The knowledge taught in Canadian schools largely reflects European intellectual traditions—histories written from settler perspectives, sciences framed through Western epistemologies, literatures drawn from European canons. This curricular inheritance is colonial, emerging from systems designed to assimilate Indigenous peoples and establish European cultural dominance. Decolonizing curriculum means examining these foundations and transforming education to include Indigenous knowledge, challenge colonial narratives, and prepare all students for respectful relations with Indigenous peoples and lands.
Understanding Curricular Colonization
Colonial education was explicitly designed to eradicate Indigenous knowledge. Residential schools prohibited Indigenous languages, banned cultural practices, and imposed European knowledge as the only legitimate form. This wasn't incidental but intentional—curriculum was a tool of cultural genocide. The content taught, the languages used, and the knowledge excluded all served colonial purposes.
Contemporary curriculum inherits these colonial foundations even without explicit assimilationist intent. Subject definitions, content selections, and knowledge hierarchies developed in colonial contexts remain encoded in current curriculum. Western science is treated as universal truth; Indigenous science is either absent or presented as folklore. European history is assumed as shared heritage; Indigenous histories are optional additions. These patterns perpetuate colonial assumptions about whose knowledge counts.
For Indigenous students, colonial curriculum communicates that their knowledge, cultures, and histories don't matter. They see their peoples absent from curriculum or present only as problems, historical curiosities, or victims. This erasure damages identity and belonging, contributing to educational disengagement and the persistent achievement gaps between Indigenous and non-Indigenous students.
For non-Indigenous students, colonial curriculum creates ignorance about the lands they live on, the peoples whose territories they occupy, and the treaties that established their presence. This ignorance enables continued injustice and prevents the reconciliation Canada claims to seek. Education that perpetuates colonial narratives prepares students poorly for respectful relations with Indigenous peoples.
What Decolonizing Curriculum Involves
Inclusion of Indigenous knowledge goes beyond adding Indigenous content to existing curriculum. It involves recognizing Indigenous knowledge systems as legitimate ways of understanding the world, equivalent to rather than subordinate to Western knowledge. Indigenous perspectives on land, relationships, governance, and sustainability offer knowledge that Western frameworks miss. Inclusion means integration, not tokenistic addition.
Challenging colonial narratives requires examining how history is taught. Whose perspectives are centred? What's included and excluded? How are colonization, treaties, and Indigenous-settler relations presented? Decolonized history doesn't just add Indigenous content but reframes understanding of Canadian history around Indigenous presence and rights rather than settler achievement.
Indigenous languages are both subject and medium for decolonized curriculum. Teaching Indigenous languages helps preserve endangered languages and transmits culture embedded in language. Teaching in Indigenous languages—immersion education—positions Indigenous languages as vehicles for learning across subjects. Both approaches resist the linguistic colonization that targeted Indigenous languages for elimination.
Land-based education connects learning to specific places and Indigenous relationships with those places. Rather than abstracting knowledge from context, land-based approaches ground learning in local lands, ecosystems, and Indigenous presence. This approach reflects Indigenous pedagogies while also providing place-based education that benefits all students.
Approaches Across Canada
British Columbia's redesigned curriculum explicitly incorporates Indigenous perspectives and knowledge. The First Peoples Principles of Learning inform pedagogical approaches. Indigenous content appears throughout subjects rather than being isolated in separate courses. This curricular transformation has been substantial, though implementation varies by school and teacher.
Indigenous-controlled education operates through band-operated schools, Indigenous education authorities, and some urban Indigenous schools. These institutions can design curriculum reflecting community knowledge, languages, and priorities. Self-determination in education enables approaches that provincial curricula constrain. However, funding limitations often restrict what Indigenous-controlled schools can accomplish.
Indigenous language immersion programs teach through Indigenous languages—Mohawk immersion, Cree immersion, and others. These programs serve language revitalization while providing education in languages that colonial systems tried to eliminate. Students emerge bilingual, connected to cultural heritage, and often academically successful.
Integration of Indigenous perspectives in teacher education prepares teachers to implement decolonized curriculum. Teacher preparation programs increasingly require Indigenous education courses, expose candidates to Indigenous perspectives and protocols, and develop cultural competency. However, the depth and effectiveness of this preparation varies significantly across institutions.
Challenges and Tensions
Whose knowledge gets included raises complex questions. "Indigenous knowledge" isn't monolithic—different nations have different knowledge systems, languages, and traditions. Curriculum can't include everything; selections must be made. Who makes these selections, how they're made, and what's included or excluded are contested. Generalizing across diverse Indigenous nations risks creating stereotyped "Indigenous content" that doesn't accurately represent any specific nation.
Knowledge ownership and protocols affect what can be taught. Some Indigenous knowledge is sacred, restricted, or inappropriate for classroom contexts. Determining what can be taught, by whom, and how requires engagement with knowledge keepers and respect for Indigenous protocols. Non-Indigenous teachers may not have authority to teach certain content; even Indigenous teachers may not have authority for knowledge from other nations.
Teacher capacity limits implementation. Many teachers lack knowledge of Indigenous histories, perspectives, and protocols. They may feel uncertain about teaching content they don't understand well, worried about making mistakes that cause harm. Building teacher capacity takes time and resources that school systems often don't invest.
Resistance to decolonizing curriculum comes from multiple directions. Some dismiss Indigenous knowledge as insufficiently "scientific" or academic. Some object to changing established curriculum. Some deny the colonial nature of existing curriculum. Navigating this resistance while advancing decolonization requires strategic persistence.
Performative versus transformative change distinguishes superficial additions from genuine decolonization. Adding an Indigenous unit while leaving curricular foundations unchanged isn't decolonization. Changing surface content while maintaining colonial pedagogies and knowledge hierarchies is performative. Genuine transformation examines and changes how knowledge is constructed, valued, and transmitted—which is harder than adding content.
Beyond Curriculum Content
Decolonizing curriculum extends beyond content to pedagogy. Indigenous pedagogies often emphasize relationships, experiential learning, storytelling, and connection to land. These approaches differ from didactic, text-based instruction that dominates many classrooms. Decolonizing pedagogy means teaching differently, not just teaching different content.
Assessment practices may need transformation. Standardized tests may not capture Indigenous knowledge appropriately. Assessment approaches that conflict with Indigenous values—competition, individual achievement, written demonstration—may disadvantage Indigenous students and misrepresent their learning. Alternative assessment approaches aligned with Indigenous pedagogies can be more appropriate.
School structures and governance affect whether curriculum change succeeds. Hierarchical, bureaucratic structures may conflict with Indigenous governance approaches. Involving Indigenous communities in educational governance—not just consulting them—enables curriculum that reflects community needs. Without structural change, curriculum change may be superficial.
Questions for Reflection
What Indigenous knowledge, perspectives, or histories did your education include? What was absent? How did these presences and absences affect your understanding?
What would genuinely decolonized curriculum look like in subjects you studied? What would change about content, perspective, and approach?
How should schools navigate the complexity of diverse Indigenous nations and knowledge systems? What approaches would respect this diversity while being practically feasible?
What would teachers need to implement decolonized curriculum effectively? What preparation, support, and resources are necessary?
How do you understand the relationship between Indigenous knowledge and Western academic knowledge? Are they complementary, in tension, or something else?