First Peoples and Accessibility to Cégeps and Universities

In 2015 the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (TRC) pointed out that reconciliation with First Peoples¹ is not an “Indigenous problem” but rather a societal phenomenon in which all players in society have a role, including postsecondary educational institutions. Also, “in order to redress the legacy of residential schools and advance the process of Canadian reconciliation,” the TRC made the following calls to action in relation to education (6 through 12) and to education for reconciliation (62 through 65). The Commission thus encourages players in these areas to follow its recommendations.²

In response to the TRC’s calls to action, in June 2017 Quebec’s Secrétariat aux affaires autochtones launched the Government Action Plan for the Social and Cultural Development of the First Nations and Inuit 2017‒2022. Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur (MEES) is responsible for five higher education measures set out in the plan that target success and retention.

These government initiatives reflect observations about the disparities experienced by First Peoples (FNQLHSSC, 2018; Statistics Canada, 2016; Posca, 2018), particularly in terms of postsecondary education (FNEC, 2009).

Differences in graduation rates at Cégeps and universities between non-Aboriginals³ and First Peoples persist (see Figure 3). Universities have the lowest level of First Peoples representation. The figures are better for colleges (Statistics Canada, cited by Joncas, 2018).

It has been recognized, however, that education provides access to better jobs and higher incomes (NCCAH, 2017). The most recent First Nations Regional Health Survey, conducted by the First Nations of Quebec and Labrador Social Services Commission (FNQLHSSC, 2018), shows that the percentage of adults who have a “strong feeling of control” over their lives seems to increase in line with the level of education completed, as shown in the figure below.

A little-known sociohistorical reality

The disparities facing First Peoples are the result of a colonial historical reality in which they were marginalized, stigmatized, and subjugated. For many years, the aim of educating First Peoples was to assimilate them by various means, including distancing them from their communities and world views (NCCAH, 2017). For example, under the Indian Act, any member of a First Nation would lose their Indian status upon earning a university diploma, in a practice described as“compulsory enfranchisement” that targeted cultural assimilation.⁴

It is now agreed (CHRC, 2013; TRC, 2015; UN, 2007) that the “Indian residential schools” system and various assimilation polices led to intergenerational trauma that helped foster educational disparities.

In other words, gaps in access and graduation rates have structural roots. According to First Nations people, theses gaps are reflected in the multiple obstacles that limit access to, and persistence in, completing postsecondary education (CMEC, 2010).

Residential schools for Aboriginal children, the last of which closed their doors in 1980 in Quebec and 1996 in the rest of Canada, aimed to assimilate young First Peoples into colonial Canadian society by erasing all traces of their cultural origins. These objectives were based on the assumption that their customs and cultures were inferior.⁵ There were about ten such institutions in Quebec (six residential schools and four hostels as well as the four federal hostels for recognized Inuit⁶) that are estimated to have housed some 13,000 children. In 2015 the then Supreme Court Chief Justice of Canada Beverley McLachlin stated in a public speech that the assimilation and subjugation system was the backbone of a “cultural genocide” policy that resulted in access disparities in several areas and whose consequences persist to this day.

In short, current challenges to educational accessibility are “intricately connected to historical and ongoing impacts of colonialism at individual, family, community, and systemic levels.” (NCCAH, 2017). All Canadians share responsibility for correcting these wrongs (TRC, 2015).

Sociodemographic portrait of First Peoples

According to the most recent Canadian census (Statistics Canada, 2016), there are 1,673,785 First Peoples, 182,890 of whom live in Quebec. The population has risen sharply in the last ten years. Statistics Canada (2015) attributes this rapid growth in part to a high fertility rate. However, the population boom can also largely be explained by a greater tendency to identify as Aboriginal in the Canadian census or, in other words, what Statistics Canada refers to as “intergenerational ethnic mobility.”

Overall, growth in the First Peoples population in Canada is four times (42.5%) the growth rate of the non-Aboriginal population. In Quebec, it is almost ten times higher (66%) than the growth rate for the province’s non-Aboriginal population (6.8%) between 2006 and 2016 (Statistics Canada, 2016).

Each Nation⁷ in Quebec is facing a specific reality, and socio-economic conditions are different for each community, family, and individual.

The First Peoples population is young. The average age in Quebec is 36.4 compared to 41.2 for the non-Aboriginal population. Inuit are the youngest community, with an average age of 26.7.

According to Projections of the Aboriginal Population and Households in Canada, 2011 to 2036 published by Statistics Canada (2015), First Peoples will make up an increasingly large share of the young adult population in the near future. The “The Aboriginal identity population in Canada could increase to between 1,965,000 and 2,633,000 by 2036 under the projection scenarios developed” (ibid.).

This projected population increase shows the importance of immediately prioritizing a concerted approach to access to higher education, with an emphasis on cultural safety.

Discrepancies in postsecondary enrolment rates

Statistics for Canada and Quebec show that First Nations enrolment rates are lower than non-Aboriginal rates, and that “the most significant differences are in post-secondary education” (Statistics Canada, 2016; Blackburn, 2018; Joncas, 2018). As seen in the figure below, a smaller share of the First Peoples population have a college and university diploma, compared to the non-Aboriginal population.

The percentage of First Peoples who have a university diploma has clearly gone up in recent years (Blackburn, 2018). Rates among the non-Aboriginal population are also growing, but more quickly, so the gap between First Peoples and non-Aboriginal people is getting bigger, rising from 12% in 1996 to 14% in 2001 and 15% in 2006 (Aboriginal Peoples Survey, cited by Blackburn, 2018).

Although a number of institutions have added a self-identification box to their application forms, many First Peoples students are reluctant to self-identify for fear of being stigmatized, particularly when services are not tailored to them and when they have no supporting documents (Dufour, 2015).

At this time it is impossible to know exactly how many First Peoples students are enrolled in postsecondary education, due to the lack of a data collection strategy and effective, systematic methods (Lefevre-Radelli and Jérôme, 2017).

Barriers to accessibility

Because the goal of education policies for First Peoples has historically been assimilation, encouraging students to pursue postsecondary education is now a considerable challenge and a major historic reversal (Ratel, 2017). There are still plenty of barriers preventing access to higher education, especially for students raised in communities who are more vulnerable than those who grew up elsewhere (Lefevre-Radelli and Jérôme, 2017). Students from communities face a combination of multiple barriers⁸ and discriminatory factors within the postsecondary system (Dufour, 2015), including:

• Geographical isolation: About half of “future” Aboriginal students reside in communities far from the urban centers where colleges and universities are located (Loiselle and Legault, 2010). To access postsecondary education, they must be able to travel but significant economic constraints are an issue. For example, there are many expenses associated with further education: Expensive travel, high housing costs (in addition to profiling, credit report, lack of co-signers), etc. In its paper on education funding, the
  First Nations Education Council (FNEC, 2009) mentions that lack of funding is the main barrier to postsecondary education for youth living in communities. The FNEC has also shown that First Peoples students are significantly underfunded compared to non-Aboriginal students (cited in Joncas, 2018). One of the MEES measures under the government Plan referred to earlier involves two pilot housing projects (Sept-Îles and Trois-Rivières). In addition, practices and programs are being developed at a number of colleges and universities.

The socio-economic conditions in communities (endemic unemployment, unstable jobs, etc.)—resulting from a prolonged policy of assimilation and subjugation—ensure that “few First Nations students can rely on their family to help them pay for their studies” (Asselin and Basile, 2012).

• Loss of identity and support: In addition to the lack of financial support, because some young people have to leave their family home and community to pursue university studies, they also have to deal with being uprooted and losing their identity. This distance from family and friends is often associated with a loss of community support for students, who are dealing with family and financial responsibilities in addition to their studies (Rodon, 2008; Indspire, 2018). The proportion of teenage mothers is significantly higher among First Peoples than among non-Aboriginal women:⁹ Less than 6% of non-Aboriginal women aged 25 to 29 became mothers before the age of 20, while the figure is more than three times higher among First Peoples (Arriagada, 2016). Students who are also mothers must find affordable child care and schools for their children on top of managing their own postsecondary education, without the support that many of them would receive in their communities.

• Intergenerational shock: Many parents, grandparents, and elders had a traumatic experience within the school system (NCCAH, 2017), particularly at residential schools. As a result they distrust non-Aboriginal education. This distrust can be passed on to their descendants (Loiselle and Legault, 2010). Some participants in the Dufour study (2015) noted that postsecondary education, and university education in particular, project an image of inaccessibility.

Working toward structural change

One of today’s biggest challenges for colleges and universities is creating space for First Peoples students, while most institutions have long ignored them (Pidgeon, 2016). It is not enough, however, to introduce measures or programs. Non-Aboriginal professionals, instructors, and students still need to be educated in order to demystify the realities experienced by First Peoples and to overcome the stubborn prejudices and stereotypes that hinder accommodations under the pretext of small numbers of Aboriginal students (Blackburn, 2018).

Sheila Cote-Meek, Associate Vice President of Academic and Indigenous Programs at Laurentian University in Ontario, recently said that for lasting transformation to occur, changes made in response to reconciliation must be embedded in administrative and academic structures. To ensure that structural changes in postsecondary institutions are sustained over time, she recommends strong policies and a long-term commitment to First Peoples education (Cote-Meek, 2018).

The Indigenous Education Protocol for Colleges and Institutes, drawn up in 2015 by Colleges and Institutes Canada in cooperation with First Peoples communities and specialists, is one such long-term commitment.

Signatory institutions, including eight cégeps and colleges in Quebec, agree to:

1. Commit to making Indigenous education a priority
2. Ensure governance structures recognize and respect Indigenous peoples
3. Implement intellectual and cultural traditions of Indigenous peoples through curriculum and learning approaches relevant to learners and communities
4. Support students and employees to increase understanding and reciprocity among Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples
5. Commit to increasing the number of Indigenous employees with ongoing appointments throughout the institution, including Indigenous senior administrators
6. Establish Indigenous-centred holistic services and learning environments for learner success
7. Build relationships and be accountable to Indigenous communities in support of self-determination through education, training and applied research

Accordingly, the indigenization of higher education (Pete, 2015; CACUSS, 2018; Pidgeon, 2016) is not about simply helping First Peoples adapt to the non-Aboriginal higher education system, but rather about changing existing structures and practices. Such an approach requires First Peoples’ values, principles, and organizational methods to be respected and integrated into structures, services, and education. To this end, governance, hiring, knowledge assessment, and (co)management practices must be revised, in open collaboration with First Peoples. These are not cosmetic changes, but changes that are profound and authentic.

Indigenization means that “conscious efforts are underway to bring Indigenous people, philosophies, knowledge, and cultures into strategic plans, governance roles, curriculum development and review, research, and professional development” (CACUSS, 2018).

According to Pidgeon (2016), the Indigenization process must not be limited to the occasional speech or event on campus; it must be a meaningful and substantive change in the fabric of the institution.

In this report, CAPRES highlights examples of best practices that aim to strengthen cultural safety (see Key Concept) during First Peoples’ postsecondary education.

---

¹ In this document the term “First Peoples” refers to First Nations, Inuit, and Métis (Gauthier and Blackburn, 2015).

² See Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada: Calls to Action (2012)

³ The term “non-Aboriginal” refers to residents of a territory who are not descendants of First Peoples (Gauthier and Blackburn, 2015).

⁴ Canada’s Indian Act aimed to “enfranchise” Indians, i.e., to stop them from being legally Indians and to allow them to take on all the attributes of citizenship, as specified in Section 109. In 1880 an amendment automatically stripped anyone who earned a university diploma of their Indian status. Provisions addressing enfranchisement would not be repealed until 1985 (https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-act).

⁵ Seeking, as has been infamously said, “to kill the Indian in the child.” Ministère des Affaires autochtones et du Nord Canada, 2008.

⁶ The invariable term Inuit is used throughout this report, except in references where the original title has been retained. To learn more: Inuit, Inuk (Linguistic recommendation from the Translation Bureau) 

⁷ In Quebec, the First Nations are Abenaki, Algonquin, Atikamekw, Cree, Huron-Wendat, Innu, Maliseet, Micmac, Mohawk, and Naskapi. Inuit are the 11th Aboriginal nation in the province, in terms of population.

⁸ Loiselle and Legault (2010) and Dufour (2015) produced a summary of the many discriminating factors and barriers to access and success. Lévesque et al. (2015) also wrote about this in Synthèse des connaissances sur la persévérance et la réussite scolaires des élèves autochtones au Québec et dans les autres provinces canadiennes.

⁹ It is common for First Peoples to follow an atypical educational path. Mothers often put their studies on hold to raise a family and go back to school later on. According to the FNQLHSSC (2018), “the proportion of adults with a high school diploma is significantly higher among adults aged between 25 and 64. This could indicate that a good number of adults returned to school and completed their secondary studies at the age of 25 or older.” (p. 5).