In this episode we're going to dive deep into the world of Indigenous Research Methodologies and reflect on the complexities of doing social research that honors the diversity of human experiences.

EPISODE TRANSCRIPT

Hello, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the SOSC 739 lecture series podcast! As always, I'm your host, Dr. Siomonn Pulla. Today, we're going to dive deep into the world of Indigenous Research Methodologies, also known as IRM. This topic is incredibly relevant, especially as we think about the complexities of doing social research that honors the diversity of human experiences.

So, grab your coffee or tea, and let's get into it!

In our last episode, we focused on Participatory Action Research and its impact on the politics of knowledge. This week, we've shifted gears to look at how Indigenous communities and epistemologies often find themselves at the fringes of mainstream Western social science.

Our unit resources also touch upon some polarizing perspectives within IRM, notably those of Gone, to showcase that even within Indigenous scholarship, there's a rich tapestry of views. I'm keen to hear your thoughts in the Unit forum.

The Indigenous world is incredibly diverse. So, echoing McGuire-Adams' warning from our reading list, we should avoid painting IRM with a broad "pan-Indigenous" brush. It's essential to look at the contextual aspects of IRM to understand its application in research more comprehensively.

Historically, Indigenous Research Methodologies emerged as postmodern and postcolonial critiques of mainstream research paradigms gained traction. The late '60s and early '70s were a revolutionary time in epistemology, closely aligned with social movements like feminism, which began challenging traditional masculine approaches to social science. The feminist challenge to mainstream social science prompted a broader rethinking of the question: social science by whom and for whom?

Postmodern, postcolonial and feminist critiques of the modernist tradition created an important space for the support of perspectives, voices, and populations that have traditionally been marginalized by western science. Indigenous research methodologies and epistemologies allowed for appropriate representations within academia of Indigenous peoples' and communities' experiences and cultures, which are typically not represented in the foundational assumptions of social science, even by traditions whose role has been to challenge empirical-rationalist methodologies.

Edward Said's seminal work, Orientalism, is a cornerstone here, especially in how it critiqued Western narratives that perpetuated colonial ideologies.

He—briefly—addressed in this critical work the embedded representational practices that continued to support colonial ideologies of "western" superiority over the marginalized "other." Said was Palestinian, and much of his discussion centred on the tensions and binaries that exist between Arab and Western cultures. This work, however, provided a framework within which many marginalized and colonized populations could now challenge western epistemological traditions that continued to support colonial rationalities. Anthropology and its ethnographic practices were deeply involved in this postcolonial turn. Clifford and Marcus' 1986 work was seminal in advancing the process of uncovering anthropology's and anthropologists' colonial histories, as well as providing new approaches to ethnography.

Indigenous social research methodologies emerged in the 1990s and have flourished in the new century in this context. Much of the early scholarship proposed incorporating Western social research while rethinking and repurposing it to reflect Indigenous perspectives and interests.

Linda Tuhiwai Smith really led the charge here. Her book, Decolonizing Methodologies, is often cited as a pivotal moment that solidified IRM within academia.

As far as I’m concerned, Decolonizing Methodologies should be regarded as a "classic text" right up there with Marx and Engels!  I'll admit that when Smith's early work was released in the late 1990s, it made me very uncomfortable. It felt like there was a lot of "pointing fingers" and "blaming," but not a lot of constructive calls to action on how we can all work together to move forward.

For me, this is part of a larger critique of the critical approach that underpins much of the initial IRM and postcolonial approaches to research. As evidenced by the readings in this unit, there is still considerable debate about the applicability and framing of IRMs. I truly believe that a pragmatic approach to these issues can help us move beyond finger-pointing and blaming and into some stimulating discussion about the possibility that, regardless of sex, gender, race, or class, we as social scientists can collectively and/or independently build and design respectful, supportive, and resilient responses to complex challenges.

One of the most important pragmatic contexts for decolonizing methodologies is that they are community-defined, collaborative, and meaningful—exactly like the participatory methodologies we discussed in the previous episode.

I also appreciate Shawn Wilson's support for "indigenist" approaches, which are inclusive and collaborative by nature  Some of the key general principles for Indigenous Research that we now understand include: reconceptualizing assumptions from Western culture; ensuring meaningful inclusion of Indigenous peoples in research; and ensuring Indigenous peoples' ownership of knowledge— the OCAP protocol is perhaps the most cited Canadian example of this approach.

I've spent considerable time reflecting on IRM, and I've organized my thoughts into seven key elements:

First it embraces Non-linearity: Unlike traditional methods, IRM is cyclical, iterative, and doesn't necessarily have a start or end.

Secondly is the importance and value of Cultural Protocols: It's vital to respect the unique protocols of the community you're working with – and it’s not just about following rules, these protocols are also teachings and you can learn a lot from practicing them. it is also critical that we do not assume that there is a "single" protocol or practice that is "Indigenous."

Thirdly is the notion of Accountability: As Researchers we must take responsibility for both intended and unintended impacts – in some cases, the effects of our work are felt over generations rather than immediately. As a result, we must consider this lengthy period!

Fourthly is the importance of Making Connections: the work we do has an inherent relational quality, and these relations extend to the non-human world and across time.

Fifth is the recognition of the power of a Strength-Based approach: we can support and honour successes with our research in a way that illuminates the darker aspects of history and issues while focusing on developing resilience and capacity strategies in all or any of the personal, family, community, and societal spaces our research touches.

The Sixth element is the acknowledgment of an Ongoing Commitment: we are constantly working together to strengthen and expand the circle of our relationships in order to build and support resilience and strength. And it may even continue after we have ceased to exist physically in this world. It is truly intergenerational.

The final seventh element for me is the importance of Giving Back: We always give back; it's a circle. This is critical: our research must be designed in such a way that our relationships are nurtured and we accept responsibility for the consequences by giving back to our communities in meaningful ways.

I’ve tried to illustrate these reflections visually. Check out the Figure I’ve posted in the Unit resources.

I believe these elements are broadly applicable, whether you're dealing directly with Indigenous communities or not. The relational aspects of IRMs, for example,  can help us build trust and go deeper with our research participants; this relational aspect of IRM is an important aspect of doing any kind of participatory and collaborative research and reminds us of the importance of respecting and honouring our research participants' contributions.

This concept of relationality even resonate with recent shifts in Western social sciences towards what's known as "new materialism," emphasizing relationships and acknowledging the non-human world. Of course this is something Indigenous knowledge keepers all over the world have known since the beginning of time.

Shawn Wilson's book, Research is Ceremony, also supports the idea that you can be an "indigenist" researcher without necessarily being Indigenous, underlining the importance of reflecting on the principles of IRM.

This really hit home for me when one of the indigenous students in the program shared in this class that  for her the foundation of Indigenous methodologies was  about being genuine and true to who you are.

Whew! That was a long but hopefully enriching discussion. In our next episode, I'm going to do something a bit different and then the following episode I’ll be handing the mic over to you. Remember during Unit 10 to please post your forum presentations as earlier as possible  so we all have ample time to engage and comment.

And, for all you Mac users out there, remember you can use the built-in "QuickTime" program to create screencasts and audio recordings.

If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to reach out to me.

Thank you for joining me in today's episode. Stay curious, stay informed, and I'll talk to you all next time.