASS resolutions are not that binding.

• M
ost school superintendents really care about kids, all kids including First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• F
irst Nations need to aggregate and partner with other First Nations
because of the lack of capacity in area like capital, labour relations, human
resources, and finance.

174
• T
he small set of schools in First Nations communities have good
intentions but these individuals currently working on-reserves do not
have the broad spectrum of issues as to where we know where we are
going. As a result, they do very poorly in providing education.

• P
rovincial school boards have autonomy, flexibility and the authority to
make decision based on their local needs and priorities. First Nations
don’t have this luxury; as they are too small generally only manage one
school.

• T
he Northland School Division is so huge and this school board’s
governance structure is very cumbersome because it is so large, maybe
too large.

• S
chool boards should be accountable to all students including First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• F
irst Nations, Métis and Inuit communities don’t have a voice in the
business of school boards however appointing First Nations trustees by
quota is a mistake.

• S
chool boards must work with neighbouring school boards on
relationships and mutually agreed upon decisions through negotiations.

175
Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• W
hen a child leaves the reserved and goes to a public school, this child
should be funded at the same level as other students.

• I
ndian and Northern Affairs Canada did not provide adequate funding in
areas such as special education. It is the federal and provincial
governments who have this responsibility. However, it is the local school
board and neighbouring First Nations that are left to find over these
funding issues.

• T
he federal and provincial governments need to provide this funding.

• T
he solution is for Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and the First
Nations chiefs to negotiate a provincial rate of education funding and
have this department fund this. These are examples of bad management
on the part of First Nations in managing their block funding agreements.

• I
t is common among teachers to have a preference to work in public
school boards were they get a pension, benefits, better compensation, and
tenure.

176
 • T
he on-reserve First Nations education systems are getting second-class
teachers when they should be getting the best teachers; this is not
happening. First Nations schools pay their teachers less than provincial
systems.

• F
irst Nations education might consider becoming like charter schools that
exist in the provincial schools that are funded as if they were school
systems.

• F
irst Nations block funding seems to receive the same amount as
provincial systems. I would compare this to provincial health care cost,
which is a bottomless pit.

• F
irst Nations face huge social problems and children are a product of their
parents and we are spending less money on these children, when we
should be spending more.

• T
he Alberta School Boards Association has little Aboriginal representation
and this is disappointing.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

177
• Aboriginal people are becoming more political and this will
strengthen their cause to improve educational outcomes. It is going to
happen where Aboriginal people are becoming more empowered.

• Schools ought to be reflections of communities especially in

northern communities like Fort Vermillion School Division, where the
vast majority of students are Aboriginal.

• R
eserves and residential schools have created Aboriginal parents without
parenting skills. We learn parenting skills like apprentices and children
grow and the history of First Nations, Métis and Inuit communities has
not allowed this to take place.

• O
n the Aboriginal side, there is no integration between the mainstream and
reserve communities. There are no real role models for children from
reserve communities.

• P
arent who lost their children because of the residential schools didn’t see
the importance of care of children, and this has left a vacuum in First
Nations communities that have no level of expectation for their children.

• W
e have a lost generation of parents and we need to develop parenting
centres that will provide these parenting skills for First Nations, Métis
and Inuit parents.

178
• T
he biggest indicator of student school success is the mom. It is important
that women learn these parenting skills in context and we need to provide
parenting centres, particularly for First Nations, Métis and Inuit parents.
This needs to be done to address the residential school mess.

• T
he legacy of residential school survivors is that they had no parenting
skills.

• T
he federal Conservative government has offered an apology but the next
step has not started yet. Our current prime minister needs solutions and
none of his advisors have offered solutions either.

• T
he Alberta Commission on Learning’s Report identifies the big problem,
which is the lack of parenting skills of Aboriginal peoples. This is the
power of mom to change the world.

• A
boriginal parenting centres cost money, which means spending money on
people.

• W
e must learn to invest in children especially in early education. This is the
silver bullet, which will determine the success of First Nations, Métis and
Inuit children and the success in society. This is the union card for
everyone in society.

179
 INTERVIEW 9: Curtiss Pilling

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• In Alberta and Canada, financially we, the Kainai Board of

Education and the Blood Tribe, are really struggling to offer a
comparable education program on our First Nation to the neighbouring
school board because of our funding arrangement with Indian and
Northern Affairs.

• Financially, we are not able to offer a comparable program as

is required within the terms of our Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
funding agreement.

• The Kainai Board of Education provides more exposure to

culture and language.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

• D
ramatic progress has been made over the last 20 years. During the initial
years of local control of education, Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
poured huge sums of money into First Nations during the policy of
devolution of department programs to First Nations. Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada was anxious to wash their hands of this
responsibility of education.

180
• T
his has meant an influx of First Nation’s teaching personnel getting
qualifications and coming back to the community to teach their children.

• I
n 1995, the federal government came out with a program of global
funding which was a financial transfer agreement to guarantee funding
over a five-year period.

• W
e have good educators and policies in the development in our systems.

• I
ndian and Northern Affairs Canada has been generous in providing
infrastructures and facilities, however, it is easy to see the success of a
facility and not so easy to see the success of the students being educated
in that facility.

• T
here are no extra costs in resources good special education programs and
the department has not kept up.

• T
he provincial Minister of Education is very supportive of First Nations,
Métis and Inuit programs but they cannot provide education supports
because of the jurisdictional barrier.

181
Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• I
ndian and Northern Affairs Canada has shown a lack of leadership in
working and funding First Nations education systems.

• I
ndian and Northern Affairs Canada must figure out how to have First
Nations work with neighbouring school boards.

• T
here would be an advantage if First Nations worked together and the
Federal government does not provide enough leadership to advise First
Nations to aggregate and work together in simple areas such as the
employment of teachers.

Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• F
irst Nations Education Authorities are accountable to the Blood Tribe
Chief and Council, and we have two members of chief and council on the
Kainai Board of Education.

182
 • W
e are also accountable to Indian and Northern Affairs Canada, parents,
and students.

• F
irst Nations parents to not recognize that they are an important part of
the education process and they need to hold this education system
accountable.

• F
irst Nations communities are just embarking on this journey where the
provincial parental involvement has been doing this for 60 years and they
will become more and more involved.

Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• N
o, a few years after local control Indian and Northern Affairs Canada
came out with a new funding arrangement that was adequate to meet the
needs of this First Nation system. However, the problem came in the
next agreement.

• T
hese provincial costs for our students attending these schools began to
accelerate as did the tuition costs because of the investment that the
Government of Alberta was making into education and we could not
keep up with these provincial costs.

183
• T
he third global funding arrangement made this even harder. However,
we could not change the terms of this funding arrangement and this left
us in a difficult position financially. We could not keep up in the areas of
technology, teacher salaries, and special education.

• W
e cannot keep competent and professional staff, because of the
inadequacy of the teacher salaries that we offer, that are not competitive
with surrounding school boards.

• T
here is adequate funding for First Nations, Métis and Inuit students
attending provincial schools. Alberta Education did recognize the
benefits of providing per student First Nations, Métis and Inuit learner
grants to resident students who lived within the boundaries of the school
division and not resident on-reserve.

• T
his is a real shortcoming. There is an element of unfairness of students
who live on-reserves, and are not provided with this additional funding.
This means that they are excluded from benefiting from the so-called
Alberta Advantage.

• T
hat simple gesture of providing a First Nations, Métis and Inuit learner
grant for all students regardless of where they reside who go a long way in
addressing the issue of equity for funding education programs for all First
Nations, Métis and Inuit students, where ever they lived in Alberta

184
 • T
his suggestion has been made but because of issues of educational
jurisdiction, this has not been done.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

• The long term solution is that First Nations student must be

funded at the same levels as all other provincial students. However, the
reality is that First Nations are still in the developmental stage where
Alberta school boards have been in existence for also 100 years.

• Indian and Northern Affairs Canada must remember that

First Nations school systems are relatively young so they must be funded
at higher levels to ensure successful development.

• The federal government does not have the interest, the ability
or the resources to promote and develop First Nations education.

• Our First Nations are not able to draw from education

resources that provincial school boards almost take for granted, First
Nations need better access to provincial second and third level services.

• A teacher without the support of the home is engaged in a

futile exercise, especially in Aboriginal communities.

• Politicians need to come and see what is happening in First

Nations. It would not cost huge sums of money to address the need for
compatibility between First Nations and provincial school boards.

185
• P
rovincial Ministries of Education should provide a First Nations, Métis
and Inuit learner grant to all students, regardless of where they reside.
This would go a long way in demonstrating support for all First Nations,
Métis and Inuit students.

• F
irst Nations education is getting better all the time in a steady rise, even
though they are behind provincial education systems.

186
 • INTERVIEW 10: Brian Wildcat

Question 1: What is the current status of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
Education in Canada/Alberta?

• In the past year, especially with the change in government to

a Conservative government, First Nations education has reached a point
being in a standstill position. When Prime Minister Harper came in the
Kelowna Accord moved out, then the whole area of First Nations education
fell off the table, and education has fallen off the priority list.

• First Nations Education Authorities have also been in a

holding pattern because it is not at the same level of priority as it was
under the previous Liberal Government with the Kelowna Accord.

• In Alberta, I have been impressed with Alberta Education

and the work that they are doing in making connections with First
Nations communities.

• In Alberta, they are taking the responsibility of trying to

create success for students and this is one of their goals in their business
plan.

• There is potential for partnerships between band-operated

schools and Alberta Education, within the context of what is best for
students.

Question 2: Have there been points of progress made in First Nations,

Métis and Inuit Education?

187
 • I
n Hobbema and Treaty 6, conscious decision was made in the education
program we delivered that it would be equal to provincial schools

• W
e still follow provincial programs of study; out difference is in the
preservation of the Cree language and culture. We are developing these
resources on our own through Cree syllabics.

• S
chool boards are reluctant to share and segregate educational results of
First Nations, Métis and Inuit students.

• T
his is slowly changing where they are willing to share information on the
results of student achievement. However, First nations need to be willing
to share their own results.

Question 3: What is the role of the federal and provincial governments in

improving educational success for First Nations, Métis and Inuit

students?

• T

he role of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada is to provide adequate

funding under the Treaties.

• I

ndian and Northern Affairs Canada’s first responsibility is to help and

188
assist in the band-operated schools get better, and no focus on

compliance, nominal role reporting and the purpose is to help kids get a

good education.

189
Question 4: What is the role of provincial school boards and other

stakeholders in ensuring accountability in First Nations, Métis and Inuit

education programs?

• F
irst Nations education authorities need to be accountable to Indian and
Northern Affairs Canada with true partnerships to develop second and
third level services where there is nothing that exists now.

• T
his is what is missing with a second level of support. A middle level of
education support service does not exist this needs to be created for First
nations education authorities.

• W
e must allow natural alliances within First nations, such as the First
nations of Hobbema to form a consortium or formalize as a school
board.

• I
n order to go to government to request more funding. First Nations
need to provide educational data that is required by government. Indian
and Northern Affairs Canada’s role could be to assist in providing this
higher level of data to support First nations in making the argument for
additional funding.

• F
irst Nations need to develop action plans and strategic plans with targets

190
 that we lead to better results. We need to set high indicators for our
band-operated schools.

• F
irst Nations schools need to have a good set of indicators with good
planning.

• I
t is not what is expected, it is what is inspected!

Question 5: Is there adequate funding provided for First Nations, Métis

and Inuit programs?

• T
he easy answer is no because we can always use more money. Whatever
money we get we maximize programs with good management. If we
spend our money in the right areas, we can get by.

• O
ur First Nations pay at par with the highest local school board. This
means sacrifice in areas such as hiring more administrators or band
members.

• E
nrollment levels need to be high to meet these educational needs.

• W
e keep administrative and overhead costs to a minimum

191
 • T
uition agreements are difficult to measure, what would be more
productive is to identify what are the needs of First Nations students
attending provincial schools.

• T
he key is to develop respective partnerships, and sometimes school
boards see First Nations as the poor cousins.

• M
aking your band schools the best they can be, by making them the best
that they can be and the schools of choice.

• F
irst Nations should be less concerned with discussions about what are
their expectations are regarding First Nations student achievement.

• F
irst Nations need to understand what a partnership is. First Nations need
to contribute and add value as partners. This might mean provincial
students coming to First Nations schools in their activities.

• T
rue partnerships means getting equal value in participation for both
school boards and First Nations.

Question 6: How do we close the educational gap between First Nations,

Métis and Inuit and non-First Nations, Métis and Inuit students?

192
• We need to raise our educational standards, expectations, and
deadlines for our on-reserve schools.

• First Nations need to create an atmosphere where they are

schools of choice rather than schools of last resort.

• We need to keep our First Nations, Métis and Inuit students

in school regardless of where they attend. First Nations, Métis and Inuit
students that start with us need to be retained to the end of grade 12 in
cohorts.

• First Nations, Métis and Inuit keys to increased high school

completion is to keep support and cohort groups where students go
through the education system together and to not let them move in and
out from year to year.

• A child should finish in the school that he or she started in,

whether they are in provincial schools or band-operated schools.

• First Nations need to take the time to develop relationships,

respect, and caring.

• The Auditor-General was right in evaluating the state of our

education program. This is not a terrible thing because it gives us a
starting point to improve. It is a standard and a measuring tool. I am not
sure if this was an arbitrary number defined by Statistics Canada.

193
4