Exploring self-determined urban Indigenous adult education in an Indigenous organization

ABSTRACT

Urban Indigenous communities in Canada are sites of dynamic knowledge transfer among Indigenous people who build community together both from within similar cultural frameworks and across difference. These “inter-national” urban Indigenous communities face distinct challenges and opportunities for implementing Indigenous knowledge transfer processes. This article examines the mechanisms through which knowledge transfer occurs at the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres, a large urban Indigenous organization in Toronto, Ontario. The researchers used interviews and focus groups to explore strategies for knowledge transfer among Elders, Knowledge Keepers, leaders, and staff. We argue that urban Indigenous communities transfer knowledge through processes that are sensitized to the diverse inter-national nature of these environments while at the same time oriented toward achieving the continuity of a common knowledge base. Thinking about these processes and their underlying goals through an educational lens helps broaden understandings of where Indigenous education occurs to include professional workplaces.

Introduction

Urban Indigenous communities in Ontario are dynamic sites of knowledge transfer, where individuals from different nations and diverse backgrounds share knowledge with each other in a wide range of settings. In Canada, research on knowledge transfer within urban Indigenous communities has largely focused on the role of culturally relevant services for creating spaces of knowledge transfer or on the role of Indigenous institutions in designing and facilitating this service provision (Newhouse, 2003; Proulx, 2003; Silver et al., 2006). Meanwhile, although knowledge transfer is fundamentally an educational activity, the Indigenous education literature includes scant examples of urban Indigenous knowledge transfer outside of schools or outdoor land-based settings. Nevertheless, there are many possible spaces of urban Indigenous knowledge transfer outside of the contexts of service provision or schools, including homes, community gatherings, and workplaces.

In this article we explore Indigenous knowledge transfer (IKT) at the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC), a large urban Indigenous nonprofit organization in Toronto, Ontario. We use “Indigenous knowledge transfer” to refer to intentional acts and processes rooted in Indigenous cultural frameworks for sharing knowledge between people, which exist within broader, lifelong projects of Indigenous education. Through this examination of IKT, we assert that the workplace is a site of urban Indigenous adult education. Investigating how adults learn and transfer culture-based knowledge within a broad range of contexts – including urban workplaces – provides a more wholistic understanding of contemporary Indigenous education at all life stages, and a more complete picture of ongoing efforts toward self-determination. In urban Indigenous communities, self-determination has been defined broadly as the individual and collective ability to envision and work toward desired changes in all areas of urban Indigenous life including social, educational, cultural, economic, and governance spheres (Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996; Tomiak, 2010; Walker, 2008).

We argue that IKT at the OFIFC occurs through processes that are characterized by two key elements. First, IKT requires an awareness that there are many different worldviews, cultural frameworks, and life experiences represented among both staff and the Elders and Knowledge Keepers who support the organization. At the same time, knowledge transfer processes are intended to secure the continuity of a common knowledge base and the continued capacity of staff to work with this knowledge. Our research therefore finds evidence of two key elements of urban Indigenous adult education embedded within the mechanisms of knowledge transfer at the OFIFC: a commitment to honoring distinct sources of knowledge and educating for continuity by following the protocols of knowledge transfer established by the OFIFC.

This article draws on the results of Indigenous Knowledge Transfer in Urban Aboriginal Communities (IKTUAC), a three-year research project conducted by a group of primarily Indigenous scholars in collaboration with the OFIFC. The IKTUAC study explored the role of the OFIFC and Friendship Centre communities in supporting the transfer of Indigenous knowledge as part of their contributions to the development of urban Indigenous communities across Ontario. The authors of this paper identify as a Métis Anishinaabe scholar working with urban Indigenous communities, a Polish settler researcher exploring language revitalization strategies in collaboration with Indigenous communities, and a Métis scholar, writer, and educator working in the discipline of Indigenous Studies. The first author is a former employee of the OFIFC and the second author was based at the organization during a postdoctoral fellowship, affording us both “insider” knowledge as well as possible bias about the merits and functioning of the organization. The non-Indigenous researcher did a research internship at the OFIFC and underwent two cultural competency trainings combined with a long-term mentorship by the OFIFC staff. She participated regularly in the organizational life by contributing to research projects, following cultural protocols, taking part in ceremonies, staff meetings and visiting several Friendship Centres. The third author is a university-based researcher who has conducted collaborative research with the OFIFC over a period of 30 years.

The OFIFC exists to support and advocate for the network of 29-member Friendship Centres across the province, through program support, administration, policy, education and training, and research. Friendship Centres are autonomous not-for-profit and charity corporations that serve the urban Indigenous community of their respective geographical locations and exist as places for community members (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) to gather and connect. The OFIFC (sometimes referred to as the “Federation”) is an office and workplace for approximately 90 Indigenous and non-Indigenous people from diverse backgrounds, where a broader network of Indigenous Elders and Knowledge Keepers regularly visit, share teachings, and encourage the integration of culture-based knowledge into staff’s daily work. The city of Toronto, where the OFIFC is located, exists on the traditional homelands of the Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, and Wendat peoples, and lies within the treaty territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit First Nation.

In this paper, we refer to the OFIFC “community.” We use “community” to reflect some participants’ use of this word to contextualize their knowledge transfer experiences or describe their network of relationships at the OFIFC, as well as in alignment with the urban Indigenous community development literature in Canada (Howard, 2011; Newhouse, 2003). As we learned through this research and is further evidenced in the literature review, understandings of a strict separation between “community” and “workplace” are not necessarily reflective of the experiences of individuals working in urban Indigenous organizations. When discussing the notion of community for the OFIFC, the Executive Director has emphasized that the community is a “broad circle” that includes Friendship Centres and relationships with teachers, Elders and traditional people, OFIFC staff, other Indigenous organizations, non-Indigenous people, and government. This notion of community was used to set the OFIFC’s vision in the 1970s and continues to underpin how leadership and staff understand their work today. While the kind of relationships and responsibilities within this broad circle of community vary widely, this notion helps to ground staff in an understanding of the kinds of knowledge transfer processes that occur at the OFIFC, in which they might be learners or eventually teachers.

We first provide a literature review that situates this work within the longstanding scholarship on urban Indigenous organizations and their role in community development, as well as literature on Indigenous education with a focus on Canadian contexts. We describe the community-driven USAI Research Framework (OFIFC, 2016; Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres, 2012) implemented in this study and methods used, and provide a section on the research context of IKT at the OFIFC. We then discuss research findings and provide a discussion that connects these findings to urban Indigenous self-determination and broadening understandings of Indigenous education in urban spaces.

Literature review

Urban indigenous organizations, community development, and identity

In Canada, scholars have demonstrated the integral role of urban Indigenous organizations in urban Indigenous community development and infrastructure (Howard-Bobiwash, 2003; Newhouse, 2003; Peters, 2011). Urban Indigenous organizations provide gathering spaces, culturally relevant services, opportunities for involvement in urban Indigenous governance, and culturally relevant employment (Howard, 2011). Through this work, urban Indigenous organizations function as key sites for IKT in cities, as community members come together and share cultural teachings and skills and develop or deepen understandings of identity (Ramirez, 2007; Urban Aboriginal Task Force, 2007). Urban Indigenous communities are not reducible to a group of organizations, nor is any organization with a mandate to serve urban Indigenous people necessarily a community; however, research in Canada has consistently demonstrated the central role of urban Indigenous organizations in the maintenance and perpetuation of the relationships and knowledge that comprise urban Indigenous communities (Andersen, 2013; Newhouse, 2003; Silver et al., 2008).

Interest in identities within urban Indigenous communities has grown; in a literature review of research from 1996–2010, Peters (2011) notes that scholarship in this area has expanded and deepened following the release of the final report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples in 1996. Peters asserts the relevance of this growing scholarship for the creation of public policy, stating that “For governments, the research on urban Aboriginal identities provides insights into appropriate definitions of urban Aboriginal self-government, representation, and program definition; processes contributing to recent population increases; and factors that support or erode Aboriginal identities in cities” (Peters, 2011, p. 80). Indigenous self-determination and functional governance depend on community members’ understanding of their identities, including roles and responsibilities (Borrows, 2016; Simpson, 2017). Mohawk traditional teacher Sylvia Maracle frames identity formation through four life-long questions, the answers to which teach people how to live well in their communities: “Who am I? In order to answer that I have to know: Where have I come from? And once I know where I have come from, I have to know: Where am I going? And once I know where I am going, I need to know: What is my responsibility?” (as cited in Anderson, 2016, p. xxvii). Many scholars assert that cities can be, and often are, conducive to the development of strong and positive identities among Indigenous people (Andersen, 2013; Anderson & Lawrence, 2003; Urban Aboriginal Task Force, 2007).

Within urban Indigenous communities, both individuals and organizations must navigate the presence of different Indigenous knowledge systems as they consider personal and collective identities. The extremely heterogeneous nature of urban Indigenous communities creates both challenges and opportunities for identity formation and knowledge transfer more broadly (Andersen, 2013; Lawrence, 2004). Contemporary urban Indigenous adults have widely differing levels of cultural knowledge and different relationships to, or awareness of, traditional knowledge transfer responsibilities, as a result of historic and ongoing colonization (Howard & Proulx, 2011; Lawrence, 2004). Indigenous adults often begin to participate in culture-based knowledge transfer processes later in life than would have occurred prior to the colonial disruptions that interfere with Indigenous education across the lifespan (Fiola, 2015; Lawrence, 2004). Nevertheless, urban Indigenous community members are reclaiming cultural knowledge and practices with the guidance of Elders and Knowledge Keepers, and by coming together to share knowledge (Anderson, 2011; Ramirez, 2007). Including the perspectives of urban Indigenous adults on IKT is important to understanding cultural regeneration, future possibilities for intergenerational IKT, and Indigenous self-determination.

Previously, Maracle et al. (2020) described the qualities and characteristics of culture-based leadership at the OFIFC, and the role of leadership in creating a successful atmosphere for knowledge transfer.¹ This paper continues this conversation by including the perspectives of Elders, Knowledge Keepers and staff on IKT processes at the OFIFC, and the ways that they have taken up, interpreted, and enacted organizational knowledge transfer priorities

Knowledge transfer as Urban indigenous adult education

Knowledge transfer is an educational activity that can occur in many different spaces and at many different life stages. However, within the Indigenous education literature, the majority of research focuses on Indigenous education within the K-12 public school system or formal post-secondary, or increasingly, land-based education either within or outside those institutions. There are scant examples of urban Indigenous adult education outside of formal postsecondary institutions or land-based settings, with some notable exceptions (see, Haig-Brown, 1995). Largely, scholars have explored the many logistical, epistemological, ethical, and political challenges that accompany efforts to incorporate or make room for Indigenous ways of teaching and learning into mainstream institutions, including efforts to integrate land-based learning (Ahenakew, 2017; Bartmes & Shukla, 2020; Battiste & Henderson, 2009). Within the growing scholarship on Indigenous land-based education, scholars have drawn on cultural frameworks to assert that Indigenous education is fundamentally land-based and therefore cannot be separated from land-based experiences (Styres, 2017; Smith et al., 2019). This work raises critical questions around the ability of schools and post-secondary institutions to accommodate or properly value Indigenous land-based education (Simpson, 2014). Meanwhile, researchers have drawn attention to the possibilities of Indigenous land-based education through community-based projects or institutional partnerships (Bang et al., 2014; Johnson & Ali, 2020).

Nonetheless, there is a gap between this substantial focus on K-12 education, formal postsecondary, and land-based learning, and the full range of possibilities for Indigenous education. Battiste (2002) states that within Indigenous communities, “learning is viewed as a life-long process that people assume to understand the world around them and animate their personal responsibilities” (p. 14). Further, Battiste (2002) explains that “Aboriginal pedagogy is found in talking or sharing circles and dialogues, participant observations, experiential learning, modeling, meditation, prayer, ceremonies, or story telling as ways of knowing and learning” (p. 18). Describing the intergenerational transmission of cultural values in the home among urban Indigenous participants as a form of education, Restoule (2005) states that “The values are crucial to identity more than the material signs of identity. One might say that it is the values that inform and underlie the visible expressions of the culture” (p. 31). Indigenous education is conducted within Indigenous cultural frameworks and is undertaken for both personal and community benefit (Battiste, 2000; Bomberry, 2013; Simpson, 2017). Importantly, Indigenous education is both an expression of, and a tool for strengthening Indigenous governance (Grande, 2004; National Indian Brotherhood, 1972). As the culture-based systems by which Indigenous people educate themselves and each other, Indigenous education is deeply implicated in creating possibilities for Indigenous wellbeing and self-determination (McCarty & Lee, 2014). There are many spheres of life and physical settings outside of schools in which Indigenous education is possible, and which deserve scholarly attention.

It is worthwhile to consider how Indigenous adults in particular engage in ongoing education in these different spheres. Many Indigenous communities across Turtle Island differentiate roles and responsibilities by life stage, including responsibilities related to knowledge transfer (Archibald, 2008; Simpson, 2014). As Anderson (2011) explains with regard to Métis, Cree and Anishinaabe communities, traditionally the adult life stage is characterized by hard work to maintain the viability and overall health of the community. In the grandparent or Elder life stage, community members are the keepers of traditions and laws, and teach younger generations through both stories and example (Anderson, 2011). Indigenous adult education has the potential to guide adult community members into a deeper understanding and uptake of their roles and responsibilities. In an examination of urban Indigenous community development in Winnipeg, Silver et al. (2006) note that adult education has helped many Indigenous people “to heal personally, and to develop the consciousness necessary for effective involvement in community development” (p. 18). Furthermore, they state that “For some of our respondents it was not formal education, but rather the education that comes with involvement in organizations created by and for Aboriginal people, that played the key role in deconstruction of colonialism and reconstruction based on a renewed pride in Aboriginal identity” (p. 21).

This paper explores IKT in an urban Indigenous workplace as an example of adult Indigenous education. The pedagogical approaches and mechanisms of knowledge transfer within Indigenous organizations warrant further attention. Understanding the knowledge transfer in these spaces as education provides a helpful frame for better understanding urban Indigenous self-governance: it becomes possible to see how urban Indigenous people are articulating a self-determined future, and how they are educating themselves for that future.

USAI research framework & methods

Indigenous scholars have long advocated that research involving Indigenous communities be led by Indigenous people (Simpson, 2004; Smith, 1999). Indigenous communities have always conducted careful observation and inquiry to solve social problems, enrich their lives, and live in better relationship with their territories and more-than-human relations; only in recent decades has this work acquired the label of “research” (Absolon, 2011; McGregor et al., 2018). The OFIFC has a long history of conducting research with Elders, Knowledge Keepers, staff, and member Friendship Centres; this research informs the support and advocacy the OFIFC provides to Friendship Centres and helps Friendship Centres to investigate questions of local priority (see, OFIFC, 2019, 2020).

In 2012, the OFIFC developed the USAI Research Framework (now in second edition) to guide all research conducted by the OFIFC (OFIFC, 2016). The USAI Research Framework is grounded in the OFIFC’s foundational teachings and is intended to facilitate research that strengthens the “everyday good living” of urban Indigenous communities. “Everyday good living” can be understood as “a felt sense of great peace within us” and is the “wisdom, inherited from many generations who come before us that tells us to practice who we are every day” (OFIFC, 2016, p. 3).

The following four principles comprise the USAI Research Framework:

1. Utility: Research needs are based on community priorities.

2. Self-voicing: Research, knowledge, and practice are authored by communities that are fully recognized as Knowledge Creators and Knowledge Keepers.

3. Access: Research fully recognizes all local knowledge, practice, and experience in all their cultural manifestations as accessible by all research authors and Knowledge Keepers.

4. Inter-relationality: Research is historically situated, geo-politically positioned, relational, and explicit about the perspective from which knowledge is generated.

The four USAI principles were operationalized at every stage of the research, with a few examples as follows. Utility: The research team sought input from the OFIFC community members (Elders and staff members) at different stages of the project through regular discussions about the conceptual design and the goals of the study, updates about the research progress and presentations of interim findings at staff meetings. These engagement activities ensured that our research approach was transparent and aligned with community priorities. Self-voicing & Access: To make the findings of this research easily accessible by the Friendship Centre communities the OFIFC published a book intended primarily for non-academic audiences (Bergier & Maracle, 2021) that reflects the stories and the lived experiences shared by the research participants and highlights their voices and the meanings they want to see manifested through an extensive use of quotations drawn from the interviews. Inter-relationality: Researchers offered tobacco to Elders and Knowledge Keepers to initiate the research relationship. Offering tobacco can signify a commitment to a relationship and a request for knowledge or guidance. An offering of tobacco is a relevant cultural practice within the territory where the OFIFC is located, and is a practice recognized by all of the Elders and Knowledge Keepers engaged in this project.

The USAI principles are not intended to act as “checkpoints” for specific moments in the research, or a static framework that can be applied uniformly to every project. The principles were layered into the research in the form of ongoing and cyclical reflection and discussion among researchers, to ensure alignment and make real-time changes to the project trajectory when necessary. The ethics protocols for the research were conducted in alignment both with Tri-Council standards as well as the OFIFC’s ethical standards for seeking knowledge within urban Indigenous communities.

In this paper we provide findings from the first phase of the study, which documented knowledge transfer practices at the OFIFC using four main research questions: 1. What knowledge is transferred at the OFIFC? 2. Why is it shared? 3. How is it shared? 4. Who is involved in the knowledge transfer? From 2014 to 2016, researchers documented these practices through participation in and observation of 20 community-relevant events including staff meetings, seasonal feasts, the OFIFC’s Board of Directors’ meetings, trainings held for the OFIFC and Friendship Centre staff, and Elders’ teachings. Each of the events was documented by 1 or 2 researchers who recorded both descriptive information (actions, settings, behaviors) and reflective information (thoughts and ideas) following a template based on the four main research questions. The majority of documentation was conducted by researchers external to the OFIFC (the PI, Co-PIs, postdoctoral fellow and student research assistants) with the OFIFC research team assisting on a few occasions. Researchers external to the OFIFC conducted eight one-on-one interviews and eight focus groups (five to seven participants) with key Knowledge Keepers and OFIFC staff members, many of whom have been actively involved in the renewal of Indigenous knowledge in urban settings both in Toronto and across the province of Ontario and are keepers of organizational memory. Participants included both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, reflective of the staff make-up of the OFIFC. Decisions about the inclusion criteria were made by the PI and the Co-PIs with a goal of ensuring that participants reflected diverse groups within the OFIFC governance structure and that the study included the voices of Elders and Knowledge Keepers. The majority of data collection occurred at the OFIFC building in downtown Toronto. The postdoctoral fellow (second author) conducted a thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke, 2013) of interviews, focus groups and materials from participant observation, using NVivo software for data organization and coding. The list of initial codes was created inductively from the raw data, allowing for the themes to gradually emerge without the use of a predetermined framework. Based on their similarity and significance to the research, some of the initial codes were grouped into the main themes and others evolved into subthemes (the detailed list of themes is presented in Figure 1). This was followed by a deductive approach which involved grouping the main themes around research questions about the mechanisms of knowledge transfer in urban Indigenous communities and aligning them with the OFIFC Foundational Medicine Wheel (see, Figure 2). The themes followed a specific sequence around the Wheel, purposefully incorporating the teachings contained within each of its quadrants – vision, knowledge, reason and action. Using the inductive approach as a starting point and combining it with deductive reasoning at a later stage of the study allowed for the development of new, unexpected patterns while grounding the analysis in the preexisting topics of interest and the OFIFC visual and ceremonial methods for integrated knowledge transfer.

Figure 1. Themes and subthemes.

Figure 2. OFIFC Foundational Medicine Wheel.

The thematic findings were presented periodically during meetings and workshops with the other team members (the PI and Co-PIs, Elders, members of the OFIFC research team, student research assistants) over the course of approximately two years. The workshops provided opportunities to discuss, revise, and expand on general themes identified through the coding process. No primary data was disclosed during the workshops in order to protect participant confidentiality and the findings were shared in aggregate form. These gatherings were nurtured by the mentorship of Elder Maria Campbell whose continuous support guided the team in their knowledge-seeking endeavors while ensuring that research was done in a good way.

Research context

In this section we provide a brief overview of the structure and mission of the OFIFC. We then describe the notion of a neha or bundle, which is the repository of common knowledge and sacred items carried and taught through IKT practices and is therefore crucial for understanding the specific elements of knowledge transfer that we explore in the findings. We also describe the structure of IKT at the OFIFC and staff responsibilities.

The first Friendship Centres in Ontario were formed in 1950s to serve the growing urban Indigenous population, migrating into cities from reserves and rural communities. Founded in 1971, the OFIFC is a nonprofit organization that supports member Friendship Centres across the province of Ontario in areas such as program support and evaluation, policy, education and training, and research. The OFIFC operates with a Board of Directors, an Executive Director, and work groups organized by area of Friendship Centre support comprised of staff with respective Directors. The organization is comprised of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous staff with diverse community affiliations. It is workplace expectation that staff hold and are committed to growing a level of cultural competency that allows them to effectively advance the goals of the Friendship Centre movement. The OFIFC and Friendship Centres serve all Indigenous people – First Nation, Status/Non-Status, Métis, Inuit and those self-identifying as Indigenous. However, as a provincial organization the Federation acknowledges the prevalence of specific nations (Cree, Anishinaabe, Haudenosaunee, and Métis) in the geographical area.

During the process of cultural resurgence in 1970s, also called “rekindling the fire” time, many prominent Elders and Knowledge Keepers representing different Indigenous nations from across Turtle Island² came together to share teachings, stories and high-minded principles, which later on laid foundations for the OFIFC’s neha or bundle (Bergier & Maracle, 2021). As Wemigwans (2018) explains, bundles can be personal, handed down through a family, or through the community, in which case “the person[s] holding the bundle must undergo a thorough process of learning about the meaning of the tradition or ceremony and how that particular bundle gets transferred to members of the community” (p. 34). Wemigwans also notes that while the term “bundle” holds meaning for many different Indigenous peoples across Turtle Island, bundles are embedded within specific cultural frameworks and care must be taken to acknowledge and honor the sources of knowledge within them (Wemigwans, 2018, p. 35). The OFIFC’s collective bundle encompasses sacred objects, stories, songs, relationships, languages and concepts that represent different Indigenous traditions, including but not limited to Haudenosaunee, Cree, Métis, and Anishinaabe. Examples from within the OFIFC’s bundle include:

• Foundational medicine wheels and teachings;

• Eagle Staffs, medicines, Wampum Belts, drums and Eagle feathers;

• Culture-based management practices, policy and research frameworks, training strategies and resources, publications;

• Ceremonial activities, Elders, OFIFC’s Grandmother’s Council and Traditional Council.³

The OFIFC’s foundational teachings weave a common thread of knowledge and provide the necessary standards for IKT to occur. These teachings include the Creator’s Law,⁴ the Anishinaabe Life Cycle teachings, the Haudenosaunee teachings on the Pathway to Peace and Creation stories (predominantly of Anishinaabe and Haudenosaunee origin).The knowledge of everyday good living flowing through the OFIFC’s foundational teachings has been translated into management concepts and provided the basis for the OFIFC strategic planning processes, patterns of Indigenous leadership development, the USAI Research Framework (OFIFC, 2016), ethical protocols regarding principled partnerships, training curricula, policy and other organizational imperatives.

The OFIFC’s cultural protocols include both formal codes of behavior, as described in the OFIFC’s policies and procedures, as well as informal ways of being highly responsive to different contextual demands. Some of the most common protocols include rules and teachings around ceremonial room setups and spatial organization, smudging, continuous care of the OFIFC’s sacred bundle, expressing gratitude, land responsibilities acknowledgment statements, oral contracts and transfer of responsibilities (tobacco offerings) and many others. The Federation frequently organizes internal training sessions, providing staff members with an opportunity to learn how the foundational teachings can be operationalized and translated into specific tasks. At the time of research activities, OFIFC staff orientation entailed thirteen sessions that follow the lunar calendar and covered teachings on the four sacred medicines, traditional protocols, foundational medicine wheels, Eagle Staff fasting and feasting, Wampum Belts and other relevant knowledge. These stories, teachings and IKT tools are subsequently discussed within different workgroups, providing strategic direction on how to approach activities, projects and relationships. For example, the OFIFC foundational medicine wheels are used to guide different stages of project development, enhance communication processes, human resources policy, strategic frameworks developed internally and in partnership with other organizations, program delivery, relationships with the government and many other aspects of the organizational life (Bergier & Maracle, 2021).

It is an obligation of all staff members to learn about the history of the Friendship Centre movement and the OFIFC neha, participate in orientation teachings and stay informed about different aspects of ceremonial life. New hires are expected to actively listen, observe and gradually take on specific tasks. Responsibilities for IKT are shared among staff according to both self-identified interest or proficiency, and recognition by leadership of individuals’ gifts or teaching capacities. At the time of research, groups with specific IKT responsibilities included the Grandmothers’ Council, Traditional Council, Men’s Council and the Drum Group.

Findings

We present findings here in the form of two elements that characterize knowledge transfer at the OFIFC. First, we discuss how IKT practices honor distinct sources of knowledge, including knowledges represented within the OFIFC bundle as well as the diverse knowledges that staff members bring. The second element is an orientation toward continuity through IKT practices that prioritize the continued existence of the OFIFC bundle and the continued capacity of staff to work with the knowledges contained within it. These elements were present simultaneously in many of the conversations with participants, and IKT occurs through the balance that is achieved through the presence of both.

Honoring sources of knowledge

The interviews and a review of OFIFC training materials revealed that the Federation has nurtured and sustained meaningful relationships with many Elders since its inception. The Elders’ wisdom purposefully guides a number of organizational endeavors, informing key areas of service delivery to urban Indigenous communities as well as internal policy at the OFIFC. Over time, Elders and Knowledge Keepers have gifted Eagle Staffs, Eagle feathers, and other sacred items to the OFIFC. These sacred items become part of the OFIFC collective bundle.

Through research activities, we learned that the Federation invests considerable time and resources in passing on the stories about the mentors whose way of life and teachings influence the OFIFC’s culture-based management. These stories are testimonies to the conduct of prominent cultural role models, who provide a frame of reference for their communities to follow. Participants reflected on the importance of honoring these relationships as they apply culture-based knowledge to their daily work:

Here, we practice the gifts that have been given to us by many people. And it is important to remember where those gifts came from, and why. Why do we do this, and who gave this to us? … When we’re working on the solution to the problem, quite frequently it isn’t a mainstream, management-based conversation that we end up having. It’s a “What did your grandmother say 50 years ago and how is that relevant now?” conversation. I think those things are particularly meaningful when we’re talking about the transfer of Indigenous knowledge. (Focus group with the OFIFC Directors)

Through an ongoing education on the OFIFC bundle, staff learn about the life journeys of cherished OFIFC traditional teachers and are encouraged to remember and express gratitude for their own wise teachers in their lives.

In addition to honoring the contributions of specific people and sources of knowledge, IKT activities at the OFIFC are designed to provide a clear understanding of the reasoning behind any cultural knowledge shared. The OFIFC community consists of individuals from various cultures who bring various levels of cultural expertise. Some individuals received cultural teachings from childhood and have actively practiced their culture ever since. Others came to their culture later in life, and now hold cultural responsibilities and knowledge. Some find themselves just at the beginning of their cultural learning journey due to disruption of cultural continuity as a result of colonization. In light of these widely differing levels of knowledge, OFIFC leadership prioritizes making clear the “why” behind practices, protocols and ceremonies:

The transmission of knowledge [at the OFIFC] is very direct, focused and intentional. It is necessary because we all come from very different places and there’s a real trauma that comes from not being able to verbalize [our knowledge]. We should not just say what is acceptable or not but we should be able to explain why. Why are we doing this? (Interview with Executive Director)

With this transparency on the rationale of cultural teachings, staff have the opportunity to make decisions to consciously shape their learning journey while drawing on a variety of teachings that the Federation has to offer. As we learned, providing the “why” also gives more information on the specific cultural context of the knowledge shared and can help to guard IKT processes against decontextualization. At the same time, Elders, Knowledge Keepers and staff with IKT responsibilities highlighted the wide applicability of certain teachings and practices to both personal and professional contexts, while other practices have more specific applications at specific times. By providing this information on both rationale and appropriate application, those who are teaching honor the cultural context from which the teaching or practice originates, while creating space for learners to think creatively about how to integrate this information into their own life and work.

In the interviews, participants emphasized the diverse nature of both the OFIFC workplace and the urban Indigenous community of Toronto more broadly as a key aspect of the knowledge transfer context. OFIFC management and staff discussed how both Indigenous and non-Indigenous staff come from different nations, territories, languages, and life experiences, and that IKT activities at the OFIFC involved learning from individuals of different ages and genders. Reflecting on the impact of this urban setting, the Executive Director explained: “[it] creates a wonderful nest and environment for Indigenous knowledge to thrive. Not only did it create an opportunity for us to learn our culture but also to see it in the context of other cultures.” Participants noted the importance of acknowledging that staff come to the OFIFC with their own cultures and life experiences, and they spoke about seeing the staff as Knowledge Keepers in their own right. Indigenous knowledge is received and perpetuated through relationships and ceremony, and many staff have taken steps before arriving at the OFIFC to build their personal bundles. One OFIFC manager explained, “My own approach from a professional standpoint is the inclusion of the diversity of all of our nations. I really believe in capitalizing on people’s gifts, looking at where they [the staff] come from, listening to their stories.” Staff learn about each other’s areas of strength through time and relationship-building, and through this process come to understand how to best leverage each person’s gifts toward the collective work.

Within this diverse urban Indigenous setting where individuals have different levels of cultural knowledge, staff underscored that kindness and care are essential to transferring knowledge in a good way that respects the personal autonomy of individuals while preserving the integrity of the teaching. In a focus group with members of the Traditional Council, participants discussed this in terms of the importance of always having good intentions when holding a responsibility to pass on knowledge to others in the organization. One participant reflected that the transmission of Indigenous knowledge “should not be used as power over, it should be used as empowering.” Participants discussed the types of moments that can inhibit learning when those who have a responsibility to teach act without kindness, or do not provide the rationale behind what they are asking:

‘Oh, you’re not picking up the tobacco with your right hand,’ ‘You need to be in this line,’ ‘You’re not supposed to be over here, you’re supposed to be standing with the other men or the other women,’ or you know, like and those things have always been social cues for me to change that space, because I wasn’t willing to make relationship with people that have a narrow or prescribed view of culture. (Focus Group with Traditional Council)

By reflecting on both effective and ineffective learning experiences in their lifetimes, staff make conscious decisions about the knowledge transfer values and practices that they choose to carry forward into their work to support urban Indigenous communities at the OFIFC. As one member of Traditional Council expressed when describing their teaching philosophy: “How can we come together in that space to create ceremony?”

With a staff comprising both Indigenous and non-Indigenous people, OFIFC leadership recognized the necessity of ongoing education and relationship-building to ensure that Indigenous knowledge would be honored, protected, and properly used. Non-Indigenous staff have the opportunity to learn how to drum, speak to and care for sacred items, smudge, pick and grow medicines and take on many other responsibilities to serve the OFIFC community. These activities occur with full consent of the organization’s leaders and within the conceptual framework of treaty. The concept of treaty involves a mutual give and take, embodying an equitable relationship removed from a power struggle and manifested by caring behavior and reciprocity. It also means that the parties to the treaty each have specific responsibilities to fulfil (Bergier & Maracle, 2021).

This collaboration framework requires non-Indigenous staff to carefully examine their biases and positionality prior to engaging in organizational activities and to think critically about what knowledge they share and why they choose to share it. They are expected to assume responsibilities respectfully and fulfill their tasks in a context-sensitive manner, within the boundaries of what they are asked to do without appropriating, distorting or compartmentalizing Indigenous knowledge. This process involves the capacity to display certain aspects of traditional teachings without assuming another identity, as explained by an OFIFC non-Indigenous senior staff:

I’m very grounded in my own culture and I didn’t come here wanting to be something I’m not. I came here with a very clear understanding that there are things that are not mine to take and not mine to have. They belong to other people. And I’m happy to fight for the right of those other people to have those things, but I don’t need to take them (Focus group with OFIFC Directors)

We learned that non-Indigenous staff as well as non-Indigenous partners outside the organization are also encouraged to participate in Indigenous Cultural Competency Training (ICCT), delivered to groups interested in building meaningful relationships with Indigenous communities, including government stakeholders, nonprofit organizations, non-Indigenous service providers, and non-Indigenous research partners. The ICCT training focuses on treaty relationships, mutual responsibilities, intergenerational trauma, and discriminatory policies and legislation that have negatively impacted Indigenous communities. Overall, non-Indigenous staff are encouraged to participate in both cultural learning opportunities as well as an ongoing process of self-reflection about their positionality and appropriate behavior within different contexts. These activities orient non-Indigenous staff toward gaining the ability to identify and respect sources of Indigenous knowledge within the OFIFC bundle.

Educating for continuity

IKT at the OFIFC is intended to foster “everyday good living” and equip individuals with the relevant cultural foundations to find their place and uphold their responsibilities within the community. As the Executive Director reflected on the role of staff: “We are all helpers: we are all responsible for creating peace and balance.” Each staff member is expected to cultivate a shared understanding of the OFIFC bundle and follow specific protocols just as they would be expected to observe certain rules of conduct upon entering any traditional territory. At the same time, IKT at the OFIFC is characterized by respect toward personal sense of belonging and cultural affiliation. In their time spent visiting and teaching at the OFIFC, one knowledge keeper observed that they were able to identify this balance: they could see both staff’s respect for the OFIFC bundle as well as personal cultural expressions. Depending on the context, individuals are encouraged to apply organizational teachings or defer to their personal practice. For example, staff members are expected to observe specific cultural protocols during seasonal feasts in the workplace. These protocols involve fulfilling responsibilities related to ceremonial conduct such as saying opening and closing prayers, taking care of the sacred fire, feasting the sacred bundle items, making ceremonial offerings and ensuring that the feast food is not wasted. At the same time, the Federation supports other organizational spaces such as Drum Group weekly practice meetings, where the participants may follow their personal cultural protocols:

When it comes to drumming it’s largely about your personal practices and what you’ve been taught, and what you’re bringing from your home community. For example, in terms of the moon time protocols,⁵ everyone’s different with where they stand on that. (Focus group with Drum Group)

By creating shared understandings for certain spaces or times with specific cultural protocols, as well as other spaces where individuals are encouraged to follow their own teachings, individuals are provided the information to make conscious choices about their own behavior.

Throughout research activities, participants emphasized that IKT responsibilities must be shared for the overall wellbeing of the community. While staff are free to make choices about whether or not to accept ceremonial or cultural knowledge transfer responsibilities, there is also an understanding that knowledge transfer of the OFIFC bundle is put at risk if teaching responsibilities sit exclusively with a small number of staff. Additionally, this can create additional stress for individuals who are seen as more knowledgeable:

For me, I think the challenge was I came into this organization with traditional teachings, with culture, and for a long time I felt a lot of pressure that I had to be that for this organization all the time, but also I felt that that eclipsed other people, and that’s not happening anymore. As an individual, I’ve taken a bit of a step back, at least I perceive that I have. And there’s other men that have taken on that responsibility. (Focus Group with Traditional Council)

As this participant notes, balance is created when more people step forward to share the responsibilities of IKT and others are able to rest or participate in a more passive role.

Research activities demonstrated that prioritizing continuity of collective knowledge as well as personal growth are not incompatible educational goals, even when individuals hold personal teachings that are different than those within the OFIFC bundle. The experience of negotiating between personal cultural identities and the collective bundle provides staff with the opportunity to learn about themselves, reflect on their own sources of knowledge, and ultimately learn how to nest their personal culture-based way of being within the broader urban Indigenous community. As one participant noted:

I think there are some things that are really different. A traditional approach to say, smudging every day may not be something that I have been traditionally taught as a Haudenosaunee person. However, for meeting the space that I’m in, I acknowledge that is what we do here and I will participate and allow myself to be open to that. It’s okay that that’s not how I was raised, but being open to other ways of doing things made me realize how much fuller I think I have become. (Focus Group with OFIFC Managers)

Integral to this process of negotiating knowledge toward the continuity of newly learned knowledge or practices is the ability of individuals to test the knowledge or practices and observe the results. OFIFC knowledge transfer processes are timed and designed to provide people with actionable knowledge that can be immediately put into practice within their lives and work. By testing the knowledge, individuals can make the teachings personally meaningful and observe firsthand how they contribute to positive outcomes in their relationships and work for the Friendship Centre Movement.

Discussion

Examining elements of IKT at the OFIFC helps to illuminate facets of self-determined urban Indigenous education outside of school, post-secondary, or land-based settings. This research helps to broaden the empirical Indigenous education scholarship in Canada to provide an innovative example that supports established definitions of Indigenous education: a lifelong process of learning how to live in a culture-based way, and a lifelong commitment to learning about and upholding one’s responsibilities within a web of kinship (Battiste, 2002). These definitions of Indigenous education closely parallel the notion of “everyday good living” which underpins the knowledge transfer infrastructure of the OFIFC. While education research often explores the tensions between Indigenous and non-Indigenous epistemologies in terms of the inclusion or exclusion of Indigenous knowledge in schools (Battiste & Henderson, 2009; Donovan, 2011; Kuokkanen, 2008), our findings provide a view into the realities of navigating the presence of diverse Indigenous and non-Indigenous epistemologies in a collective work setting.

As we have shown, the OFIFC has designed and employed a model of urban Indigenous education for staff that is built into their daily work. This education involves: taking the time to learn about and honor the distinct sources of knowledge present in the OFIFC bundle, taking up knowledge transfer responsibilities as appropriate and as directed by the individual’s own preferences, consciously negotiating between personal teachings and OFIFC protocols and expectations, and behaving in a way that supports the continuity of the OFIFC bundle and each person’s ability to engage with the knowledges contained within.

In Ontario, where more than 85% of the Indigenous population lives off-reserve (Statistics Canada, 2016), strengthening understandings of the full spectrum of how and where urban Indigenous education occurs is a crucial piece of understanding how communities are envisioning and enacting urban Indigenous self-determination. Scholars have demonstrated that urban Indigenous organizations are central to urban Indigenous governance, support community members to pursue formal education, transfer cultural knowledge through frontline service provision, and provide opportunities to become involved in governance (Howard, 2011; Newhouse, 2003; Silver et al., 2006). The OFIFC implements a self-determined program of Indigenous education for staff, who are not frontline service providers but rather who support the work of the Friendship Centre Movement through program support, administration, policy, education and training, and research. Understanding and being able to act in alignment with the cultural foundations of the OFIFC bundle are considered foundational to this work, and this is emphasized through the ongoing nature of knowledge transfer activities beginning during orientation and continuing throughout staff’s time at the organization. By rooting staff in these cultural foundations, the OFIFC – through the work of Elders, Knowledge Keepers, and all staff members who participate in knowledge transfer – designs, guides, and maintains the vision for how the organization will engage with Friendship Centres, external partners, and each other.

Our findings provide a nuanced perspective on how an urban Indigenous organization attends to the highly diverse, inter-national urban environment of Toronto while also cultivating a sense of organizational and cultural unity through ongoing education. Picking up Indigenous knowledge in an inter-national environment requires transparent knowledge transfer protocols and clear identification of knowledge sources, allowing individuals to affirm shared values and preserve organizational integrity while respecting their own sense of cultural distinctiveness (Maracle et al., 2020). The simultaneous consideration and attention to these elements demonstrates the complexity of these knowledge transfer processes. This research contributes important detail into how Indigenous and non-Indigenous participants navigate a diversity of knowledges in one urban Indigenous workplace, supporting previous research findings that both urban Indigenous individuals and institutions carefully navigate a high degree of cultural diversity (Andersen, 2013; Urban Aboriginal Task Force, 2007; Wilson & Peters, 2005). While these findings are limited to one organization, they demonstrate transformative adult education that can provide lessons for other Indigenous, minority, or diaspora communities interested in developing educational projects for groups that represent a diversity of knowledges, have shared goals or visions, and are in close daily contact (e.g., a workplace).

This paper focused on internal knowledge transfer at the OFIFC, or the ways in which staff and Elders and Knowledge Keepers who have contributed to the OFIFC bundle think about and understand their responsibilities for knowledge transfer. The limitations of space meant that we could not discuss the specific ways that external pressures, evolving relationships, and ongoing learning with organizational partners or government influences OFIFC knowledge transfer. Nonetheless, urban Indigenous communities are in constant relationship with other communities and influences in urban settings, and these forces inevitably influence knowledge transfer (Howard, 2011; Ramirez, 2007); this could be the subject of future research.

Conclusion

The work that urban Indigenous people and organizations do to perpetuate cultural knowledge, encourage and model culture-based behavior, and envision and work toward a collective future deserves to be acknowledged as Indigenous education, even when it occurs outside of schools, universities, or the “bush.” The identification of how this work took place within the OFIFC can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of where and how Indigenous education can occur. Indigenous “everyday good living” can be learned and shared in cities and in workplaces, and investigation into these processes can enrich the Indigenous education literature on pedagogies, principles and curriculum development.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge the following individuals and groups for their important contributions to this research:

Elders and traditional teachers:

Maria Campbel

Vern Douglas

Ray Kinoshameg

Sylvia Maracle, Executive Director, OFIFC

Rebecca Martell

Principal investigator: Kim Anderson

Focus groups:

OFIFC Directors

OFIFC Managers

OFIFC Indigenous Cultural Competency Training (ICCT) Trainers

OFIFC Traditional Council

Former OFIFC Men’s Council

OFIFC Drum Group

Researchers:

Magda Smolewski

OFIFC Research Team

Deborah McGregor

Jo-Anne Lawless

Brooke Splicer

Ramona Reece

Ryan Neepin

Aleksander Golijanin

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada [435-2014-1508].

Notes on contributors

Angela Easby

Angela Easby is a Metis Anishinaabe PhD student in the Social Practice and Transformational Change program at the University of Guelph. She holds a MA in Environmental Studies from the University of Victoria.

Aleksandra Bergier

Dr. Aleksandra Bergier is a Research Advisor, Indigenous Initiatives at Queen’s University. She is a Polish settler researcher with an academic background in sociology and cultural studies. She is a Research Advisor, Indigenous Initiatives at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario. Her research focuses on Indigenous language revitalization and indigenizing post-secondary institutions.

Kim Anderson

Dr. Kim Anderson is an Associate Professor in the Department of Family Relations and Applied Nutrition at the University of Guelph, where she holds a Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Relationships.

Notes

¹ Sylvia Maracle (Skonaganleh:ra) is a Mohawk traditional teacher from the Tyendinaga territory and was the Executive Director of the Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres (OFIFC) from 1978 to 2021 (including during the IKTUAC research project).

² Turtle Island is a name for North America used by many Indigenous nations in the northeastern portion of the continent. This name originates from different nations’ Creation Stories.

³ The Grandmother’s Council, Traditional Council, and Men’s Council were present at the OFIFC at the time of data collection. Currently, the OFIFC Councils are as follows: Traditional Knowledge Holders’ Group and Traditional Council.

⁴ The Creator’s Law, also referred to as Original Instructions or the teachings of kindness, honesty, sharing and strength, was transferred to the OFIFC by revered Anishinaabe traditional teacher Peter O’Chiese in the early 1980s.

⁵ Moon time is a term used by many Indigenous people across Turtle Island to refer to menstruation. As this participant notes, different people have received different teachings about protocols to adhere to while on one’s moon time, which may (or may not) involve abstaining from drumming.