The first thing that came to my mind while reading the article from Hatcher et al.

was

the definition and nature of the sciences. The popular perception regarding science is that it is

the way of understanding and obtaining reliable information (which, of course, is not infallible)

of the material world, including the description of the phenomena that can be studied in the

following order: through careful observation and Clear (as much as possible), it's intelligent

recording, its thematic classification, extraction of general rules and regulations from which it

indicates order, inference of other provisions from these rules by an inductive method,

confirmation of these provisions by observing more and presenting hypotheses and theories

that relate and describe as many laws as possible. Science deals with how and why things are

described and explained and describes the material world and offers ways to capture it.

This power to take over nature gives it legitimacy and objectivity. Scientific explanations

are reflections of facts that reflect facts more than other teachings, and anyone can experiment

with them. Science describes the world of nature as it is, not as it should be and not as we want

it to be. This is the difference between science and philosophy and art. Since science is a

democratic profession, the most eminent scholars, both Newton and Einstein, must respond to

the slightest criticism of the scientific community's members and convince him scientifically. In

this profession, there is no guardian, purpose, authority, and leadership. If the claim of the

most prominent researcher is not accompanied by evidence of experience and

experimentation, it is rejected. On this basis, the views of major scholars such as Newton on

alchemy and Linus Pauling on the importance of vitamin C in prolonging life have not been

accepted. As stated in the article, you can see a disconnection between the observer and the

observation in this type of science. It is in complete contrast with what was mentioned in the
article as “Indigenous science” that knowledge and the knowers or learners are intimately

connected. That's when contextual learning happens. According to Hull's (1993) definition of

contextual learning, learning occurs only when learners connect the information to their frame

of reference:

"According to contextual learning theory, learning occurs only when students

(learners) process new information or knowledge in such a way that it makes sense to

them in their frame of reference (their inner world of memory, experience, and

response). This approach to learning and teaching assumes that the mind naturally

seeks meaning in context--that is, in the environment where the person is located--and

that it does so through searching for relationships that make sense and appear useful."

(p. 41)

The point here that I can't stop thinking about is how the educational system I studied in

this province lacks this connectivity between indigenous children and their community. The

children that I had the opportunity to meet due to my job all were so disconnected with their

community and their land, and that why they did not feel belonged anywhere, neither their

homeland nor their new place. As a result of that, you can see some of these children face

difficulties and challenges after getting back to their communities and feeling not belong, which

is very sad and requires consideration.

Please click on the following link:

Indigenous knowledge as science

 References

Beck, U. (1992). The politics of knowledge in the risk society. In Beck, U. Risk Society:
Towards a new modernity. New Bury Park: Sage. 

Hatcher, A., Bartlett, C., Marshal, A. & Marshall, M. (2009) Two-eyed seeing in the
classroom environment: concepts, approaches, and challenges. Canadian Journal of Science,
Mathematics and Technology
Education, 9:3, 141153, DOI: 10.1080/14926150903118342

Sheldrake, P. (1991). The Way of Ignatius Loyola: Contemporary approaches to the

Spiritual exercises (1st U.S. ed., Series IV--Study aids on Jesuit topics; no. 13). St. Louis:
Institute of Jesuit Sources.

Yamamura, E., & Koth, Kent. (2018). Place-based community engagement in higher
education: A strategy to transform universities and communities (First ed.). Sterling, Virginia:
Stylus Publishing, LLC.