ABORIGINAL WAYS OF KNOWING
AEC 1100: Outline Of Adult Education
WINTER 2006
WINTER 2006
ABORIGINAL WAYS OF KNOWING
In August of 2005, I spent three days camping on the first nations reserve in Moosonee, Ontario. From an aboriginal perspective, I did this because I wanted to walk the land in order to begin to better understand the plight of the first nations people in Canada.
As stated in the 1996 Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, ‘Persons schooled in a literate culture are accustomed to having all the context they need to understand a communication embedded in the text before them….persons taught to use all their senses to absorb every clue to interpreting a complete, dynamic reality may well smile at the illusion that words alone, stripped of complementary sound and colour and texture, can convey meaning adequately.' (Canada 1999, 1:622 -3).
From a literate culture perspective, the purpose of reviewing Marlene Brant Castellano's article ‘Updating Aboriginal Traditional of Knowledge’ is to continue to increase awareness for the plight of the first nations people of Canada; to gain more exposure to aboriginal forms of knowledge; and to be able to better integrate them into my life and practice as and educator. In the examples illustrated above, the purpose of forming knowledge is the same but the means are strikingly different. Does this imply that one way of forming knowledge is more valid then the other? Unfortunately, as Castellano points out in her article, this seems to be the case when comparing aboriginal traditions of knowledge and contemporary forms of knowledge. Castellano’s purpose in writing the article was to affirm and define aboriginal traditions of knowledge while calling for the need to integrate and adapt these traditions with contemporary society. In Castellano’s own words:
‘Aboriginal knowledge has been under assault for many years. In residential schools and other educational institutions, in the workplace, in social relations, and in political forum, aboriginal people have been bombarded with the message that what they know from their culture is of no value. Intergenerational transmission of ancient knowledge has been disrupted, and the damage has not been limited to the loss of what once was known: the process of knowledge creation – that is the use of cultural resources to refine knowledge in the laboratory of daily living – has also been disrupted. As aboriginal people reassert their right to practise their cultures in a somewhat more hospitable social environment, they will have to decide how to adapt their tradition to a contemporary environment' (pg. 25)
This article is an accessible point for a detailed understanding of aboriginal traditional knowledge due to the fact that Castellano skillfully deconstructs the major sources and characteristics of aboriginal knowledge. Castellano defines the five characteristics of aboriginal knowledge as personal, oral, experiential, holistic and conveyed in narrative or metaphorical language. She identifies the main sources of aboriginal knowledge as traditional teachings, empirical observations and revelation. Through this description, it becomes easier to see the challenges faced in preserving and integrating a predominantly oral culture of knowledge in a world which functions through a literate culture of knowledge. In the context of Habermas’ paradigms of education I found aboriginal traditions of knowledge to be more closely related with the humanist paradigm - built collaboratively through consensus and valuing the potential of the individual. However, in contemporary society, knowledge is transferred primarily through what Paulo Freire described as the "banking model of education". Knowledge quantified and transferred to learners en masse. This is more related to Habermas’s technical paradigm of adult education and is relatively at odds with aboriginal traditions of knowledge.
What I found to be extremely interesting is the correlation between aboriginal traditions of knowledge and how knowledge is created in cyberspace. In Castenello’s words ‘Aboriginal knowledge is rooted in personal experience and lays no claim to universality' (pg. 26). She goes on to state that ‘Aboriginal societies make a distinction between perceptions, which are personal, and wisdom, which has social validity and can serve as a basis for common action. Knowledge is validated through collective analysis and consensus building.' (pg. 26).
Knowledge in cyberspace inherently lays no claim to universality and is validated through collective analysis and consensus building. An illustration of an active and dynamic knowledge building community is Wikipedia, a multilingual content encyclopedia on the Internet that contains over two million articles posted by users from around the world.
In the article, Castellano poses three important questions: Can the integrity of aboriginal knowledge survive the transition to a literate form? What are the tests of authenticity? Who has the authority to represent aboriginal knowledge? (pg. 31). I would argue that new forms of knowledge construction in cyberspace will not only support the integrity of aboriginal knowledge but influence our literate society to adapt a more diverse and collaborative model of knowledge creation. Where the challenge and the hard work lay is in the integration of emerging forms of knowledge construction into the daily practice of transmitting knowledge from Aboriginal elders to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal youth.
References
Canada. 1996. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Volume 1, Looking Forward, Looking Back; Volume 2, Restructuring the Relationship; Volume 3, Gathering Strength; Volume 4, Perspectives and Realities; and Volume 5, Renewal: A Twenty-Year Commitment. Ottawa: Canada Communications Group. (Also available with related documentation on CD-ROM under the title For Seven Generations; An Information Legacy of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Ottawa, Libraxus, 1997.)
Castellano, Marlene Brant “Updating Aboriginal Traditions of Knowledge” in George Dei et al (eds). Indigenous Knowledges in Global Contexts: Multiple Readings of Our World. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000
In August of 2005, I spent three days camping on the first nations reserve in Moosonee, Ontario. From an aboriginal perspective, I did this because I wanted to walk the land in order to begin to better understand the plight of the first nations people in Canada.
As stated in the 1996 Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, ‘Persons schooled in a literate culture are accustomed to having all the context they need to understand a communication embedded in the text before them….persons taught to use all their senses to absorb every clue to interpreting a complete, dynamic reality may well smile at the illusion that words alone, stripped of complementary sound and colour and texture, can convey meaning adequately.' (Canada 1999, 1:622 -3).
From a literate culture perspective, the purpose of reviewing Marlene Brant Castellano's article ‘Updating Aboriginal Traditional of Knowledge’ is to continue to increase awareness for the plight of the first nations people of Canada; to gain more exposure to aboriginal forms of knowledge; and to be able to better integrate them into my life and practice as and educator. In the examples illustrated above, the purpose of forming knowledge is the same but the means are strikingly different. Does this imply that one way of forming knowledge is more valid then the other? Unfortunately, as Castellano points out in her article, this seems to be the case when comparing aboriginal traditions of knowledge and contemporary forms of knowledge. Castellano’s purpose in writing the article was to affirm and define aboriginal traditions of knowledge while calling for the need to integrate and adapt these traditions with contemporary society. In Castellano’s own words:
‘Aboriginal knowledge has been under assault for many years. In residential schools and other educational institutions, in the workplace, in social relations, and in political forum, aboriginal people have been bombarded with the message that what they know from their culture is of no value. Intergenerational transmission of ancient knowledge has been disrupted, and the damage has not been limited to the loss of what once was known: the process of knowledge creation – that is the use of cultural resources to refine knowledge in the laboratory of daily living – has also been disrupted. As aboriginal people reassert their right to practise their cultures in a somewhat more hospitable social environment, they will have to decide how to adapt their tradition to a contemporary environment' (pg. 25)
This article is an accessible point for a detailed understanding of aboriginal traditional knowledge due to the fact that Castellano skillfully deconstructs the major sources and characteristics of aboriginal knowledge. Castellano defines the five characteristics of aboriginal knowledge as personal, oral, experiential, holistic and conveyed in narrative or metaphorical language. She identifies the main sources of aboriginal knowledge as traditional teachings, empirical observations and revelation. Through this description, it becomes easier to see the challenges faced in preserving and integrating a predominantly oral culture of knowledge in a world which functions through a literate culture of knowledge. In the context of Habermas’ paradigms of education I found aboriginal traditions of knowledge to be more closely related with the humanist paradigm - built collaboratively through consensus and valuing the potential of the individual. However, in contemporary society, knowledge is transferred primarily through what Paulo Freire described as the "banking model of education". Knowledge quantified and transferred to learners en masse. This is more related to Habermas’s technical paradigm of adult education and is relatively at odds with aboriginal traditions of knowledge.
What I found to be extremely interesting is the correlation between aboriginal traditions of knowledge and how knowledge is created in cyberspace. In Castenello’s words ‘Aboriginal knowledge is rooted in personal experience and lays no claim to universality' (pg. 26). She goes on to state that ‘Aboriginal societies make a distinction between perceptions, which are personal, and wisdom, which has social validity and can serve as a basis for common action. Knowledge is validated through collective analysis and consensus building.' (pg. 26).
Knowledge in cyberspace inherently lays no claim to universality and is validated through collective analysis and consensus building. An illustration of an active and dynamic knowledge building community is Wikipedia, a multilingual content encyclopedia on the Internet that contains over two million articles posted by users from around the world.
In the article, Castellano poses three important questions: Can the integrity of aboriginal knowledge survive the transition to a literate form? What are the tests of authenticity? Who has the authority to represent aboriginal knowledge? (pg. 31). I would argue that new forms of knowledge construction in cyberspace will not only support the integrity of aboriginal knowledge but influence our literate society to adapt a more diverse and collaborative model of knowledge creation. Where the challenge and the hard work lay is in the integration of emerging forms of knowledge construction into the daily practice of transmitting knowledge from Aboriginal elders to both aboriginal and non-aboriginal youth.
References
Canada. 1996. Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples: Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, Volume 1, Looking Forward, Looking Back; Volume 2, Restructuring the Relationship; Volume 3, Gathering Strength; Volume 4, Perspectives and Realities; and Volume 5, Renewal: A Twenty-Year Commitment. Ottawa: Canada Communications Group. (Also available with related documentation on CD-ROM under the title For Seven Generations; An Information Legacy of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. Ottawa, Libraxus, 1997.)
Castellano, Marlene Brant “Updating Aboriginal Traditions of Knowledge” in George Dei et al (eds). Indigenous Knowledges in Global Contexts: Multiple Readings of Our World. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2000
posted by mark at 4:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home