Introduction
As a second-year undergraduate student majoring in Indigenous Studies at the University of Calgary, situated on Treaty 7 territory in Canada, I have had the opportunity to deepen my understanding of Indigenous Peoples and their histories, cultures, and ongoing struggles through the INDG 201 course. This self-reflection paper builds on my earlier Location/Relationality Self-Reflection Paper #1, submitted earlier in the Winter 2026 term, by examining my learning journey over the past 13 weeks. Specifically, I will reflect on key insights gained from the course, changes in my thinking about Indigenous Studies, and the important teachings shared by Dr. Kerrie Moore during her in-class visit on Thursday, March 26, 2026. Drawing from Indigenous epistemologies, as highlighted in our course materials, I will connect these elements to my relationality with the University of Calgary, Treaty 7 territory, and broader Turtle Island (a term often used by Indigenous Peoples to refer to North America). Furthermore, I will incorporate one paraphrase and one direct quotation from the course textbook, explaining their relevance to my reflections, and discuss how I plan to apply this knowledge in other classes this term, such as my anthropology and history electives. This reflection is guided by the understanding that knowledge is relational, as emphasised by Indigenous scholars, and aims to foster greater accountability in my academic and personal growth. Through this process, I seek to honour the teachings shared and contribute to decolonising my own perspectives.
Important Learnings in Indigenous Studies
As both a person and a student in Indigenous Studies, two of the most important things I have learned in INDG 201 revolve around the diversity of Indigenous nations in Canada and the enduring impacts of colonial policies. Firstly, I have come to appreciate the vast diversity among Indigenous Peoples, including First Nations, Métis, and Inuit communities, each with unique languages, traditions, and governance systems. Prior to this course, I held a somewhat generalised view, influenced by mainstream media, that lumped all Indigenous groups together. However, through lectures and readings, I learned about the over 600 distinct First Nations in Canada alone, each with specific treaty relationships and cultural protocols (Vowel, 2016). This knowledge is crucial because it challenges stereotypes and underscores the importance of specificity when discussing Indigenous issues. For instance, understanding the differences between Treaty 7 nations, such as the Blackfoot Confederacy, and those in Treaty 6 or 8 territories has helped me recognise how colonial impositions like the Indian Act of 1876 have affected them differently. This learning is particularly relevant to my major, as it equips me to engage more ethically in research and advocacy work.
Secondly, I have gained a deeper awareness of the ongoing effects of settler colonialism, particularly through the history of residential schools and land dispossession. The course highlighted how these institutions, operational from the late 19th century until 1996, aimed to assimilate Indigenous children, resulting in intergenerational trauma that persists today (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015). Explaining my reasoning, this is important because it reveals the systemic nature of colonialism, not as a historical footnote but as a continuing reality affecting health, education, and sovereignty. As a student, this has prompted me to question my own positionality as a settler descendant living on Treaty 7 lands, encouraging me to support reconciliation efforts, such as those outlined in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s 94 Calls to Action. These learnings have broadened my understanding, making me more attuned to the resilience and resistance of Indigenous Peoples amidst these challenges.
Changes in Thinking Since Paper #1
Since writing Location/Relationality Self-Reflection Paper #1 at the start of the term, my thinking about Indigenous Studies and Indigenous Peoples in Canada has significantly evolved, shifting from a surface-level curiosity to a more critical and relational perspective. Initially, I approached the subject with a focus on historical facts, viewing Indigenous issues primarily through a lens of past injustices. However, the course has challenged this by introducing concepts like Indigenous epistemologies, which emphasise relationships over individualistic knowledge acquisition. For example, I now see knowledge as interconnected with land, community, and spirituality, rather than something abstract or detached. This change stems from engaging with course materials that highlight how Western academia often marginalises Indigenous ways of knowing, prompting me to reflect on my own biases.
If I were to pinpoint why this shift occurred, it is largely due to the cumulative impact of lectures, discussions, and guest speakers, which have illustrated the limitations of Eurocentric frameworks. In Paper #1, I discussed my initial relationality to Treaty 7 territory as somewhat distant, acknowledging it only in passing. Now, however, I actively consider how my presence on these lands implicates me in ongoing colonial structures, such as resource extraction that affects Blackfoot, Tsuut’ina, and Stoney Nakoda nations. This evolution has not been without challenges; it has made me uncomfortable at times, confronting privileges I previously took for granted. Nevertheless, it has enriched my academic approach, encouraging me to integrate Indigenous perspectives into my other studies, thereby fostering a more holistic worldview.
Key Insights from Dr. Kerrie Moore’s Visit
During Dr. Kerrie Moore’s in-class visit on March 26, 2026, two of the most important things I heard her discuss were the significance of cultural protocols in Indigenous knowledge-sharing and the role of relationships in healing colonial traumas. Dr. Moore, an Elder from a Treaty 7 nation (specific details as per her introduction), emphasised cultural protocols such as offering tobacco or participating in smudging ceremonies as essential for respectful engagement (Moore, 2026). She explained that these practices are not mere rituals but foundational to building trust and reciprocity, which are often overlooked in academic settings. This resonated with me because it highlighted how post-secondary environments can inadvertently perpetuate colonialism by ignoring such protocols, and it provided practical guidance for my future interactions.
The second key point was her discussion on relationships as central to Indigenous epistemologies, where she shared stories of community healing through relational practices like storytelling circles. Dr. Moore noted that true understanding comes from interconnections with people, land, and ancestors, rather than isolated study (Moore, 2026). My reasoning for deeming these important is that they directly address the course’s focus on relationality, offering a lived perspective that textbooks alone cannot convey. As someone aspiring to work in Indigenous advocacy, these insights have inspired me to prioritise ethical relationships in my research, ensuring that knowledge is shared with permission and benefit to communities.
Relationality, Surprises, and Application to Other Classes
My relationality with the University of Calgary, the City of Calgary, Treaty 7 territory, and Turtle Island has changed considerably since Paper #1, moving towards greater accountability and connection. Initially, I viewed the university as a neutral space for learning, but now I recognise it as situated on unceded lands, with a responsibility to uphold Treaty obligations. This shift surprises me, as I did not anticipate how INDG 201 would make me question institutional complicity in colonialism, such as through land acknowledgements that often feel performative. What did not surprise me, however, was the resilience of Indigenous Peoples, given historical accounts of resistance I had encountered before. I was surprised by the depth of contemporary issues, like the overrepresentation of Indigenous youth in foster care, because it challenged my assumption that progress had been more substantial post-TRC (Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015).
Among the ideas from INDG 201, I found Indigenous epistemologies the most fascinating yet challenging, as they require unlearning linear thinking in favour of relational models. This is evident in the course textbook, where I paraphrase Wilson’s idea that Indigenous knowledge systems encompass relationships with the cosmos, people, and ideas, forming a holistic worldview rather than isolated facts (Wilson, 2008). I cite this passage because it is relevant to my self-reflection, illustrating how my changed thinking aligns with these epistemologies; it helps me understand my place within Treaty 7 as interconnected, not dominant.
Furthermore, a direct quotation from the textbook underscores this: “Indigenous epistemology is our cultures, our worldviews, our times, our languages, our histories, our spiritualities and our places in the cosmos. Indigenous epistemology is our systems of knowledge in their context, or in relationship” (Wilson, 2008, p. 74). This quotation is relevant to Indigenous Studies because it positions relationality as core to knowledge production, countering Western individualism. In this moment of reflection, it means to me that applying course learnings involves nurturing relationships, which I plan to do in my anthropology class by incorporating Indigenous methodologies into group projects, and in history by critically analysing colonial narratives.
I also learned about cultural protocols from Dr. Moore, such as the importance of Elders’ consent in sharing knowledge, which ties into why including Traditional Knowledge in classrooms like INDG 201 is vital—it grants academic credibility to oral traditions, as MacLeod argues (MacLeod, 2021). This is especially important for decolonising education. Over the term, the most significant relationships I developed were with classmates during discussions, which were important for fostering empathy and collaborative learning.
Conclusion
In summary, this self-reflection has illuminated the two key learnings from INDG 201—the diversity of Indigenous nations and the persistence of colonial impacts—while tracing the evolution of my thinking towards a more relational framework. Dr. Kerrie Moore’s teachings on protocols and relationships have been pivotal, enhancing my understanding of how to apply these insights beyond the course. By integrating paraphrases and quotations from the textbook, I have contextualised these ideas within broader Indigenous epistemologies, revealing their relevance to my personal growth and academic pursuits. Moving forward, I will carry this knowledge into other classes, advocating for Indigenous perspectives to promote reconciliation. Ultimately, this process underscores the transformative power of Indigenous Studies, urging ongoing commitment to respectful relationality on Turtle Island. As I continue my studies, I am reminded that true learning is ceremonial, rooted in relationships that honour the past and shape a more equitable future.
(Word count: 1,512, including references)
References
- MacLeod, L. (2021) More than personal communication: Templates for citing Indigenous Elders and Knowledge Keepers. KULA: Knowledge Creation, Dissemination, and Preservation Studies, 5(1), pp. 1-5.
- Moore, K. (2026) Personal communication during in-class visit, March 26. University of Calgary, INDG 201.
- Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015) Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future: Summary of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
- Vowel, C. (2016) Indigenous writes: A guide to First Nations, Métis & Inuit issues in Canada. HighWater Press.
- Wilson, S. (2008) Research is ceremony: Indigenous research methods. Fernwood Publishing.
