Seven Actions for Seven Generations

As a collective of Indigenous and non-Indigenous people living on Turtle Island, we call upon
George Brown College to recognize and adhere to commitments made to the CICan Indigenous
Education Protocol for Colleges and Institutes, established in 2014. Though the COVID-19
pandemic has necessitated significant shifts across modern academia, already marginalized
pedagogies, including Indigenous Ways of Knowing, have been confronted with diminished
support and an expectation of seamless integration and translation into online environments,
despite online settings being more suitable for certain pedagogical methods than others.

These circumstances are not historically unique – the story of settler-colonial society on Turtle
Island is incontrovertibly a story of forced assimilation and a systemic attempt at stripping the
sovereignty of this land’s many Indigenous peoples. Today, it is fashionable, both in popular
culture and academia, to address the “legacy” of colonization, and though undoubtedly a
breakthrough in public consciousness relative to ages past, to dwell on “legacy” is to obfuscate
and downplay the degree to which processes of colonization are operating today – not the least of
which occurs in George Brown College’s classrooms.

Within a culture that is largely contented with gesturing for decolonization – often its outermost
limit of goodwill toward this land’s Indigenous peoples and cultures – it is imperative that
George Brown College transition from expressing the spirit of decolonization to its material
realization through various material concessions. Central to this realization must be an
acknowledgement of the inherent right of Indigenous peoples on Turtle Island to
self-governance, a right that must be manifested and supported in post-secondary institutions, as
much as greater society in general, in order to create equitable spaces for Indigenous
perspectives and methods as pedagogy.

As expressed in the living Kaswenta, or the Two Row Wampum: “We will not be like Father and
Son, but like Brothers… Neither of us will make compulsory laws nor interfere in the internal
affairs of the other. Neither of us will try to steer the other’s vessel.” Therefore, we call upon
George Brown College to demonstrate its commitment to and solidarity with Indigenous
self-governance by acknowledging, accepting and adhering to the following Calls to Action:

1. To recognize the College’s responsibility to decolonization, where decolonization is not

only conceived of as a mental or academic exercise but as a material engagement
demonstrating a commitment to material restitutions. As a publicly funded educational
institution situated on stolen land, we demand consistency between what the College
professes in its curricula and what the College does in actuality. Decolonization, like
 allyship, is not a badge worn or claimed – it is an active process that is willingly and
continuously undertaken. George Brown College must recognize and acknowledge that a
commitment to Land Back is integral to the embodiment and actualization of
decolonization – all begins and ends with the restoration of stolen Indigenous land.

2. To develop and institute a mandatory course focused on BIPOC and 2SLGBTQ+-specific

issues with a specific recognition of the socio-cultural and material reparations called
upon to fulfil The Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to Action. This can be seen
as an opportunity for George Brown College to go beyond tokenism, ensuring that the
college produces and continuously supports learning environments that adequately
represent and center Indigenous and other non-Western epistemologies. “White privilege
is your history being curriculum and mine being an elective.” (Anonymous)

3. To acknowledge the inalienable value of Indigenous and other non-Western

epistemologies, with the recognition that there are fundamental differences between the
core tenets and assumptions of Indigenous Ways of Knowing and settler-colonial
methods that may be difficult to reconcile in the classroom as currently structured; this
includes the acknowledgement that the accumulation of knowledge is not a singular
empirical process of data collection, nor limited to what experts write in books, and to
acknowledge this reality through a material commitment to decolonizing practices. It
must be similarly recognized that the categories of “disability” and “accommodation” are
not universal or fixed, nor do they imply any sort of deficiency. They are concepts that
exist within colonial discourse, where decolonization can inform the construction of a
social environment where all individual needs are considered and met from the outset.
The lived experience and worldviews of Indigenous peoples must be centred as a guiding
thread.

4. To recognize the unique challenges of integrating Indigenous pedagogies into

settler-colonial academic structures, with a focus on reconceptualizing methods of
delivery and evaluation to better serve and assess Indigenous and other non-Western
frameworks. Indigenous instructors and pedagogies should not have to make concessions
to be legitimized – in accordance with The Truth and Reconciliation Commission Calls to
Action and George Brown College’s signatory status on the Indigenous Education
Protocol for Colleges and Institutes, George Brown College must take responsibility for
appropriate inclusion. This can also be seen as an opportunity for the College to a)
involve Indigenous Education and Services (IES) and students as key stakeholders in
strategic planning, providing transparency in regards to what goals have and have not
been met through current initiatives; and b) involve Indigenous students and instructors
as key stakeholders as part of an educational advisory committee to ensure diversity and
equity in class construction; more robust accountability structures, such as the
 incorporation of the Student Association (SAGBC) as a supervising mechanism, will
assist George Brown College in the authentic inclusion of marginalized voices.

5. To provide non-full-time employees and Indigenous instructors with the supports and
resources necessary to create authentic Indigenous classes, where Indigenous
perspectives are faithfully represented, communicated and centred. This can include: a)
supports for experts transitioning into classroom instruction, acknowledging that people
who have expertise in the field might not possess expertise in the classroom – particularly
in an online setting; b) the use of online instruments to assist in the facilitation of talking
circles, as the dynamics generated through in-person circles cannot be congruously
replicated in an online setting; c) compensation for lived experience, through
remuneration, a contribution to students’ field placement hours, etc.; d) the creation and
continuous reinforcement of classrooms as safe spaces for Indigenous instructors,
students and perspectives, where racism and other instances of anti-Indigenous rhetoric
are swiftly addressed and adequately handled; e) increased support for instructors and
students with accommodation needs, where interpreters and closed captioners are given
access to presentation materials and coursework before lectures to facilitate delivery.
Both instructors and students with accommodation needs must have their needs met
through the system itself – not in a way that places excessive and onerous responsibility
on instructors. However, accommodation needs must be met with the acknowledgement
that the concept of “accommodation needs” itself is the product of systemic, rather than
individual deficiencies.

6. To ensure that Indigenous Education and Services (IES) and the Sahkitcheway
Indigenous Education Council (IEC) are given a larger and more concrete role in the
consultation and construction of George Brown College courses that incorporate
Indigenous pedagogies and perspectives. To effectively and authentically advocate for
Indigenous sovereignty, George Brown College must actively work to center Indigenous
educators and other Indigenous stakeholders in the dissemination of contemporary and
traditional knowledge; to continue prioritizing dominant methods and perspectives in the
construction of Indigenous classes constitutes a perpetuation of colonial paternalism, a
fundamental devaluing of Indigenous Ways of Knowing, and a complete nonobservance
of the decolonizing practices called for by the College elsewhere. Once again, this
decolonizing work must occur at a material level; given the historical underfunding of
Indigenous educational initiatives relative to the contribution of Indigenous perspectives
and teachings in the dominant culture, the College has a responsibility to bear the cost for
this transition to more equitable models of consultation, accountability, and, ultimately,
self-governance.
 7. To create and maintain a safe space within all College classrooms, informed by the
consciousness that the underrepresentation of Indigenous students must be mitigated
through the amplification of Indigenous voices, and the consciousness that colonial
standards cannot be used to assess Indigenous pedagogy – for students and institutions
alike. The goal must be to eliminate abuses of privilege and social leverage,
microaggressions, and anti-Indigenous racism within the classroom, and to ultimately
abolish institutional spaces that facilitate racial discrimination and other forms of
oppression in totality. It must be recognized that students, like the College, have a
responsibility to uphold this safe space through an individual commitment to
decolonizing practices.

We, as a collective of Indigenous and settler students, have put forward these Seven Actions in
response to the injustices, oppressions and opportunities for learning that we have experienced
and perceived both inside and beyond the George Brown College classroom. Through a
significant number of consultations and knowledge sharing sessions, we have come to the
conclusion that our proposed Actions must be approached, acknowledged and executed through
collaborative relationships with reciprocity as an underlying, guiding tenet; George Brown
College must recognize the centrality of Indigenous stakeholders in the context of colonial
institutions seeking to engage in a decolonizing shift. Throughout the past, attempts at
power-sharing have fallen apart, constantly regressing to a model of colonial paternalism within
curricula, institutions and larger social structures, and it is thus imperative that George Brown
College recognize the fundamental need for material concession in the global project towards
decolonization and sustainable, authentic Indigenous self-governance. Therefore, we cannot be
satisfied with sharing seats at an old table – a new table, in accordance with the Kaswenta, must
be constructed altogether. May this be an opportunity for George Brown College to demonstrate
its commitment to decolonization and Indigenous self-governance in the spirit of kinship rather
than opposition.

In unity,

Jenna Isaac
Julian Wee Tom
Victoria Villanueva