Figure 3 - uploaded by Sean Asikłuk Topkok
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
In any graduate research methods course, one must teach the underlying assumptions of various research paradigms, and the interrelated philosophical principles of epistemology, ontology and axiology. At an Alaskan university, many people do research and work with Alaska Native communities, so a grasp of an Alaska Native epistemology is crucial. Thi...
Similar publications
Citations
... Iñupiat ways of life continue to be threatened, restricted and harmed by colonialism, where Western research (of all types) plays a central role enacting Iñupiat communities in terms legible to Western institutions and settlercolonial liberal-democratic states (Heleniak and Napper, 2021). Consequently, the primary research aim of many Indigenous peoples in Alaska in recent decades has been to renew and revitalise Indigenous methodologies to strengthen Indigenous lives, lands and cultures (Hogan and Topkok, 2015;Zanotti et al., 2020). At the same time, however, Indigenous peoples have also articulated the importance of engaging in (and improving) Western research practices that can help to enhance selfdetermination (Reid et al., 2021), for instance through contributions to community planning (Raymond-Yakoubian and Daniel, 2018). ...
... While in some academic traditions this may seem a statement of the obvious, reading philosophy, ethics and social studies of science is often neglected in problem-driven research, where such reading may be viewed as either unnecessary or an indulgence given the scale of the real-world challenges the research seeks to address (O'Rourke and Crowley, 2013). While we have some sympathy for such views, we have found that when working across different methodological approaches it is important to make an explicit space for discussion about the foundational assumptions, aims and purposes of the approaches involved, including mutual critiques (e.g., Guba and Lincoln, 1994;Abbott, 2004), as these are central to the possible social outcomes and impacts of research (e.g., Hogan and Topkok, 2015). We refer to social studies of science (also known as Science and Technology Studies, or STS) as well as philosophy and ethics because this literature explicitly explores the social contexts and effects of science, and in treating science as a social practice has helped us to make better comparisons between our approaches (e.g., Jasanoff, 2004; Barry and Born, 2013). ...
... Yet the simple existence of such practices is not enough because, as we have shown, the ethical-political dimensions of research are often implicit. Inspired by other practical efforts to surface implicit methodological commitments (including Eigenbrode et al., 2007;Hogan and Topkok, 2015;Hertz and Mancilla-Garcia, 2019, and Simon's participation in the course 'Indigenous Knowledges and Epistemologies' at Charles Darwin University, Australia) we suggest that evaluators might look for the use of prompts that attempt to make ethical-political dimensions explicit. We provide the following examples intended to prompt reflection on the relations between ontology, epistemology, axiology and the social effects of research methods: ...
Methods are often thought of as neutral tools that researchers can pick up and use to learn about a reality ‘out there.’ Motivated by growing recognition of complexity, there have been widespread calls to mix methods, both within and across disciplines, to generate richer scientific understandings and more effective policy interventions. However, bringing methods together often reveals their tacit, inherently contestable, and sometimes directly opposing assumptions about reality and how it can and should be known. There are consequently growing efforts to identify the competencies necessary to work with multiple methods effectively. We identify the ability to recognise and negotiate the ethical-political dimensions of research methods as a key competency in mixed methods, inter- and transdisciplinary, and co-production research, particularly for researchers addressing societal challenges in fields like environment, health and education. We describe these ethical-political dimensions by drawing on our experiences developing an ethics application for a transdisciplinary sustainability science project that brings together the photovoice method and controlled behavioural experiments. The first dimension is that different methods and methodological approaches generate their own ethical standards guiding interactions between researchers and participants that may contradict each other. The second is that these differing ethical standards are directly linked to the variable effects that methods have in wider society (both in terms of their enactment in the moment and the knowledge generated), raising more political questions about the kinds of realities that researchers are contributing to through their chosen methods. We identify the practices that helped us—as two researchers using different methodological approaches—to productively explore these dimensions and enrich our collaborative work. We conclude with pointers for evaluating the ethical-political rigour of mixed methods, inter- and transdisciplinary, and co-production research, and discuss how such rigour might be supported in research projects, graduate training programmes and research organisations.
... Tied to "imperialism as a discursive field of knowledge", this domain controls epistemological colonization through Eurocentrism, as it engages the politics of education and knowledge production, and the re-articulation of Indigenous subjectivity as "inferior" and "lacking" (see: Hogan & Topkok (2015); Nakata et al. (2012); Mignolo (2011);Grosfoguel, (2007); Maldonado-Torres (2007)). ...
Across Canada, a discourse of reconciliation has emerged and is strengthening. Reconciliation is based upon establishing relationships with Canada’s Indigenous populations that are built and maintained on trust, inclusion and respect. These relationships must also be premised upon the recognition of their rights for self- determination and the significance that land holds for Indigenous culture and values. Although Canada’s relationship with its Indigenous population has been underpinned by its colonial praxis, reconciliation calls upon all Canadians to acknowledge this legacy and work towards ending these entrenched, outdated and oppressive ways of thinking. Decolonial thought and postcolonial literature provide an avenue towards actualizing reconciliation, as contemporary Indigenous-rights discourses look to address questions of self-determination, sovereignty, and the recognition of land rights and title. In January of 2019, the Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP) joined the national movement towards reconciliation when they adopted the Policy on Planning Practice and Reconciliation. The goal of the policy is to present a vision of the future of planning in Canada by harmonizing key action areas with the TRC’s Calls to Action, the 10 Principles of Reconciliation, and UNDRIP. As practitioners that connect people, land and governance, planners have a responsibility to honour Indigenous ways of planning by critically examining the status quo and looking for ways to incorporate Indigenous practices into daily practice. While CIP’s new policy has succeeded in identifying what reconciliation means to the organization and the important role planners need to play to bring about these achievements, they have not addressed what reconciliation might look like to on-the- ground practitioners on an everyday basis. The following project attempts to consolidate and operationalize the growing volume of literature on the topic through the development of a reconciliation-informed planning framework.
Keywords: Community Development, Decolonization, Indigenous Planning, Reconciliation, Resurgence, Transformative Reconciliation
The land is where Inuit knowledge transfer has taken place for generations. Land-based programs for learning and healing have been increasingly initiated across Inuit Nunangat in support of Inuit knowledge transfer that was disrupted by colonial settlement policies and imposed governance systems. We worked with Elders in Uqšuqtuuq (Gjoa Haven, Nunavut) to develop a project to understand the connections between caribou and community well-being. They emphasized that Elder–youth land camps are the most effective means for Elders to share their knowledge, for youth to learn, and for researchers to engage in respectful research. We used the Qaggiq Model for Inuktut knowledge renewal as a guiding framework, and we followed the direction of a land camp planning committee to plan, facilitate, and follow-up on three land camps (2011–2013). The Qaggiq Model also outlines the Qaggiq Dialogue as a way of engaging in relational accountability according to Inuit context and values. In this paper, we reflect on the complexities of upholding relational accountability in cross-cultural research — as part of entering into a Qaggiq Dialogue — with particular emphasis on local leadership, ethics and safety, experiential learning, and continuity. Our intention is to help others evaluate the opportunities and limitations of land camps for their own community context and research questions.
Inuit tama’nganituqaq ilihaivalau’mata nunamii’lutik. Ublumiuřuq Inuit nunaa’ni humituinnaq nunami ilihainahualiqpaktut nunamiinirmik, inuuhirmi’nik i&uaqhinahuaq&-utiglu qauřimanirmi’nik tunihinahuaq&utik nutaqqami’nut qablunaaqaliraluaqti’lugu Inuktut ilihattiaruiralua’mata. Qauřihaqtit taapkuat hanaqatiqaq&utik inutuqarnik Uqšuqtuurmiutarnik Nunavummi, nalunaiqhittiarahuaq&utik tuktut inuuhuqattiarutauni-ngi’nik, inutuqallu nunami katiqatigiiquři’lutik i&uarniqšaittuu’mat: inutuqarnut ta’na ilihaqtami’nik ilihaijuma’lutik, inuuhuktullu ilihattiatqiřaujungna’mataguuq, qauřihaqtillu ta’na qauřihattiatqijaujungna’mata atuutiqaqtunik inungnut. Atuqtut malik&utik qařginnguarmik pivaallirutaunahuaqtumik atuqtauvaktumik atu’magit, malik&utiglu katimařiralaat inuit pitquřai’nik, pingahuiqtiq&utik nunami katiqatigiingniqaralua’mata ukiut 2011-mit 2013-mut. Taamnalu qařginnguaq atuqtauvaktuq titiraqtauhimařuq nalunaiqhihima’mat iluani qanuq qapblunaat pittiarahuarniqšaujungnariakšaita qauřihaqti’lugit inuit pitquhiagut i&uatqiřauřumik. Tařvani titiraqtut unipkaaq&utik ilaagut atqunarnia’nik pittiarahuaq&utik ilitquhiqaqatigiinngiti’lugit – inuuqatigiigahuaq&utik qařgiqaqatigiiktutut ukunanik atuutikhaqarahuaq&utik hanařut: taamna qauřiharniq inungnit aulatau’luni, pittiarnirlu qanurinnginnirlu ihumagiřauřut, nunami ilihaq&utik, kajuhiinnarungnaqtumik aturahuaq&utik atuutiqaqtunik inungnut. Qauřihaqtit tařvani unipkaaqtut atuqtami’nik ikajurniqaqu’lugu ahiinut nunami ilihaqtittinahuaqtunut ima’natut hanalutik, atuutiqattiarnia’niglu atqunarnarnia’niglu ilaagut, ahiit na’miniq hanajumagutik nunami’ni qauřihaqrumagutik ima’natut pijungna’mata.
Many urban American Indian community members lack access to knowledgeable participation in indigenous spiritual practices. And yet, these sacred traditional activities remain vitally important to their reservation-based kin. In response, our research team partnered with an urban American Indian health center in Detroit for purposes of developing a structured program to facilitate more ready access to participation in indigenous spiritual knowledge and practices centered on the sweat lodge ceremony. Following years of preparation and consultation, we implemented a pilot version of the Urban American Indian Traditional Spirituality Program in the spring of 2016 for 10 urban AI community participants. Drawing on six first-person accounts about this program, we reflect on its success as a function of participant meaningfulness, staff support, mitigated sensitivities, and program structure. We believe that these observations will enable other community psychologists to undertake similar program development in service to innovative and beneficial impacts on behalf of their community partners.
