indigenous design
Since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada called for “education for reconciliation,” many Canadian universities have begun Indigenizing their campuses—through curriculum reform, Indigenous faculty hiring, land acknowledgements, and dedicated initiatives. However, framing this work as “reconciliation” can sometimes risk tokenism or depoliticization.

This article reflects on the authors’ experience serving on a university committee advancing Indigenization. Using an adaptation of Indigenous conversational methods, they explore both practical and discursive effects of their work. Conversation, grounded in relational accountability, allowed them to surface tensions, navigate differing levels of investment, and examine how institutional structures shape outcomes.

Key challenges included institutional inertia, epistemic hierarchies, unequal labor burdens on Indigenous staff, and ambiguity in reconciliation discourse. Despite these, the authors highlight essential ingredients for decolonizing Indigenization: relational accountability, institutional courage, structural support, reflexive practice, and the creation of ethical spaces of engagement (Ermine 2007).

They conclude that sustained, dialogical processes are not only a tool but a form of ethical practice. By fostering open, accountable conversation, universities can move beyond symbolic gestures toward meaningful decolonization of post-secondary education.