Indigenous Research Methodologies

Global Thematic Review on Training in
Community-Based Research
Indigenous Research
Methodologies
Final Report
Prepared by
Angela Easby
Review guidance by Leslie Brown
Institute for Studies and Innovation in Community-University Engagement (ISICUE)
University of Victoria
2016
UNESCO Chair in Community-based Research and Social Responsibility in Higher Education Project ‘Building the Next
Generation of Community-Based Researchers’ (The Next Gen project) May 2015
First published in 2016
© PRIA and University of Victoria
This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons license, Attribution -

Noncommercial - No Derivative 3.0 (see www.creativecommons.org). The text may be
reproduced for non-commercial purposes, provided that credit is given to the original
author(s).
To obtain permission for uses beyond those outlined in the Creative Commons license,
please contact PRIA at library@pria.org
This report is an initiative of the UNESCO Chair in Community Based Research and Social
Responsibility in Higher Education, under the project “Training the Next Generation of
Community Based Researchers”, supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities
Research Council (SSHRC), Canada
Table of Contents
Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Narrative description of the search process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Content of narrative synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

i. Terminology/language that best describes the practices
related to training in CBR and IRM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
ii. Places where people are getting training in CBR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
iii. Types and length of training . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
iv. Content of the training curricula and skills/capacities that
learners are expected to learn to do CBR. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Top training programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

I. First Nations University of Canada at the University of Regina. Saskatchewan, Canada
http://fnuniv.ca/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
II. American Indigenous Research Association. United States
http://americanindigenousresearchassociation.org/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
III. The Lowitja Institute for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Research. Australia
https://www.lowitja.org.au. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
IV. Katoa Ltd. New Zealand
http://www.katoa.net.nz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
LE,NONET program. University of Victoria, Canada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Universities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Institutions/organizations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Appendix A - List of Universities/Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Appendix B: Secondary Institution Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Appendix C: Literature Review Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Appendix D- List of individuals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Appendix E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

Global Thematic Review on Training in Community-Based Research: Indigenous Research Methodologies
Indigenous Research Methodologies
Final Report
Introduction
From the beginning of this project it became apparent that conducting a global review on teaching/
training/learning (TTL) opportunities of community-based research (CBR) within the thematic area
of Indigenous research methodologies (IRMs) is difficult because IRMs cannot be understood as a
thematic area within CBR. Rather, IRMs are rooted in Indigenous epistemologies and ontologies and
represent a radical departure from more positivist forms of research (Wilson 2001). While CBR is not
inherently ‘Indigenous’, it can be understood as a way of doing research that is sympathetic to many of
the principles and goals of IRMs (Laveaux and Christopher 2009).
It is necessary to understand an issue of language when thinking about TTL opportunities at the nexus of
CBR and IRMs. Resources for training IRMs often do not use the language of community-based research,
or any of its associated terms (ie participatory, action, collaborative, community-engaged). Nonetheless,
the findings of this global review indicate that in many cases this may be a result of a two different
languages being spoken, rather than an indication of a lack of CBR practiced with Indigenous research
methodologies. While CBR and IRM have key differences, and research with IRMs does not necessarily
fall within a participatory paradigm (see Walter and Andersen 2013), analysis of key IRM texts indicates
many commonalities between CBR and IRM. Importantly, these commonalities include an emphasis on
research as a “situated response” (Hermes 1998) to the research context, and as an iterative process
involving researchers and participants in ways that ruptures traditional Western concepts of the research
process (Hall 1984, Israel 1998, Ochocka and Janzen 2014). Interview participants noted that IRMs are
inherently rooted in community, and cannot be conceived of otherwise. CBR is not inherently rooted in
indigeneity. Therefore, while CBR is often, and productively, applied to Indigenous contexts; and while
IRMs are implemented in research that is community-based and shares many of the same elements as
CBR; work that explicitly self-identifies as CBR with IRMs is practically non-existent. The results of this
review indicate that this is not indicative of an inability of CBR to address Indigenous contexts, nor is it
a lack of engagement with participatory research processes in IRMs. Rather, there are two different (but
related) languages, which reflect different orientations in relation to indigeneity.
The iterative, situated, and responsive nature of both CBR and IRMs means that work done in these
realms is highly contextually-specific in terms of project design, methods, researcher-participant
relationship, and ethics. This ‘problem’ of specificity is reflected in the literature on both 1) CBR in
Indigenous contexts and 2) community-based or community-oriented IRMs. These bodies of literature
do not contain easily-generalizable teaching or training materials, but rather attempt to provide a detailed
outline of a specific research journey, or an element of this journey, in order to inform the practice of
UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 1

other practitioners in a similar or comparable research context. Indeed, many researchers who report on
their use of IRMs assert that the need to ground the work in Indigenous culture and community render it
impossible to select one “predetermined methodology to accommodate this paradigm” (Hermes 1998),
and instead find it more useful to employ elements of a range of methodologies. Therefore, the TTL
literature at the intersections of CBR and IRMs is comprised of ethics guidelines, cross-cultural research
team protocols, guidelines for capacity-building in community, discussion of identity (re)formulation, and
suggestions for increased institutional success.
A large body of literature confirms the claim that community-based research is useful and appropriate in
Indigenous contexts (eg. Community Research for Change, Dickson 2000, Fisher and Ball 2003, Kildea
et al 2009, Laveaux and Christopher 2009, McHugh and Kowalski 2009, Poudrier and Kennedy 2008). A
number of resources exist for researchers seeking to apply a community-based research methodology
in an Indigenous context. However, this work does not necessarily come from within an Indigenous
worldview or epistemology, and does not identify as using IRMs. I point to a few of these key resources
in Table 1 but have not included them in the general findings of this review, for their lack of self-identified
engagement with IRMs.
Narrative description of the search process

Literature Review
Using the search terms provided in the Global Review Guidelines document, I created various search
strings and combinations of terms, and input these search strings into various databases. Within the
search results from each search string, I did a preliminary evaluation of the literature in the following
ways:
1) looking for the search string terms within the title of the article
2) scanning the abstract to see if the search string terms, OR if learning/training/teaching was
mentioned in any substantial way
3) looking for reference (within the title or abstract) of a review or explanation of methods related to
Indigenous community-based research
4) looking for reference of learning, sharing or teaching Indigenous research methodologies in relation
to community-based research
If the article met one or more of these criteria, I added it to the Refworks database.
I then replicated the search strings across other databases, using either “Abstract”, “Keyword”,
or “Topic” as search fields (where the selection of a search field was an option). Within subsequent
database searches I scanned quickly to eliminate replicates and conducted a preliminary evaluation for
any literature which had not already appeared in previous database searches.
After conducting this database search, I reviewed the selected articles and organized them by journal.
The following journals had more than three articles through the database selection:
• American Indian Quarterly
• Australian Journal of Indigenous Education
• Canadian Geographer
• Ecology and Society
• Journal of Aboriginal Health
• Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal
2 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

• Qualitative Inquiry
• Action Research
• Australian Health Review
• AlterNative: An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples
• Journal of Experiential Education
• Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning
• The Australasian Journal of University-Community Engagement
• Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society
I therefore identified these journals as potential sites of more learning/teaching/training literature on CBR
and IRM. Within these journals, I searched by replicating the same search strings I had used in the initial
database phase- however, I also included the terms ‘teaching’, ‘training’, or ‘learning’.
After clearing Refworks of duplicates, I evaluated each article with Appendix 1. Although the same
appendix was applied to each article, this was an iterative process as I continually reviewed the goals
of the project and revised my standards for inclusion. I found that while some articles did present a
teaching/training/learning technique in CBR, the IRM component was often non-existent; and in literature
that focused on IRM, the content of the article often focused on explaining the methodology rather than
offering teaching/training/learning techniques. While I attempted to seek literature that bridged these
two camps, I was constrained by the large volume of articles and inability to read each in-depth. After
using Appendix 1, I was left with 14 articles. I then used the Appendix 2 tool from the Review Guidelines
to extract data, and eliminated one more article (total of 13). See Appendix C for a list of the selected
articles.
Institutional Review
I began by conducting an internet evaluation of the networks and project partners listed in the Global
Review Guidelines (p. 4). I evaluated by asking the following questions:
Does the network/institution have a focus on Indigenous populations, Indigenous research, or Indigenous
research methodologies?
Does the network/institution conduct research itself, or support members through other means (ie
funding)?
Is their explicit mention on the website of community-based, participatory, action, or collaborative
research as a focus?
Does the network/institution provide resources, capacity-building, or contact information for teaching/
training/learning in CBR?
At this stage, the recommended networks/partners themselves did not seem to offer the teaching/
training/learning opportunities in CBR and IRM that I was seeking, but many had extensive resource lists
and partner contact information that shaped the next stage.
After evaluating the partner/resource pages of each of the recommended networks, I created an
additional list of institutions/networks to explore based on the following criteria:
Do they generate resources related to the teaching/training/learning of CBR and IRM?
Is their explicit mention of CBR, IRM, Indigenous populations, or a combination of these terms in the
title of the institution/network?
Institutions that met these criteria were selected for further analysis.

At this stage, I conducted (additional) basic Google searches using combinations of search words.
Search terms used were:
‘teaching OR training in Indigenous research methodologies’
‘teaching OR training in community-based research for Indigenous researchers’
‘Indigenous research methodologies AND community-based research’
‘Indigenous research methodologies AND participatory research’
‘community-based research from an Indigenous perspective’
‘participatory research from an Indigenous perspective’
Of all of the different approaches to searching institutions I found this to be least productive in terms of
identifying teaching/training/learning opportunities, because of the high number of search results which
only described community-based research projects with Indigenous communities. However, this stage
was useful for identifying key individuals involved with CBR and IRM, as many of the search results led
to faculty member pages or academic papers.
See Appendix A for the complete list of institutions selected at Steps 2-3.
I then went through the suggestions offered by survey respondents on the global survey regarding
institutions or networks that conduct teaching/training around IRM and CBR. However, all of the
suggested institutions were already present in the results I had compiled in steps 1-3.
Institutions listed in Appendix A were analysed a second time for IRM/CBR content, as well as the
quality and quantity of opportunities offered. At this stage it also became apparent that a number of the
Appendix A institutes did not have IRM content. See Appendix B for the secondary institution evaluation.
Institutions and programs that passed this secondary review are highlighted in green and constitute the
Recommended Opportunities.
Expert interviews
Interviews were conducted with key informants in the fields of CBR and IRMs, after undergoing an
ethics approval process at the University of Victoria (ethics protocol number 14-217). A need for these
interviews was determined based on the lack of clarity in the research literature and on institutional
webpages on the specific relationship between CBR and IRMs, and how this relationship might shape
training or learning opportunities. See Appendix E for the interview question guide that was used for
these interviews. Informants were selected from the list of individuals listed in Appendix D. Fourteen
individuals were contacted for interviews; however, despite responses from the majority of individuals,
only 2 interviews were conducted in the end due to individuals’ other commitments.
Content of narrative synthesis

i. Terminology/language that best describes the practices
related to training in CBR and IRM
It is important to note that the term ‘Indigenous research methodologies’ has a very recent past-
although Indigenous peoples have a long unbroken history of conducting research that emerges from,
and is informed by their worldview. Interview participants indicated that to their knowledge, the term
and its implications emerged within academic consciousness in the late 1990s, although until recently it
remained an area far outside the consideration of most academics and research institutions (including
those conducting research on/with Indigenous peoples). Results from the literature review corroborate
these claims; the first academic articles using this language appeared in 1998 and 1999 (Bishop et al

1998, Hermes 1998, Rigney 1999), and the quantity of literature claiming to use ‘Indigenous research
methodologies’ has increased significantly and consistently since then. This methodological framework
has gained attention via the recent publication of key books that have greatly increased the profile
and discussion around this methodology in universities and institutions (see Kovach 2009, Walter and
Andersen 2013, Wilson 2008). Concurrent with this ‘mainstreaming’ has been an increase in support for,
and acceptance of, the use of IRMs. This support has manifested through: the creation of more Indigenous
studies programs in universities, the sustained work of tribal research association/institutes, the creation of
funding opportunities for research with IRMs, and the creation of conferences and workshops to expand,
deepen, and share knowledge on IRMs. This increased institutional support was spurred by the growing
articulation by Indigenous scholars and communities of the need for a radical re-visioning of research
through an Indigenous lens, using Indigenous understandings of data, methods, reciprocity, relationality,
and knowledge production to produce meaningful and culturally-appropriate research (Gaudry 2011).
The results of these two converging currents have been an uptake of IRMs among emerging Indigenous
as well as non-Indigenous researchers, and an increased grassroots interest.
However, the emergence of the IRM/CBR nexus has been less articulated, with some exceptions (Fletcher
2003; Laveaux and Christopher 2009; Michell 2009). This could be a product of the fact that IRMs have
emerged out of Indigenous researchers’ need for a framework originating, and implemented within,
Indigenous worldviews, that cannot be encapsulated within other participatory frameworks (Hermes
1998). Based on data from interviews with informants as well as the research literature, Indigenous
scholars emphasize relationality, self-location and accountability as key sites of difference between
IRMs and CBR. For example, within IRMs there is a great deal of attention paid to the researcher’s own
identity and the complex ways that identity shapes and guides a research project. It is expected that
both researchers’ and participants’ identities may undergo shifts across the trajectory of the research;
these shifts are a key source of learning and knowledge production. As well, informants distinguished
between the degree of accountability that is required and expected of researchers implementing IRMs,
as opposed to CBR. Informants noted that the close-knit, and often remote nature of Indigenous
communities means that knowledge of researchers’ behaviour and conduct is often widely shared.
As well, the time requirements of building meaningful relationships with Elders and other Indigenous
community members are intensive. Through these long-term engagements, researchers and participants
co-create detailed and culturally-appropriate structures of accountability which are particular to the
research context. Conducting research, and oneself, within these structures of accountability is one of
the most crucial elements of IRMs. While accountability is also important in CBR, informants noted that
the very success of IRMs is predicated upon positive, accountable relationships.
However, while researchers make careful distinctions between IRMs and CBR, the two are not
incompatible. Rather, the point raised by Indigenous and community-based researchers is that it is
necessary to question the extent to which they overlap in any given research project, and whether this
fusion is fruitful.
Despite the shifting and contingent relationship between IRMs and CBR in the published academic
literature, the possibility of these two frameworks overlapping productively seems strong judging by the
TTL opportunities that do exist. While the relationship between IRM and CBR were seldom explicitly
stated in the evaluated institutions and programs, a thorough examination of their faculty/staff research
backgrounds, past projects, reference list and syllabi revealed that IRM and CBR were often melded;
most often, this took the form of explicitly teaching/training IRMs, and incorporating principles and
teachings of CBR as it related to, and enhanced, the conduct of research in Indigenous communities.1
1 On the more ‘CBR’ end of the spectrum, there exist a large number of excellent programs and institutions that offer training for community-based researchers
intending to conduct research in an Indigenous context. However, within these training/teaching opportunities there was no mention of the incorporation of
IRMs, and there was no evidence that these teaching/training opportunities had emerged from or were located within an Indigenous worldview.

ii. Places where people are getting training in CBR
Geographically, training/learning opportunities were found almost exclusively in Canada, the United
States, Australia, and New Zealand. This may have been a result of the literature/institutional search
methodology, or the language used in search terms (see Literature Review and Institutional Review
sections).
In the form of literature, TTL opportunities were found in the form of published academic articles,
documents produced by Indigenous research organizations, documents produced at conferences/
workshops, and guidebooks or toolkits available on institutional websites.
Opportunities were found to exist in universities and tribal colleges in Canada, the United States, Australia,
and New Zealand, with potential in opportunities in Bolivia and Uganda. The quality/content of many
potential opportunities could not be verified due to an unclear/inactive web presence, lack of contact
information, or lack of response from contacts.Within universities and colleges, training opportunities
exist typically in departments of social work, Indigenous studies, Indigenous health, education, and
public health.
Other institutional opportunities existed in publicly-funded health research institutes, Indigenous/tribal
research associations, and non-profit Indigenous organizations. I also suggest that involvement in IRM/
CBR projects in itself constitutes a TTL opportunity, given the fact that learning through doing is a key
element of these frameworks. Therefore, TTL opportunities exist for researchers engaged in IRM/CBR
projects through universities or Indigenous research organizations, although this form of TTL is highly
self-directed and receives little to no direction from institutions.
See Appendix A for a comprehensive list of preliminary universities and organizations.
What is missing?
Key texts in the IRM literature as well as interview participants stressed that the bulk of their own
learning/training was often not in an institutionalized, formalized context. Many prominent scholars
who use Indigenous research methodologies in community-based research discuss their training as a
journey; an iterative, ongoing, lifelong process that draws on Elders, communities, colleagues, spirituality,
ceremonies, and self-knowledge to inform the research trajectory, and improve oneself as a researcher
(see Wilson 2008, Kovach 2009). This is a journey that is highly specific and defined by the researcher’s
own worldview, their relationships, and the research projects they take on. Many Indigenous researchers
have knowledge of, or have engaged in, CBR and have arrived at IRMs in an attempt to ‘go beyond’
what is possible through CBR in an Indigenous context. Thus, a major limitation of this review is the fact
that it does not include the vast opportunities to receive teachings in IRMs in CBR that exist through
relationships with Elders, traditional knowledge-holders, communities, and Indigenous scholars, as well
as through the experience of iteratively creating an IRM specific to the research context.
In order to attempt to mitigate this major limitation and communicate the relational, interpersonal nature
of learning IRMs, I include a list of individuals who are practitioners and/or teachers of IRMs and CBR,
and suggest that opportunities for this kind of learning/training resides with people just as much as in
institutions (given the emergent nature of IRMs). See Appendix D for a list of individuals.
iii. Types and length of training

Interview participants stressed that the process of learning Indigenous research methodologies, and
how to implement them in community-based research, is a lifelong project. One university professor
who teaches several courses on Indigenous research methodologies and issues in Indigenous research
stated, “I am still new to this. I am always learning.” While it is necessary to learn new skills and constantly
adapt to the context in any kind of research, the highly contextual and relational nature of IRMs means that

it is impossible to conceive of ever receiving ‘complete’ training in IRMs. IRMs will change significantly
with the researcher’s worldview, the community, and the broader research context. Practitioners of
IRMs in CBR are constantly receiving teachings that enhance their capacity to conduct research in a
good way. Therefore, broadly speaking, the length of teaching/learning/training opportunities is lifelong
because the researcher’s evolving self-knowledge and relationships are integral parts of the evolution of
IRMs. IRMs can be conceived of as a journey that does not end with the publication of research findings.
However, the more institutional training opportunities that are the focus of this report do offer clear
timelines for researchers seeking to increase their capacity, or understanding of IRMs and CBR. Many of
these opportunities are in the form of a university course, and consist of approximately 3 hours of direct
training per week for 4 months.
Other opportunities include workshops or conferences, which often last 1-3 full days and are intended
to provide participants with a basic understanding of CBR and IRM principles, or work on specific skills
that can then contribute to an enhanced research practice (ie respectful collaboration with Indigenous
research participants, how to document and work with oral knowledge, how to collaboratively design
research goals). Often, a synopsis or manuscript of these conferences/workshops are available on the
websites of host organizations/universities.
Another type of training is done with research/tribal organizations, where a deeper, more long-term
relationship is established and training is tailored to the specific requirements of the research project.
In these instances, researchers or research collectives contact the organization, meet to describe the
research, and organizations determine if and how they can offer training (via consultation services,
connecting researchers with other people or resources, or providing sustained support throughout the
research trajectory).
Additionally, many CBR and tribal organizations offer links to toolkits or videos that offer instruction on
the basics of CBR in an Indigenous context, or the principles of IRMs. Videos are often under 1 hour,
and toolkits can take approximately 1-5 hours to read.
iv. Content of the training curricula and skills/capacities that

learners are expected to learn to do CBR
The content of training/learning opportunities for CBR with IRMs is wide-ranging and is closely linked
to where and with whom the training/learning takes place. To reiterate, the creation of IRMs is a highly
contextual, relational process and as such the content of training will depend highly on the people
involved. As such, here I offer a very general overview of important themes, ideas or practical skills that
appear often, since more detailed information would not be relevant outside the specific training context.
For example, in the case of research organizations that offer consultation services to researchers or tribal
governments, the content of training is completely tailored to the needs of the specific research project.
Additionally, the content of training often depends on the type of training, since certain types of training
are conducive to specific kinds of content. Therefore, this overview is organized by type of training
opportunity and then outlines the content of training found there. However I stress that this form of
organization is intended to communicate general commonalities of content within training types, and not
to suggest that this content is not also found in other forms of training.
Literature
The main content found in the literature consists of the following:
• ethics guidelines. This includes documents produced by tribal governments, Indigenous research
associations, and universities that describes in detail the requirements of the particular governing
body for conducting ethical research with Indigenous communities. Often, researchers working in

Indigenous communities will be required to go through their own institutional ethics process as well
as ethics processes required by Indigenous communities. These documents inform researchers
about the ethical dimensions of their involvement in Indigenous research, and lay the groundwork
for the possibility of implementing an IRM in a good way (or implementing CBR in an Indigenous
community).
For key examples of ethics guidelines regarding research with Indigenous peoples see Ganono’se’n
e yo’gwilode’: One Who is Full of Our Traditional Knowledge,
• Guidelines for Ethical Research in Australian Indigenous Studies, Ho-Chunk Nation Tribal Research
Code, Navajo Nation Human Research Code, and Six Nations Council Ethics Committee Protocol.
• reflections on experiences on implementing IRMs in CBR. This includes peer-reviewed or open-
access journal articles that focus on the challenges, process, and ‘lessons learned’ of creating
and conducting research. See Caracciolo and Staikidis 2009; Carpenter and McMurchy-Pilkington
2008; Evans et al 2010; Lavallee 2009; Nakamura 2010.
• Conceptual models of IRMs/CBR. This includes detailed diagrams, models and methodological
descriptions found in journal articles, books, as well as within the Resources and References
sections of Indigenous research or CBR organizations. These models often describe the key
elements of an IRM paradigm, outline the commitments of the researcher to the community and
research project, and describe the main phases of a CBR/IRM research project. See Iwama et al
2009; Kovach 2009; Smith 1999; Spider Conceptual Framework; Walker et al 2014; Wilson 2008.
• Description of the theoretical convergences/divergences of CBR and IRM. This includes
academic journal articles and documents produced by Indigenous research organizations which
often focus on distinguishing IRMs from other forms of CBR, and discuss the different commitments
and goals of both. See Fletcher 2003; Laveaux and Christopher 2009; Michell 2009.
Academic accredited courses

The main content of academic accredited courses included:
• quantitative and qualitative data collection methods
• how to create and write an Indigenous research plan
• learning how to undertake self-location
• preliminary training in doing research in an Indigenous context (undergraduate level)
• discussion/learning with Elders
• presentations from Elders and practitioners
• directed self-reflection
• sharing circles with peers
• service learning conducting research in local Indigenous communities
See the University of Calgary, First Nations University of Canada, Biidaaban Community Service-
Learning at Nippissing University, University of Manitoba, University of Victoria.
Involvement in university-based research projects

See II. Training: Where and How for a discussion of how involvement in Indigenous community-based
research constitutes a training opportunity in itself. Often involvement in a university-based research
project employing IRM in CBR includes:
• training in local culture/ protocols. This is often done with more experienced colleagues/
members of the research team, or through relationship-building with local nations and Elders.

• Community visits/walks on the land. Researchers learn through visiting with communities and
visiting territories.
• Training via research on IRMs. In some institutions, there are research chairs engaged in
interpreting/ consolidating IRM literature. This is an opportunity for involved researchers to
deepen and widen their knowledge of IRMs. See the Canadian Research Chair in Indigenous
Knowledges and Social Work, University of Manitoba.
Involvement in research organizations/institutions
See Appendix B for an overview of relevant organizations. Content of training opportunities in these
organizations includes:
• data collection methods and research design. Many organizations offer resources on specific
data collection methods and research design that are compatible with IRMs. For organizations
with extensive resource lists see Kaupapa Maori, The Lowitja Institute, National Congress of
American Indians Policy Research Center.
• Knowledge exchange among colleagues. Organizations often have platforms where members
can participate, or facilitate online discussions related to implementing IRMs and CBR. This
knowledge exchange is intended to broaden knowledge of members regarding the practices
and frameworks of other colleagues and open minds to other ways of researching. For
exemplary knowledge-exchange platforms, see the American Indigenous Research Association.
• Conferences/workshops. This includes participation in training sessions on Indigenous
community engagement and Indigenous research. This also includes papers generated from
conference discussions. The material from these conferences often focuses on how to foster the
conditions under which CBR with IRM can flourish, training in specific data collection methods,
and ethics training. See Community Engagement Workshop 2013; Training on Participatory
Research Methods 2006; Indigenous Summer School of the Network for Aboriginal Mental
Health Research; Aboriginal Education Research Forum 2015.
• funding opportunities and support. Some organizations offer scholarships or grants to
encourage students and researchers to implement CBR and IRMs, and offer recipients the
opportunity to interact with and learn from a community of researchers. See Ngā Pae o te
Māramatanga and the Indigenous Peoples Health Research Centre.
Top training programs

I. First Nations University of Canada at the University of Regina. Saskatchewan, Canada
http://fnuniv.ca/
Training Objectives
While the First Nations University does not offer any full programs or certifications in CBR or IRM, they
offer a variety of courses that are intended to educate students about the proper ways of conducting
Indigenous research, as well as what it means to conduct CBR. In Lighting the Path: First Nations
University of Canada Strategic Plan 2013-2018, the University lists a number of goals that are conducive
to creating/maintaining a thriving academic environment for teaching and learning community-based
research and Indigenous research methodologies. These goals include:
• Enhance the use of traditional Indigenous methodologies and content in the classroom
• Engage communities on an ongoing basis and extend outreach and awareness of the cultural
initiatives of the University

• Explore innovative ways to increase the dissemination of Indigenous knowledge through
research by establishing an Indigenous knowledge research foundation and a journal
• Identify and implement ways the University can engage and collaborate with Indigenous
communities with a focus on community-based programming
(Lighting the Path: First Nations University of Canada Strategic Plan 2013-2018)
Content
Courses on CBR and IRMs are located within the Indigenous Studies, Indigenous Health Studies,
Indigenous Education, and Indigenous Social Work programs. These include:
INHS 300 – Community-Based Indigenous Health Research Methods
INDG 280 Research Issues in Indigenous Studies
INDG 281- Methods and Theory in Documenting Oral Tradition
INDG 282- Methods in Indigenous Community-based Research
ED 870 – Research Methods with Indigenous Peoples ED
INSW 450- Community Development from a First Nations Perspective
Design
Courses are 4-month, university level courses taught by primarily Indigenous instructors. While the
majority of teaching happens in a regular classroom setting, classes may also involve visits from Elders,
trips out on the land, guest speakers, or learning opportunities within Indigenous communities.
Underlying philosophy/pedagogy
The underlying philosophy of the First Nations University of Canada is that the university is “a special place
of learning where we recognize the spiritual power of knowledge and where knowledge is respected and
promoted” (First Nations University of Canada website, Overview). The University aims to “enhance the
quality of life, and to preserve, protect and interpret the history, language, culture and artistic heritage of
First Nations” (ibid), while allowing students to learn in a university setting while simultaneously learning
and growing in the context of their own knowledge systems.
Facilitators’ and students’ profile

Facilitators are both Indigenous and non-Indigenous university professors, from a wide range of cultural
and professional backgrounds. Indigenous Elders are also facilitators of certain courses by acting as
important cultural and spiritual resources, as well as academic leaders.
Students are both Indigenous and non-Indigenous university-level learners who have been accepted
through the University of Regina.
Expected learning impacts

The support systems and institutional structure of FN University make this a prime site for Indigenous-
centred learning and training. A main priority of all programs is the incorporation of Elders into classroom/
experiential learning, which provides students the opportunity to engage with traditional knowledge-
holders and gives an Indigenous-centred orientation to learning experiences. FNUniversity is a key site
of IRM/CBR training for the exposure it offers students to a large number of IRM/CBR practitioners,
Elders, and other Indigenous scholars, as well as the breadth of courses available that are relevant to
IRM/CBR.

II. American Indigenous Research Association. United States
http://americanindigenousresearchassociation.org/
Training objectives
The American Indigenous Research Association’s mission is to provide a forum for discussing IRMs,
encourage publication of work with/on IRMs, collaborate with tribes/tribal schools to develop research,
help research boards develop research agendas and protocols with IRMs, and educate students and
scholars about the use and importance of IRMs. AIRA uses the Spider Conceptual Framework to an
Indigenous research paradigm, which includes among other elements:
• community interest and need
• community collaboration and permission
• community empowerment and self-determination
• community-based data/knowledge dissemination
Thus, while AIRA does not articulate a specific commitment to teaching/training CBR as such, explicit in
their understanding of an Indigenous research paradigm are many of the foundational elements of CBR.
AIRA also holds annual meetings in which members are invited to present papers regarding work with,
or on, IRMs. Membership to AIRA is free. Learning/teaching is facilitated through dialogue among the
forum of members, as well as knowledge exchange and workshops during annual meetings.
Content
Beginning in Fall 2015 a 15-credit certification in Indigenous Research Methods and Methodologies
will be available through a collaboration between Salish Kootenai College and AIRA. This professional
certification consists of the following courses:
• Indigenous research methodologies and methods (5 credits)
• Writing the Research Proposal (5 credits)
• The Institutional Review Board Process (2 credits)
As well as one of the following electives:
• Art-based Research (3 credits)
• Introduction to Indigenous Science (3 credits)
• Indigenous Education (3 credits)
• Native American Wellness (3 credits)
The goal of this certification is to enable researchers to implement IRMs in research in an Indigenous
context, in a good way that is appropriate within an Indigenous research paradigm.
Design
These courses last 4 months and are taught at Salish Kootenai College. Those from outside the college
who would like to participate can do so through the Moodle online learning platform.
The underlying pedagogy of AIRA is “to educate researchers and the public about the importance
of Indigenous Research Methodologies and to promote incorporation of these methodologies into all
research that engages Indigenous peoples and communities” (AIRA website). The underlying pedagogy
of the professional certification is to prepare and equip students who intend to do research in Indigenous
communities, by focusing on the cultural aspect of IRMs.

Students of the professional certification in Indigenous Research Methodologies is unknown due to
the fact that the program has not yet been implemented. However, members of AIRA are also students
in the sense that they take part in knowledge exchanges, workshops, conferences and other learning
opportunities. Membership to AIRA is free and anyone can join. There is also an online graduate student
group that is open and free for all.
Facilitators of the professional certification program are professors at the Salish Kootenai College.

This certification was selected as a representative example of training/learning opportunities at the
nexus of CBR and IRMs because many of the stated outcomes, as well as key aspects of the course
content, parallel the key principles/lessons of CBR. For example, the outcomes include:
• Disseminate data either qualitatively or quantitatively in ways that communities will understand
• Improve relevance in policy and practice within Indigenous contexts
• Enhance skills in critical reflection, including self-awareness, art based research in relation to
research with Indigenous groups
Thus, while engaged in a certification for IRMs, students are also learning how to disseminate research
in community-appropriate ways, ensure the relevance and applicability of their research, and increase
their self-awareness in relation to the research group. These are all key elements of a successful CBR
project. Additionally, in the description of the core Indigenous Research Methodologies course, it poses
the following questions as those which will drive the course: “to whom does the research belong?
Whose benefit and interests are at stake? Who is the researcher and what is their relationship to the
research community? who carries out the research? Who controls and disseminates the results?” Thus,
students receive training and guidance on how to answer the questions that are crucial to both IRMs
and CBR, in an Indigenous context.
III. The Lowitja Institute for Aboriginal and

Torres Strait Islander Health Research. Australia
https://www.lowitja.org.au
Training objectives
Lowitja is a public research institute committed to achieving equity in health outcomes through health
research with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. They focus on ensuring the meaningful
participation of Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander communities at all stages of the research, and centring
Indigenous knowledges and ways of knowing, stating: “We aim to produce knowledge, tools and
resources that can be used to enhance positive health outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
people”. The goals described by Lowitja are deeply rooted in CBR principles, such as:
• promoting a collaborative approach that brings together researchers, service providers, policy
makers and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
• having a measureable impact
• ensuring research is driven by the needs identified by community controlled health services and
the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities they represent
Content
However, the use of IRMs within the Lowitja Institute, and the teaching/learning opportunities available that
pertain to IRMs, are less foregrounded. Nevertheless, several of their research projects have employed
IRMs in CBR including Dhunupa Dh^wu: Enhancing Strengths, Researching with the Community.

In addition to their own projects, Lowitja offers a number of useful resources including guidelines for
supporting Indigenous researchers and guidelines for conducting Indigenous health research. The
website also has an extensive list of resources related to knowledge exchange, research relationships,
Aboriginal health, data interpretation, and information regarding the use of images, media and film.
Lowitja also offers scholarships for Indigenous health researchers.
Design
The Lowitja approach to developing research is called the Facilitated Development Approach (see http://
www.lowitja.org.au/making-research-work).
The underlying philosophy of the Lowitja Institute is one of horizontal knowledge-exchange between
researchers and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander populations. The knowledge systems of Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples are foregrounded. In the context of health research, the Lowitja Institute
states that good knowledge exchange is necessary to successfully transform research findings into
changes in policy and practice. On their website, they provide a list of knowledge exhange resources.

The Lowitja Institute operates through research partnerships in which researchers benefit from Lowitja
resources, and then share their research with the Institute and work to help them fulfill their goals.
Researchers are thus both simultaneously facilitators and students in this process.
Students also include the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and research workforce, who are
involved in capacity-building training activities at the Institute.

The Lowitja Institute is an important site for training opportunities in CBR/IRMs for their active involvement
in Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander health research in Australia and their extensive list of partners. As
such, this is a place where many researchers have the opportunity to work together on health research,
benefit from Lowitja’s informational resources and support, and learn how to conduct IRM/CBR via
involvement in research projects and facilitated relationships with Indigenous communities.
IV. Katoa Ltd. New Zealand

http://www.katoa.net.nz
Training objectives
Katoa Ltd is a research organization founded by Dr. Fiona Cram in 2003 that “undertakes Kaupapa Māori
(by Māori, for Māori) research and evaluation, as well as offering a range of research and evaluation
training”.
Content
The website offers an explanation of the six principles upon which Māori research is based, as well as
detailed descriptions of the Māori research paradigm, evaluation, interviewing, ethics, and protocols.
Each of these descriptions also offers extensive reference lists for academic papers, overviews, toolkits,
videos, reports, and presentations. Additionally, the Katoa website offers a short summary of Action
Research with an associated reading list.
Design
The teaching/training opportunities offered by Katoa is tailored to the needs of the particular group or
organization. Groups, organizations or individuals must contact Katoa Ltd to discuss training options.

However, the website does list a few standard training options including: Introduction to Evaluation
(1-2 days), Organizational Capacity Assessment (workbook for Maori social service providers intending
to conduct research), Whānau Ora Health Impact Assessment (guidebook), and a Reducing Health
Inequalities training program. Katoa also offers a Writer’s Toolkit package for Maori researchers.
The underlying philosophy of Katoa Ltd is Kaupapa Maori. On their website, Kaupapa Maori is described
as the following: “As an analytical approach Kaupapa Māori is about thinking critically, including
developing a critique of Pākehā (non-Māori) constructions and definitions of Māori and affirming the
importance of Māori self-definitions and self-valuations” (Katoa Ltd website).

Students who receive training from Katoa Ltd come from a wide variety of organizations and groups
who are interested in conducting research by Maori and for Maori. The main facilitator of training is Dr.
Fiona Cram, although a large number of researchers are involved in various Katoa research projects and
collaborations.

Katoa Ltd is an important site of IRM/CBR training because of the extent to which the organization is
grounded in, and infused by, a Maori worldview and understanding of research. Users of Katoa resources
or recipients of training sessions with Katoa will be well-informed about the key principles of Maori
research, and will be well-equipped with theories of IRM and CBR.
LE, NONET program. University of Victoria, Canada

Training objectives
The LE,NONET graduate seminar explores “themes and issues related to Indigenous research methods
and community engagement”, and as such constitutes a key learning opportunity at the nexus of IRM
and CBR. This is a 4-month course at the University of Victoria for First Nations, Metis and Inuit graduate
students.
Content and design

The course covers topics such as “developing Indigenous research designs, decolonizing the academy,
doing research ‘at home’, and connecting research to projects of self-determination”, as well as self-
location and a grounding in the context of local Nations. The course is intended to be useful for Indigenous
graduate students currently involved in the design and implementation of thesis research in Indigenous
communities. Learning takes place through visits from Elders and guest speakers, class discussion of
assigned texts, guided reflections, a book review, development of a research framework, and a class
presentation. Course content includes key texts on IRMs, articles on developing anti-colonial research,
discussion of ethics, discussion of obligations and responsibilities to research communities, and case
studies of the application of IRMs. Course learning objectives include:
• “identify key themes of Indigenous research frameworks and relate them to your own projects in
specific ways
• locate your research projects in the context of Indigenous research methodologies
• identify the actual and/or potential connections between your research projects and Indigenous
communities and/or organizations, with a focus on ethics and working within your own
communities”

While the seminar does not explicitly include CBR content and does not include CBR texts in the
syllabus, a key goal of the course is to develop community engagement and accountability skills in the
context of graduate-level research. As such, this course prepares students to conduct research based
in community and sensitive to their particular context.
LE,NONET also offers a 4-month undergraduate seminar that includes an introduction to IRMs and
teaches students the skills necessary to work and conduct research in Indigenous communities. After
completing this preparation seminar, students can participate in a 120 research apprenticeship with a
UVic faculty member, or a 120 community internship.
Students in the graduate seminar are exclusively Indigenous students registered in graduate programs
at the University of Victoria. Students in the undergraduate seminar are both Indigenous and non-
Indigenous students at the University of Victoria.
Facilitators are Indigenous professors and staff members at the University of Victoria, as well as Elders
and guest speakers who contribute to the graduate seminar.
Expected learning outcomes

In the LE,NONET graduate seminar Indigenous students have the opportunity to learn IRMs and
community-engagement skills in an entirely Indigenous setting, with entirely Indigenous learning
resources. This is a unique learning environment that is unavailable in most institutions and universities.
References
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies. Guidelines for Ethical Research
in Australian Aboriginal Studies. Canberra, Australia. 2012. Available: http://aiatsis.gov.au/sites/
default/files/docs/research-and-guides/ethics/gerais.pdf
Caracciolo, D., & Staikidis, K. (2009). Coming of age in methodology: Two collaborative inquiries with
shinnecock and maya peoples. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(8), 1395-1415. doi:10.1177/1077800409343771.
Carpenter, V. M., & McMurchy-Pilkington, C. (2008). Cross-cultural researching: Maori and pakeha in te
whakapakari. Qualitative Research, 8(2), 179-196.
Dickson, G. (2000). Aboriginal grandmothers’ experience with health promotion and participatory action
research. Qualitative Health Research, 10, 188-213.
Evans, M., Hole, R., Berg, L. D., Hutchinson, P., & Sookraj, D. (2009). Common insights, differing
methodologies toward a fusion of indigenous methodologies, participatory action research, and
white studies in an urban aboriginal research agenda. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(5), 893-910.
Fletcher, C. (2003). Community-based participatory research relationships with Aboriginal communities
in Canada: An overview of context and process. Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous
Community Health, 1 (1), 27-62.
Fisher, P. A., & Ball, T. J. (2003). Tribal participatory research: Mechanisms of a collaborative model.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 32, pp. 207-216.
Hall, B. (1984). Research, commitment, and action: the role of participatory research. International
Review of Education 30 (3): 289-299.

Hermes, M. (1998). Research methods as a situated response: Towards a First Nations’
methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 155–168. http://doi.
org/10.1080/095183998236944
Ho-Chunk Nation. Ho-Chunk Nation Tribal Research Code. Black River Falls, WA:Ho-Chunk Nation.
2005. Available: http://www.nptao.arizona.edu/research/docs/Ho-Chunk.pdf
Indigenous Health Research Development Program. Ganono’se’n e yo’gwilode’: One Who is Full of Our
Traditional Knowledge. Submitted by: Dr. Dawn Martin-Hill, Danielle Soucy MA. Available: http://
www.ihrdp.ca/media/docs/lega4e54fe5d0c807-ethical%20guidelines%20for%20aboriginal%20
research.pdf
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998). Review of Community-based research:
Assessing Partnership Approaches to Improve Public Health. Annual Review of Public Health, 19(1),
173–202. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173
Iwama, M., Marshall, M., Marshall, A., & Bartlett, C. (2009). Two-eyed seeing and the language of healing
in community-based research. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 32(2), 3.
Kovach, M. (2009). Indigenous Methodologies: Characteristics, Conversations and Contexts. Toronto:
University of Toronto Press.
Kildea, S., Barclay, L., Wardaguga, M. & Dawumal, M. (2009). Participative research in a remote Australian
Aboriginal setting. Action Research, 7, 143-163.
Lavallee, L. F. (2009). Practical application of an indigenous research framework and two qualitative
indigenous research methods: Sharing circles and anishnaabe symbol-based reflection. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods, 8(1), 21-40.
LaVeaux, D., & Christopher, S. (2009). Contextualizing CBPR: Key Principles of CBPR meet the Indigenous
research context. Pimatisiwin, 7(1), 1.
Michell, M. (2009). Gathering berries in Northern contexts: a Woodlands Cree metaphor for community-
based research. Pimatisiwin, 7(1), 65-74.
McHugh, T.L.F.,& Kowalski, K.C. (2009). Lessons learned: Participatory action research with young
Aboriginal women. Pimatisiwin, 7, 117-131. Retrieved from: http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/
July_2009/09McHugh.pdf.
Nakamura, N. (2010). Indigenous methodologies: Suggestions for junior researchers. Geographical
Research, 48(1), 97-103.
Navajo Nation. Navajo Nation Human Research Code. 1996. Available: http://depts.washington.edu/
ccph/pdf_files/NNHumanResearchCode.pdf
Ochocka, J., & Janzen, R. (2014). Breathing life into theory: Illustrations of community-based research–
Hallmarks, functions and phases. Gateways: International Journal of Community Research and
Engagement, 7(1), 18–33. Retrieved from http://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/ijcre/
article/view/3486.
Poudrier, J., & Kennedy, J. (2008). Embodiment and the meaning of the “healthy body”: An exploration of
First Nations women’s perspectives of healthy body weight and body image. Journal of Aboriginal
Health, January 2008.
The Six Nations Council. Six Nations Council Ethics Committee Protocol. http://www.sixnations.ca/
admEthicsPolicy.pdf
Tuhiwai Smith, L. (1999). Decolonizing Methodologies. Zed Books.

Walker, M., Fredericks, B., Mills, K., & Anderson, D. (2014). “Yarning” as a method for community-based
health research with indigenous women: The indigenous women’s wellness research program.
Health Care for Women International, 35(10), 1216-1226.
Walter, M., & Andersen, C. (2013). Indigenous Statistics: A Quantitative Research Methodology. Left
Coast Press.
Wilson, S. (2008). Research is Ceremony: Indigenous Research Methods. Fernwood Publishing.
Universities
First Nations University of Canada: http://fnuniv.ca/
Nippissing University, Biidaaban Community Service-Learning program: http://www.nipissingu.ca/
departments/aboriginal-initiatives/csl/Pages/default.aspx
University of Calgary, Indigenous Studies: http://www.ucalgary.ca/pubs/calendar/current/indigenous-
studies.html
University of Manitoba, Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Knowledges and Social Work: http://
umanitoba.ca/faculties/social_work/research/crciksw/778.html
University of Victoria, LE,NONET program: http://www.uvic.ca/services/indigenous/programs/lenonet/
Institutions/organizations
American Indigenous Research Association: http://americanindigenousresearchassociation.org
Indigenous Peoples Health Research Centre: http://www.iphrc.ca/
Kaupapa Maori: http://www.rangahau.co.nz/
The Lowitja Institute: http://www.lowitja.org.au
National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center: http://www.ncaiprc.org/
Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga/ Maori Centre for Research Excellence: www.maramatanga.co.nz

Appendix A - List of Universities/Institutions
North America
Aboriginal Health Research Networks
http://ahrnets.ca/
Alaska Native Knowledge Network
www.ankn.uaf.edu
American Indigenous Research Association
http://americanindigenousresearchassociation.org/certification/
Arctic Institute of Community-Based Research
http://www.aicbr.ca/home
Centre for Indigenous Health Research
http://iwri.org/health/
First Peoples’ Cultural Council
http://www.fpcc.ca/
National Network for Aboriginal Mental Health Research
www.namhr.ca
National Congress of American Indians Policy Research Center
http://www.ncaiprc.org/
Nipissing University: Biidaaban Community Service-Learning
http://www.nipissingu.ca/departments/aboriginal-initiatives/csl/Pages/default.aspx
Nunavut Research Institute
http://www.nri.nu.ca/apps/authoring/dspPage.aspx?page=home
SFU Continuing Studies:
Stepping Stones Certificate in Community Capacity-Building
http://www.sfu.ca/continuing-studies/programs/stepping-stones-certificate-in-community-capacity-
building-for-rural-aboriginal-communities/overview.html
Course: Shared Spaces: Foundations for Dialogue and Engagement Between Aboriginal and non-
Aboriginal Peoples
http://www.sfu.ca/continuing-studies/courses/dlog/shared-spaces.html
Trent Centre for Community-Based Education
http://www.trentcentre.ca/
University of Alberta: Community Service-Learning Program
http://www.csl.ualberta.ca/en/About%20Us.aspx

University of Calgary: Indigenous Research Website and Centre for Community-engaged learning
http://www.ucalgary.ca/indigenous/
http://www.ucalgary.ca/ccel/
University of Manitoba- Canada Research Chair in Indigenous Knowledges and Social Work
http://umanitoba.ca/faculties/social_work/research/crciksw/765.html
University of Saskatchewan
community-university institute for social research
http://www.usask.ca/cuisr/background
University of Winnipeg: Experiential Learning Network
http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/eln/
Wii Chiiwaakanak Learning Centre
http://uwinnipeg.ca/index/wcclc-index
South America
Centro Boliviano de Estudios Multidisciplinarios
http://www.cebem.org/
Oceania
Katoa Ltd
www.katoa.net.nz
Kaupapa Maori
http://www.rangahau.co.nz/
Ngā Pae o te Māramatanga/Maori Centre for Research Excellence
www.maramatanga.co.nz
The Lowitja Institute
http://www.lowitja.org.au
University of Newcastle- The Wollotuka Institute
http://www.newcastle.edu.au/about-uon/our-university/indigenous-collaboration/the-wollotuka-
institute
Africa
Mpambo African Multiversity
http://www.videa.ca/index.php?pageid=98
South African Higher Education Community Engagement Forum
http://www.sahecef.ac.za/

Appendix B: Secondary Institution Evaluation
Name Type of Geographic CBR activities/training carried Affiliations Contact info (name,
organization area/country out email address, website)
Katoa Ltd Indigenous Aotearoa -not much detail. says training -Centre for http://www.katoa.net.nz/
research (New Zealand) can be tailored to needs of Culturally home
organization organization or group. Groups Responsive
contact and set up specific Evaluation and Dr Fiona Cram, fionac@
trainings? Assessment katoa.net.nz
(CREA)
Rangahau Website Aotearoa -doesn’t actually carry out CBR -Ngā Pae o te http://www.rangahau.
with (New Zealand) teaching/training itself but has Māramatanga co.nz
resources a large # of resources for Maori
scholars, related to method, Dr Leonie Pihama, Māori
methodology, ethics etc and Indigenous Analysis
Ltd
Ngā Pae o te Research Aotearoa -early on, concerned with Tracey McIntosh
Māramatanga centre (New Zealand) creating a critical mass of t.mcintosh@auckland.
(Māori Centre at the Maori scholars ac.nz
of Research University of -research addresses creative
Excellence Auckland opps for Maori peoples
(CoRE)) -builds capacity in these
ways: 1) conduct of research
projects, 2) program designed
to help maori scholars
succeed in tertiary ed,
and 3) grants and awards
programme.
-still doesn’t seem to be
conducting any CBR training…
The Lowitja Institute for Australia -has lots of KE resources, The Australian http://www.lowitja.org.au/
Institute aboriginal videos Institute of
health -no mention of IRM anywhere Aboriginal Dr Michael Tynan,
research though and Torres Associate Director,
Strait Islander Knowledge Exchange
Studies and Research
Michael.Tynan@lowitja.
org.au
Indigenous Centre Regina, -fund CBR health projects, and -jointly owned Wendy Whitebear
Peoples’ committed Canada indigenous students doing by the First Research Coordinator
Health to health research Nations wendy.whitebear@
Research increasing -“has held numerous University uregina.ca
Centre capacity for mentoring sessions and of Canada,
community- research colloquia to provide University of http://iphrc.ca
based networking and information Regina, and
health sharing opportunities for University of
research. students and researchers Saskatchewan
Funding across the province”
organization

First Nations University Regina, -hard to tell from the website -offers classes Anthony de Padua,
University of that Canada if there is any CBR/IRM in social work, department head of
Canada provides teaching/training. Need to call. health, arts Indigenous Education,
“opportunity Could be classes in it. and culture Health and Social Work
to study at UofR- (306) 765-3333
in an
environment Dr. Edward Doolittle,
that department head of
supports Indigenous Science,
First The Environment and
Nations Economic Development
cultures, - Regina Campus, ext.
languages, 3260
and values”, Dr. Lesley McBain,
accredited Saskatoon Campus,
through U 306-931-1800 ext. 7509
of R (head of Indigenous
Languages, Arts and
Cultures)
http://www.fnuniv.ca/
Wharerata international -?? -again, from website hard to tell http://www.indigenous-
Group network of if there is teaching/ training, mental-health.ca/
Indigenous maybe when you’re a member,
leaders the leadership exchanges? (contact via website)
working -really awesome, extensive
in mental resources library on website of
health & work by indigenous peoples
addictions. on mental health/addiction
-is a
network
you can
join and
then
access the
network,
support
from
others, and
participate
in
leadership
exchanges
Biidaaban -experiential Anishnaabe -offers students exp learning
Community learning territory opps in FN communities
Service- program (North Bay, -“the student receives training
Learning out of Ontario) and understanding of theory
Nippissing while offering assistance and
University new ideas to the community”
-training weekend and
workshops to prep

Wii -community -Winnipeg, -unclear if there is Associate Vice-President of
Chiiwaakanak partnership Ontario any CBR teaching/ Indigenous Affairs
Learning initiative that training. Seems Wab Kinew
Centre provides more like a uni/ Phone: 204.789.9931
educational and community bridging email: w.kinew@uwinnipeg.ca
capacity building org. better to get in
opportunities. contact with people Manager of Wii Chiiwaakanak
in these programs Learning Centre
Sharon Redsky
phone: 204.789.1454
email: s.redsky@uwinnipeg.ca
The University of Winnipeg

Jenna Neepin, Department
Assistant
Phone: 204.786.9305
Email: j.neepin@uwinnipeg.ca
Trent independent, Anishnaabe -doesn’t seem http://www.trentcentre.ca
Centre for charitable territory like they do any (705) 743-0523
Community- organization (Peterborough, training themselves,
Based that connects Ontario) more facilitate the
Education students and opportunity to
faculty with local conduct CB ed.
organizations
to create
community-
based research,
service learning
and experiential
education
opportunities
The Wollotuka Indigenous ed Australia -really hard to tell Professor Peter Radoll
Institute institute what there is. It’s Dean of Aboriginal and Torres
an institute for Strait Islander Education &
education with Research
a lot of different The Wollotuka Institute
branches, but no Phone: +61 2 4921 5036
mention of IRM/ wollotuka@newcastle.edu.au
CBR.
NCAI Policy National tribal United States -capacity-building shicks@ncai.org
research research center/ for tribes around
center think tank how to do/ manage
research... CBR not
mentioned...
-capacity-building is
for tribal leaders
-doesn’t seem to be
CBR oriented.
Indigenous -non-profit 501(c) United States -offers evaluation On webpage
Education (3) institution and analysis
Institute with a mission capacity-building
to preserve, for indigenous
protect and communities, no
apply traditional mention of CBR
Indigenous
knowledge in a
contemporary
setting

American -group that United States -no mention of CBR On webpage
Indian Higher represents tribal training... networking
Education colleges in the among colleges,
Consortium US, to influence receiving support for
policy and build building programs,
programs in undertakes
higher ed advocacy and
research , building
curricula
American -A
ssociation to United States -no mention of CBR Must sign up to receive contact
Indigenous promote use explicitly, but have info. Lori Lambert is head.
Research of IRMs in all conferences in
Association research with ‘engaged’ research
Indigenous -offer certification
communities in IRM, through
courses. Begins in
2015
-also developing grad
workshop around
how to implement
IRM
Center Non-profit Global -unclear.. says they On website
for World research/ offer consultation http://cwis.org/contact/
Indigenous education services to govs,
Studies organization, NGOs, and tribes
dedicated concerning research
to wider methods, planning,
understanding/ and capacity-
appreciation of building
voices from 4th
world
Arctic Institute to Canada -KT workshops info@aicbr.ca
Institute of monitor, lead and -knowledge-sharing
Community- capacity-build workshops for
based CBR in the Arctic researchers/ ind
Research communities
-program evaluation
workshops
-however no mention
of IRMs. But all done
with ind folk, and in
collaboration w them
Indigenous -group of US -doesn’t seem like www.indigenousgeography.net
Peoples’ American any teaching/training
Specialty academics in IRM or CBR.
Group of the that conduct Organize sessions
Association research with and workshops
of American Indigenous about conducting
Geographers peoples CBR with ind folk.
Canadian -research project -Winnipeg, -currently developing Michael.hart@umanitoba.ca
Research looking at how Canada and documenting
Chair in IK can improve Indigenous Research
Indigenous social work for Methods.
Knowledges Ind folk.
and Social
Work-
University of
Manitoba

LE,NONET -undergraduate -Victoria, -undergraduate -University Dr. Rob Hancock- rola@uvic.ca
program, and graduate Canada seminar, graduate of Victoria
Indigenous program seminar,
Studies that teaches undergraduate
Department, students IRMs community
University of and community internship,
Victoria engagement undergraduate
skills research project
Indigenous -organization -Ontario, -no mention of -Canadian
Health that helps fund Canada IRMs, and unclear Institute
Research and assess how CBR training of Health
Development CBR project is undertaken... Research
Program proposals for provides funding for
Aboriginal CBR projects
health research -have summer
in Ontario. institutes for
According to students to learn
website no about proposal
longer operating writing, methods,
as of 2013. data collection
etc... but entirely
CBR, no mention or
discussion of IRMs
Appendix C: Literature Review Results

Caracciolo, D., & Staikidis, K. (2009). Coming of age in methodology: Two collaborative inquiries with
Shinnecock and Maya peoples. Qualitative Inquiry, 15(8), 1395-1415. doi:10.1177/1077800409343771.
Carpenter, V. M., & McMurchy-Pilkington, C. (2008). Cross-cultural researching: Maori and pakeha in te
whakapakari. Qualitative Research, 8(2), 179-196.
Dana-Sacco, G. (2010). The indigenous researcher as individual and collective: Building a research
practice ethic within the context of indigenous languages. American Indian Quarterly, 34(1), 61-82.
Datta, R., Khyang, N. U., Prue Khyang, H. K., Prue Kheyang, H. A., Ching Khyang, M., & Chapola,
J. (2014). Participatory action research and researcher’s responsibilities: An experience with an
indigenous community. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, , 1-19.
de Ishtar, Z. (2005). Striving for a common language: A white feminist parallel to indigenous ways of
knowing and researching. Womens Studies International Forum, 28(5), 357-368.
Evans, M., Andersen, C., Dietrich, D., Bourassa, C., Logan, T., Berg, L. D., et al. (2012). Funding
and ethics in métis community based research: The complications of a contemporary context.
International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, 5(1), 54-66.
Iwama, M., Marshall, M., Marshall, A., & Bartlett, C. (2009). Two-eyed seeing and the language of healing
in community-based research. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 32(2), 3.
Lemelin, R., Wiersma, E., Trapper, L., Kapashesit, R., Beaulieu, M., & Dowsley, M. (2013). A dialogue and
reflection on photohistory: Engaging indigenous communities in research through visual analysis.
Action Research, 11(1), 92.
Muwanga-Zake, J. W. F. (2009). Building bridges across knowledge systems: Ubuntu and participative
research paradigms in bantu communities. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education,
30(4), 413-426. doi:10.1080/01596300903237198.

Nakamura, N. (2010). Indigenous methodologies: Suggestions for junior researchers. Geographical
Research, 48(1), 97-103.
Pihama, L., Cram, F., & Walker, S. (2002). Creating methodological space: A literature review of kaupapa
maori research. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 26(1), 30.
Walker, M., Fredericks, B., Mills, K., & Anderson, D. (2014). “Yarning” as a method for community-based
health research with indigenous women: The indigenous women’s wellness research program.
Health Care for Women International, 35(10), 1216-1226.
Willox, A. C., Harper, S. L., Edge, V. L., My Word Storytelling Digital Media, & Rigolet Inuit Community
Govt. (2013). Storytelling in a digital age: Digital storytelling as an emerging narrative method for
preserving and promoting indigenous oral wisdom. Qualitative Research, 13(2), 127-147.
Appendix D- List of individuals

North America
Dr. Carrie Bourassa, First Nations University of Canada
Dr. Marie Battiste, University of Saskatchewan
Dr. Diane Caracciolo, Adelphi University
Dr. Heather Castleden, Queens University
Natalie Clark, UBC
Dr. Lynne Davis, Trent University
Dr. Mike Evans, UBC Okanagan
Dr. T’hohahoken Michael Doxtater, McGill University
Dr. Fay Fletcher, University of Alberta
Dr. Linda Goulet, University of Regina
Dr. Rob Hancock, University of Victoria
Dr. Jennie Joe, University of Arizona
Dr. Shelley Johnson, UBC
Dr. Lori Lambert, Salish Kootenai College
Dr. Tanya Lukin-Linklater, Nippissing University
Albert Marshall, Elder, Mi’kmaw Nation
Dr. Andrew Miller, First Nations University of Canada
Dr. Jean-Paul Restoule, University of Toronto
Dr. Ashlee Cunsolo Willox, Cape Breton University
Wendy Whitebear, University of Regina, Indigenous Peoples Health Research Centre

Oceania
Dr. Fiona Cram, Katoa Ltd
Dr Bronwyn Fredericks, Queensland University of Technology
Dr. Tracey McIntosh, University of Auckland
Dr. Naohiro Nakamura, University of the South Pacific
Dr. Leonie Pihama, Maori and Indigenous Analysis Ltd
Dr. Peter Radoll, Wollotuka Institute
Dr. Michael Tynan, Lowitja Institute
Dr. Shawn Wilson, University of Sydney
Africa
Dr. Paolo Wangoola, Mpambo Multiversity
Appendix E
UNESCO Community-based research literature review- Indigenous research methodologies Interview
questions for experts/informants
1. In your understanding, what is the relationship between indigenous research methodologies and
community-based (or participatory) research? How have you seen them converge, or diverge, in
your field?
2. Could you tell me about your experiences learning indigenous research methodologies?
3. Could you tell me about your experiences learning how to conduct CBR? Was there much
overlap in these learning experiences?
4. Could you tell me a little about your experience in matters related to training and teaching in
CBR?
5. To what extent did these also involved training/teaching in indigenous research methodologies?
6. What are the key challenges faced when training and teaching CBR, in the context of indigenous
research?
7. What are the key opportunities available for training and teaching in CBR for researchers who
also want to implement indigenous research methodologies?
8. What approaches do you find the most valuable in learning and teaching CBR?
9. In your opinion, is there anything about the training/teaching of CBR with indigenous
methodologies, that differs significantly from other forms of teaching or training of CBR? Are
these teachings/trainings different in form, content, method of transmission?
10. What kinds of CB projects and research does your organization undertake?
11. How are these initiatives funded?
12. Who are your main CBR partners?
13. Does your organization offer a structured learning opportunity on CBR? If so, how does it also
incorporate indigenous research methodologies?
14. What resources are you drawing on in informing your own CBR?

15. Could you give me an example of a case of success in CBR at your organization? What are the
pedagogical and practical lessons to be learned from this case?
16. Could you give me an example of a case of failure in CBR at your organization? What are the
pedagogical and practical lessons to be learned from this case?
17. What are your thoughts on the state of CBR practices in your organization?
18. What are the institutional policies needed to mainstream these practices?
19. What are the most promising policies that national governments and funding bodies could
implement to improve the quality of CBR with indigenous methodologies?


Indigenous Research Methodologies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indigenous Research Methodologies

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Indigenous Research Methodologies

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are the main topics covered in the document?

What are the main topics covered in the document?

What are some of the top training programs mentioned?

What are some of the top training programs mentioned?

Global Thematic Review on Training in

This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons license, Attribution -

Narrative description of the search process. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Content of narrative synthesis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Top training programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Appendix A - List of Universities/Institutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Appendix B: Secondary Institution Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Appendix C: Literature Review Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

Appendix D- List of individuals. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 1

Narrative description of the search process

2 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 3

Content of narrative synthesis

4 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 5

iii. Types and length of training

6 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

iv. Content of the training curricula and skills/capacities that

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 7

Academic accredited courses

Involvement in university-based research projects

8 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

Top training programs

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 9

Facilitators’ and students’ profile

Expected learning impacts

10 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 11

Expected learning impacts

III. The Lowitja Institute for Aboriginal and

12 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

Facilitators’ and students’ profile

Expected learning impacts

IV. Katoa Ltd. New Zealand

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 13

Facilitators’ and students’ profile

Expected learning impacts

LE, NONET program. University of Victoria, Canada

Content and design

14 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

Expected learning outcomes

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 15

16 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 17

18 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 19

20 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 21

The University of Winnipeg

22 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project

UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project 23

Appendix C: Literature Review Results

24 UNESCO CBR-SR – The Next Gen project