scholarly journals The I/Indian Not-In-The-Textbook: Native/Indigenous Post-Structuralism, Critical Methodologies, Epistemologies, and Tribal Realities as Agency toward the Decolonization of the Territorial Divide In American Indian Studies Courses

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-16
Author(s):  
Alan Lechusza Aquallo

This article focuses upon how, within American Indian Studies courses, there is a necessary border crossing between territorialized Native and non-Native students. Taking the literal borders of Indian reservations, and repositioning these realities as a metaphor for critical epistemological deconstruction, I argue that there is a necessary educational border crossing which is necessary for Native/Indigenous equity and socio-political justice to be realized and acquired as cultural currency. As students within these courses begin to understand, embrace, and challenge American Indian Studies (AIS) courses, and the dynamics of the discipline, there is a self-defined border crossing between, and within, the Native/Indigenous ideological territories, and literal, physical reservation borders, which the curriculum represents. Each student may – or will – find their own point of critical Native/Indigenous inquiry, from which they are challenged and welcomed to embrace, as well as depart from previous scripted Euro American rhetorical references regarding Native/Indigenous cultures. Following this critical epistemology, for the student participant, a new territory of knowledge, cultural, and expressed understanding from, and about, Native/Indigenous Peoples becomes manifest; a new academic frontier is possible. Applying this methodology, for academic decolonization, the i/Indian image/icon need not exist within the textbook(s); the potential for recognizing and decolonizing the physical reservation borders becomes possible. The realities of Native lives – both historic and contemporary - do matter, beyond these limitations and scripted inclusions within textbooks. Whereas a text may prove as a site of disenfranchisement, inequity, and, tribal marginalization, there, then, lies the necessity for Native V/voices to be heard, reviewed, and function as sovereign references and expressions, which advances beyond the terminal reservation borders as agency. This article seeks to challenge pre-determined academic references, mis-representations and re-presentations of Native Peoples, read: the i/Indian image/icon, as well as providing a critique of how Native/Indigenous realities are, then, able to sovereignly relate to the large non-Native population beyond the limitations of a physical reservation border. Taking note that there is no one single educational methodology, which can be applied within American Indian courses, multiple academic perspectives begin to surface, which address the educational process about Native Peoples. The 3 views of Indian education – anthropological/archeological/ethnographic/historical, sympathetic, activist - as I argue, become, and are maintained as antiquated points of articulation, which continue to be employed about Native Peoples, replacing the active dynamics of Native cultures, customs, traditional knowledge, and expressions. This article, therefore, challenges these 3 views of Indian education - anthropological/archeological/ethnographic/historical, sympathetic, activist - noting that the classroom, textbook(s), and their references, mis-representations and re-presentation(s) about Native Peoples, need to be decolonized, following the importance, ideology, dialectics and dynamics of tribal sovereignty, equity, and socio-political justice.

Author(s):  
Alan Lechusza Aquallo ◽  

This article focuses upon how, within American Indian Studies courses, there is a necessary border crossing between territorialized Native and non-Native students. Taking the literal borders of Indian reservations, and repositioning these realities as a metaphor for critical epistemological deconstruction, I argue that there is a necessary educational border crossing which is necessary for Native/Indigenous equity and socio-political justice to be realized and acquired as cultural currency. As students within these courses begin to understand, embrace, and challenge American Indian Studies (AIS) courses, and the dynamics of the discipline, there is a self-defined border crossing between, and within, the Native/Indigenous ideological territories, and literal, physical reservation borders, which the curriculum represents. Each student may – or will – find their own point of critical Native/Indigenous inquiry, from which they are challenged and welcomed to embrace, as well as depart from previous scripted EuroAmerican rhetorical references regarding Native/Indigenous cultures. Following this critical epistemology, for the student participant, a new territory of knowledge, cultural, and expressed understanding from, and about, Native/Indigenous Peoples becomes manifest; a new academic frontier is possible. Applying this methodology, for academic decolonization, the i/Indian image/icon need not exist within the textbook(s); the potential for recognizing and decolonizing the physical reservation borders becomes possible. The realities of Native lives – both historic and contemporary – do matter, beyond these limitations and scripted inclusions within textbooks. Whereas a text may prove as a site of disenfranchisement, inequity, and, tribal marginalization, there, then, lies the necessity for Native V/voices to be heard, reviewed, and function as sovereign references and expressions, which advances beyond the terminal reservation borders as agency. This article seeks to challenge pre-determined academic references, mis-representations and re-presentations of Native Peoples, read: the i/Indian image/icon, as well as providing a critique of how Native/Indigenous realities are, then, able to sovereignly relate to the large non-Native population beyond the limitations of a physical reservation border. Taking note that there is no one single educational methodology, which can be applied within American Indian courses, multiple academic perspectives begin to surface, which address the educational process about Native Peoples. The 3 views of Indian education – anthropological/archeological/ethnographic/historical,sympathetic, activist – as I argue, become, and are maintained as antiquated points of articulation, which continue to be employed about Native Peoples, replacing the active dynamics of Native cultures, customs, traditional knowledge, and expressions. This article, therefore, challenges these 3 views of Indian education – anthropological/archeological/ethnographic/historical, sympathetic, activist – noting that the classroom, textbook(s), and their references, mis-representations and re-presentation(s) about Native Peoples, need to be decolonized, following the importance, ideology, dialectics and dynamics of tribal sovereignty, equity, and socio-political justice.


Author(s):  
Rajeev Kaushal

The precious possession of any educational institution worth its name is the treasure of knowledge and skills which it imparts to the educands in the hope that this very treasure proves to be valuable for them in every walk of life. The treasure of values serves as the springboard for determining the various aims of education. In fact, values act as the cornerstone of entire educational process whatsoever be the field. However, it is a matter of grave concern that the monetary value of education is escalating and its moral value is dwindling day by day. It won’t be an exaggeration to say that the real cause and worth of education are plummeting with each passing day. As per the current scenario, there is dire need of instilling moral and ethical values in all those who are related to the field of education and this necessitates the inclusion of value based education the prime onus of which lies on the shoulders of none other than the teacher who is undoubtedly the maker of a nation's destiny.The present paper reflects upon the significance and need of value education and also throws light on how can moral and ethical values be inculcated in students at various levels of education besides giving valuable suggestions pertaining to the use of same in the field of Teaching and Pre-service Teacher Education programme.


Author(s):  
J. Donald Boudreau ◽  
Eric Cassell ◽  
Abraham Fuks

This book reimagines medical education and reconstructs its design. It originates from a reappraisal of the goals of medicine and the nature of the relationship between doctor and patient. The educational blueprint outlined is called the “Physicianship Curriculum” and rests on two linchpins. First is a new definition of sickness: Patients know themselves to be ill when they cannot pursue their purposes and goals in life because of impairments in functioning. This perspective represents a bulwark against medical attention shifting from patients to diseases. The curriculum teaches about patients as functional persons, from their anatomy to their social selves, starting in the first days of the educational program and continuing throughout. Their teaching also rests on the rock-solid grounding of medicine in the sciences and scientific understandings of disease and function. The illness definition and knowledge base together create a foundation for authentic patient-centeredness. Second, the training of physicians depends on and culminates in development of a unique professional identity. This is grounded in the historical evolution of the profession, reaching back to Hippocrates. It leads to reformulation of the educational process as clinical apprenticeships and moral mentorships. “Rebirth” in the title suggests that critical ingredients of medical education have previously been articulated. The book argues that the apprenticeship model, as experienced, enriched, taught, and exemplified by William Osler, constitutes a time-honored foundation. Osler’s “natural method of teaching the subject of medicine” is a precursor to the Physicianship Curriculum.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document