What’s Missing in Alberta’s Education System? A Reflection on the Leaked Alberta Curriculum Proposals

By Caleb Anacker

Being in my mid-thirties, I went through elementary school in the early 1990s in Alberta. As I can remember, what I learned about Indigenous Peoples was minimal. I recall learning historic territories of First Nations that existed prior to Alberta. Looking back, I now know that the textbook often used the wrong names (the common English name for any Indigenous People is usually not what that people group calls themselves) and always referred to these people as if they no longer existed. There seemed to be absolutely no reference to any Indigenous life after 1905, the beginning of Alberta. My Social Studies education must have included some descriptions of the traditional ways of life and languages of these Peoples, but the only First Nation’s culture that I remember learning clearly was the potlatch, a ceremony of west coast peoples. Obviously, that has little if anything to do with the people in what became Alberta. If my fading memory serves me correctly, I learned that the potlatch needed to be banned because it created bad habits for the people practicing it. Certain people would acquire lots and lots of things and then they would give far too much away at the potlach, until they were destitute. I can see now that this was also wrong, perhaps part of my own indoctrination by a society that wanted me to understand that the potlatch violated a law of capitalism: accumulation and production of capital in a free market. Therefore, the governmental, legislative, and economic institution of the potlatch was a threat to capitalism and colonization.

I had not thought about my own under-education of Indigenous Peoples until the recent outrage about the leaked Alberta curriculum advice for K-4 Social Studies. I will not summarize that article except to make my own critiques about the removal of key concepts of Indigenous knowledge and history, in favour of more dominance by a Judeo-Christian, Euro-Canadian, and Western point of view. The consequence of this emphasis will be the same as my education. Indigenous Peoples will be referred to in the past tense only and their being/knowing/doing will be grossly mischaracterized–again.

I have a counter-proposal to this curriculum advice. Let us start with a correct understanding of mutual co-existence between Indigenous Peoples and Settlers on these territories: we are on Indigenous lands with still-present Peoples that hold valid title to the territory and we are all subject to treaties that govern our rights and responsibilities to ourselves and each other. Perhaps we should spend a significant portion of the first five years of education building up foundational knowledge (K-2; 3-4) in civics, politics, economics, geography, culture, philosophy, religion, and history for BOTH Indigenous Peoples and Settlers. For each of Mr. Champion’s one-sided curriculum suggestions, each Indigenous People group has a parallel structure. Every Indigenous People group has their own civics, politics, economics, geography, culture, philosophy, religion, and history to teach. Furthermore, proper teaching of the Indigenous side of the ledger makes clear how vital it is to talk about the residential schools and other tools of the genocide that Settlers were and ARE using to wipe away Indigenous existence. If Settlers were at all serious about reconciliation and carrying our half of the treaty relationship, then we should start teaching our children about Indigenous ways of life. I certainly see that it is necessary to learn both sides well enough that we might actually live together in peaceful co-existence, respect for each other’s way of life, and non-interference as long as the sun shines, rivers flow, and grass grows.