Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explore the notion of decolonizing interpretive research in ways that respect and integrate the qualitative sensibilities of subaltern voices in the knowledge production of anti-colonial possibilities.

The paper draws from the decolonizing and post-colonial theoretical tradition, with a specific reference to Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak’s contribution to this analysis.

Through a critical discussion of decolonizing concerns tied to qualitative interpretive interrogations, the paper points to the key assumptions that support and reinforce the sensibilities of subaltern voices in efforts to move western research approaches toward anti-colonial possibilities. In the process, this discussion supports the emergence of an itinerant epistemological lens that opens the field to decolonizing inquiry.

Its practical implications are tied to discursive transformations, which can impact social and material transformations within the context of research and society.

Moreover, the paper provides an innovative rethinking of interpretive research, in an effort to extend the analysis of decolonizing methodology to the construction of subaltern inspired intellectual labor.

To share the narratives of six Indigenous Researchers representing the diverse thinking of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders. The narratives describe the impact Decolonizing Methodologies have on our lives within the framework of Tuhiwai Smith’s Indigenous Research Agenda.

Linda Tuhwai Smith’s Indigenous Research Agenda framework is used to explore through narrative, the impact Decolonizing Methodologies had on the authors’ professional awakening as Indigenous Researchers. Each author reflects on their first encounter with Decolonizing Methodologies and describes through their narratives how the book influenced and guided their research and community work.

Positionality as a Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander is imperative to being an Indigenous Scholar. Understanding who one is requires critical reflection and is a part of developing an Indigenous Research Agenda. The challenges each Indigenous scholar’s narrative explores is navigating a Western system while staying true to our values and identity as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander. At the core is our ability to work in partnership with the community to bring forth sustainable change.

This paper explores the impact Decolonizing Methodologies had on the authors thinking and research approaches. The narratives the authors share is from the positionality of being Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander.

In Decolonizing Methodologies (1999), Linda Tuhiwai Smith asserted that “the master’s tools of colonization will not work to decolonize what the master built.” Smith challenged Indigenous researchers to fashion “new tools for the purpose of decolonizing and Indigenous tools that can revitalize Indigenous knowledge” (p. 22). A quarter of a century later, this paper reflects on the powerful impact that Smith’s call to action has had upon recent generations of bright, politically active and culturally grounded Native Hawaiian researchers, many of whom are innovatively turning to the Native epistemologies embedded in our traditional cultural practices to craft (k)new research tools and methodologies.

This paper features three Native Hawaiian scholars who are simultaneously hula and mele (traditional Hawaiian dance and song) practitioners and who instinctively turned to their hula training to guide and indigenize their research practice.

Each of these three scholars describes how they creatively applied the Hawaiian epistemologies embedded in their hula and mele training to fashion (k)new, Indigenous methodologies to guide (1) their research conduct, (2) their data analyses or interpretations and (3) the presentation of their research findings, respectively.

These three Hawaiian scholars and hula practitioners represent a larger groundswell of Native Hawaiian researchers who are bravely and creatively drawing upon the traditional wisdom and sensitivities embedded in our cultural practices to craft and wield (k)new research tools to “dismantle the master’s house” (Lorde, 1981) and build an Indigenous hale (house) of our own.

Over recent decades, research institutions have prescribed discrete ethics guidelines for human research with Indigenous people in Australia. Such guidelines respond to concerns about unethical and harmful processes in research, including that they entrench colonial relations and structures. This chapter sets out some of the limitations of these well-intentioned guidelines for the decolonisation of research. Namely, their underlying assumption of Indigenous vulnerability and deficit and, consequently, their function to minimise risk. It argues for a strengths-based approach to researching with and by Indigenous communities that recognises community members’ capacity to know what ethical research looks like and their ability to control research. It suggests that this approach provides genuine outcomes for their communities in ways that meet their communities’ needs. This means that communities must be partners in research who can demand reciprocation for their participation and sharing of their knowledge, time and experiences. This argument is not purely normative but supported by examples of Indigenous research models within our fields of health and criminology that are premised on self-determination.

One’s standpoint and consequent research paradigm impacts how we conduct research, including study design, analyses interpretation and dissemination of results. In 2017, the authors began PhD, studying the potential barriers to aftercare treatment for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children aged under 16 who had sustained a burn injury in one of five major hospitals in Australia. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

As Aboriginal PhD students, the authors are conducting research using Aboriginal ontology as a framework, which is based on a holistic framework with interconnectedness, person-centred care and Aboriginal ways of knowing as the foundation. The framework has been shaped by the first author’s knowing, being and doing, and the authors’ worldview has informed and shaped the standpoint and the way the research has been developed and conducted.

It was important for the authors to have a connectedness to each aspect of the research and to each individual person that shared their story: this was paramount to the ways of being.

This connectedness stems from growing up on the authors’ country and learning from elders, from the connection to all entities living around, within and with the authors. The Indigenous research methodology was used throughout the study, including yarning and Dadirri, a way of deep listening and learning, as the basis for interviewing.

The purpose of this paper is to outline the contributions of Smiths legacy in Indigenous methodologies and to show how her interventions encourage and facilitate meaningful research relationships with Indigenous communities. It is also a practical guide for future Indigenous researchers who aim to work with their communities.

This article outlines the legacy and interventions from Linda Smith that have influenced my research and pedagogy work with my community—the Navajo Nation. I weave together a Kejnrj story and theory to show how Smith’s predominant legacy has taught me how to create, maintain and safeguard relationships with horses, humans and knowledge while working within a Western institution.

I discuss the navigation of research relationships before, during and after official research and the implications this has for increasing indigenous sovereignty in partnership with research. It also describes the process of researcher reflexivity required for Indigenous methodological work.

This paper outlines one Navajo researcher’s individual story with research on community. This adds value to researchers who intend to do research/pedagogy work with Native communities.

This chapter reviews and synthesizes three major strands of recent research, alongside discipline-specific research design, from scholars of Language Issues in Comparative and International Education. The first strand is mixed methods research on the policy and practice of L1-based multilingual education programs, and their contribution to raising educational quality and addressing equity and inclusiveness worldwide. The second strand is qualitative, community-based research of educational programs aimed toward revitalization of minoritized, indigenous, and/or endangered languages. The third strand is empirical and theoretical research that seeks to document, contest, and reconceptualize the dynamics among dominant and non-dominant languages within and between international contexts. The authors explore points of synergy between studies, examine publication in the field from a meta-perspective, and suggest encouraging directions of future research, while highlighting the value of non-dominant languages as resources for education and life.

This essay provides an overview of key contemporary issues researched by scholars of Language Issues in Comparative and International Education. The authors present this scholarship around three main themes: L1-based multilingual education; language revitalization and education; and the power dynamics between dominant and non-dominant languages in educational settings. Research in all three themes challenges the view of monolingualism as the norm and invites the view that all languages are resources. These perspectives are relevant to the goals of educational development, particularly to equitable access to quality schooling. Recent research examines some stakeholders’ resistance to supporting and sustaining local languages and cultural practices. While language-in-education policy change may be slow, there are promising directions in research on how educators and communities exercise agency in transforming educational institutions to support plurilingualism and intercultural understandings. Scholars highlight the ideological, pedagogical, and policy-level supports needed for sustainable development of multiple languages, literacies and learning across contexts.

The purpose of this article is to untangle the influence of Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonizing Methodologies on botanical gardens, particularly in the context of commemorating 25 years since its publication. By examining the intersections between decolonial theory and botanical practices, this article seeks to elucidate the ways in which Smith’s work has informed and inspired efforts to decolonize botanical research, conservation and education. Through a narrative review and case study analysis, this article highlights key insights, challenges and opportunities for botanical gardens to embrace decolonial practices and foster more equitable and inclusive relationships with Indigenous communities, science and knowledge systems.

The design and methodology of this article involve a narrative literature review and comparative case study analysis (Petticrew and Roberts, 2006; Goodrick, 2014). The review synthesizes scholarly articles, books and reports on decolonizing botanical practices, focusing on literature that stems from Indigenous science, identifies engagement strategies and advocates for systemic change within botanical institutions. Key themes and recommendations are identified and analyzed to provide insights into future directions for decolonizing botanical gardens. This approach allows for a thorough examination of current discourse and best practices in decolonial theory and botanical research, informing actionable recommendations for advancing decolonization within botanical gardens.

The findings reveal that Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonizing Methodologies has significantly influenced botanical gardens, inspiring efforts to prioritize Indigenous knowledge systems, deepen community engagement and advocate for systemic change. While progress has been made in integrating decolonial practices, challenges persist, including the need for greater institutional commitment, capacity building and accountability. However, opportunities abound for botanical gardens to continue advancing decolonization, particularly through partnerships with Indigenous communities, educational outreach and policy advocacy. Overall, the findings underscore the importance of ongoing reconciliation and action in cultivating more equitable and respectful relationships that advance principles of Indigenous data sovereignty and governance.

While this article offers valuable insights into the influence of Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s Decolonizing Methodologies on botanical gardens, several limitations must be acknowledged. Firstly, the literature review may not document all relevant transformations undertaken by gardens to date if such initiatives are not documented in the public domain, such as institutional websites. Additionally, the review primarily focuses on English-language literature, limiting the exploration of decolonial practices for botanical gardens in non-English-speaking contexts.

This article holds several practical implications for botanical gardens seeking to decolonize. Firstly, by prioritizing Indigenous knowledge and deepening community engagement, botanical gardens can foster more inclusive and respectful relationships with Indigenous communities. Secondly, advocating for systemic change and policy reforms will address institutionalized inequities and recognize Indigenous People’s rights, including biocultural and intellectual property. Additionally, investing in educational outreach and capacity-building initiatives can enhance institutional and public understanding of decolonization. Overall, embracing decolonial practices can contribute to the adoption and advancement of Indigenous Data Sovereignty and the CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance within botanical gardens and beyond.

This article highlights the importance of decolonizing botanical gardens for promoting justice and equity. By centering Indigenous rights to data sovereignty, such as attribution of traditional and biocultural knowledge, botanical gardens can contribute to reconciliation efforts and promote respect for Indigenous rights and sovereignty. Additionally, addressing colonial legacies and systemic inequalities within botanical institutions can advance botanical justice and help build more just and equitable societies. Moreover, this transformation also aligns with a growing legal movement recognizing the inherent rights of Nature, including plant relatives collected, stored and stewarded by botanic gardens.

This article contributes to the literature by exploring the intersection of decolonizing methodologies and botanic gardens, particularly in the context of Linda Tuhiwai Smith’s influential work. By synthesizing key insights and offering actionable recommendations, this review provides guidance on future directions botanic gardens can follow to advance their decolonization strategies and initiatives in furtherance of botanical justice.

This study aims to reflect and honor Linda Smith and her seminal work Decolonizing Methodologies.

Reflecting on Linda Smith’s Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples, I discuss my own application of Smith’s major contributions to my research, teaching- and community engaged work. I begin with my positionality and detail my journey as a Native Hawaiian teacher and researcher who has been influenced by the major tenants of Decolonizing Methodologies. After 25 years, Smith continues to empower Indigenous scholars and reminds us of the importance of the process of research and the necessary actions to collaborate with Indigenous communities towards knowledge production.

Reflections of how the tenants of Decolonizing Methodologies have influenced my own research, teaching and community engaged work.

This is my personal reflection and so it is limited.

Other Indigenous scholars can relate to my reflections of Linda Smith and Decolonizing Methodologies.

Many of us can attest to the power of Decolonizing Methodologies.

My reflections as a Native Hawaiian woman will add value to the special issue.