English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The urban/rural dichotomy used in framing Indigenous educational issues is becoming increasingly untenable and deserving of scrutiny. Indigenous urban education follows initiatives derived from rural areas with the assumption that rural Indigenous education programs are pure or authentic. Without a critical examination of power relations, the flow of people and knowledge in the Indigenous curriculum development process may lead to continued disrespect, appropriation, and tokenization of Indigenous knowledges. This article challenges the conventional conceptualizations surrounding the rural/urban Indigenous educational divide. In so doing, the authors explore two cases: The Saskatchewan (Canada) Ministry of Education’s official K-12 science curriculum attempts to integrate Indigenous perspectives, as do Taiwan’s Indigenous experimental schools. The finding suggests moving beyond pan-urban/rural paradigms that are stemming from settler colonialism. Acknowledging the important role partnerships play for Indigenous education policy and program development, the authors put forth Crit-Trans Partnership Framework to analyze these two cases.

Unsettling the urban–rural dichotomy for Indigenous education and education for reconciliation