On the Land Round Table Report

NWT ON THE LAND ROUND TABLE
FINAL REPORT
April 2016
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On Thursday, February 25, 2016, the NWT Recreation and Parks Association (NWTRPA)
hosted a round table of on the land (OTL) leaders in Yellowknife. Twenty-six people
representing each of the regions in the NWT gathered at the Yellowknife Ski Club to
talk about the rewards and challenges of delivering on the land programming and to
identify concrete actions to support on the land leaders.
The round table grew out of the On the Land Funders Collaborative Workshop
spearheaded by Tides Canada in the fall of 2014. Concerned that the non-funding
related observations and suggestions that emerged during the Collaborative
Workshop might be lost, the NWTRPA offered to host a round table for OTL
coordinators and practitioners to continue the conversations begun in 2014. Invitations
were extended to individuals from across the territory working in land-based
programming (broadly understood) for schools, cultural institutions, First Nations,
community governments, non-profit organizations, and the territorial government.
At the most basic level, the round table was an opportunity for people working in landbased education, broadly conceived, to meet face-to-face, in many cases for the first
time, and to learn more about other programs and activities happening around the
territory. The round table was also an opportunity to identify and address non-fundingrelated barriers to delivering culturally relevant, meaningful, and safe on the land
programming. Participants identified four broad categories of challenges: Capacity
referred to human and material resources; Commitment included both institutional
and individual commitments to supporting and participating in on the land programs;
Outcomes captured the challenges OTL leaders face in developing and evaluating
meaningful programs, but also in communicating their successes to funders; and
Safety highlighted the barriers to developing programs that are physically and
emotionally safe, while still challenging participants.
Participants developed a rich suite of possible solutions to each of the challenges
identified during the brainstorm. Here again, there were common themes in the
solutions, many related to working collaboratively. While a number of actions were
identified as priorities for the group, the call heard most consistently was for a network
of on the land leaders. Not only will a network create a space for sharing resources
and best practices, but it can also serve as the foundation for other priorities such as
training, advocacy, research, and resource development.
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
1
Background
3
Getting Started
4
Creative Solution Café
5
Capacity
Commitment
Outcomes
Safety
6
9
13
16
Walk and Talk/Snowshoe Circle
18
Moving Forward
20
Sharing Resources
Tapping into Local Resources
Training
Bringing Language and Land Together
20
20
21
22
Conclusions and Next Steps
23
Appendix A: Participants
24
This report was prepared by:
Please direct questions to:
Jess Dunkin
On the Land Programs Consultant
[email protected]
867.669.8376
2
BACKGROUND
In 2014, Tides Canada hosted an On the Land Funders Collaborative Workshop that
brought together stakeholders in land-based programming and education to
“brainstorm and discuss how support for on the land programs in the NWT could be
enhanced and strengthened.” While much of the discussion centred on fundingrelated barriers, the meeting highlighted other areas for improvement including, but
not limited to communication, collaboration, and capacity.
In the interest of continuing this conversation, the NWTRPA offered to host a round
table for OTL coordinators and practitioners to measure progress since the Funders
Collaborative meeting and to highlight areas for future work. While the NWTRPA served
as the lead organization, an advisory committee was assembled to guide the
planning process. Steve Ellis (Tides Canada), Erin Freeland-Ballantyne (Dechinta), Jill
Gilday (Northern Youth Leadership), Jess Dunkin (NWTRPA), and Geoff Ray (NWTRPA)
all contributed to the development of the program and the invitation list.
Invitations were extended to individuals from across the territory working in land-based
programming (broadly understood) for schools, cultural institutions, First Nations,
community governments, non-profit organizations, and the territorial government. A list
of participants can be found in Appendix A.
On Thursday, February 25, 2016, 26 participants representing 21 different organizations
gathered at the Yellowknife Ski Club to talk about the rewards and challenges of
delivering on the land programming, and to identify concrete actions that will support
on the land leaders. This report seeks to capture the day’s conversations and to map a
way forward for this nascent network of on the land leaders.
3
GETTING STARTED
Jess Dunkin opened the round table by offering words of welcome and a brief
overview of the motivations for bringing together on the land (OTL) leaders in this way.
Chief Gerry Antoine of Liidlii Kue First Nation offered further words of welcome and a
prayer song. Facilitator Lois Little then asked the participants to introduce themselves
and to share their motivations for leading and/or participating in OTL programs.
The following is the list of motivations generated during the opening circle:




























Identity – a Dene person is of the land
Belonging
Connecting language and land and history
Culture-based education = success
The land feeds us in all ways
The land is the root of education for all
OTL education is transformative, if we can create safe and strong spaces
Environmental stewardship and conservation
Valuable base for education (not always recognized by formal education)
Being on the land lifts spirits
Kids feel valued
In times of climate change, we need to connect with the land
Land stewardship – the land has power
Unique source of knowledge
Part of northern life
Way of life is under threat
Conservation economy
Filling gaps not addressed in the home – growing healthy children
Able to be “my best self”
Empower youth and make connections with elders
Find “true self”
Learn healthy family roles
Longer stays (e.g. Tundra Science Camp) = rich learning
Skills development (e.g. Ranger training)
Connect values, culture, and land to sustain culture and produce good values
and ethics
Wellness and well-being
Good citizens give back to society
Decolonization, reconnection, and political consciousness
4
CREATIVE SOLUTION CAFÉ
Following introductions and a brief coffee break, the group reconvened to brainstorm
responses to the following question: Funding aside, what are the most important
challenges you face in delivering culturally relevant, meaningful, and safe on the land
programming in your community/region?
Participants’ contributions were grouped into four categories (Capacity; Commitment;
Outcomes; and Safety), which formed the basis for the discussion in the next session,
titled the “Creative Solution Café.” In this session participants had the opportunity to
begin the process of creatively collaborating to address challenges identified in the
first session using a modified World Café Model.
Four facilitators (Lois, Jess, Geoff, and Karen) were positioned at tables around the
room with one of the categories of “challenges” identified during the brainstorm.
Participants circulated randomly, spending approximately 15 minutes at each table.
Following on our intention to avoid discussions of funding and also our desire to be
realistic in our planning, participants were encouraged to develop solutions that were
low cost and/or made use of existing resources and relationships.
(Photo: NWTRPA)
5
A. Capacity
The larger group identified a number of challenges related to capacity. They were:














Cultural inclusion
Cultural experts may change
Cultural experts have inadequate training
Lack of community interest in Pleasure Craft Operators Card (PCOC) training or
a sense that it may not be needed due to existing skills
Safety issues (e.g. people don’t always wear life jackets)
Lack of access to appropriate transportation to get on the land
Resource people/policies require criminal record checks, which can limit locally
qualified people being hired
Having enough staff to handle all aspects, deliver SAFE programs, and avoid
staff burnout
Appropriate infrastructure for winter gatherings for large groups
Limited network and available land
Lack of OTL programs for urban youth
Lack of equipment to run programs
Managing OTL language instruction (how? who?)
Human capacity, e.g. I am the only land-based staff in my office
Visitors to this table identified a number of possible solutions to these challenges. These
have been grouped thematically.
Develop relevant programming that is rooted in the local community and connected
to the land






Understand community needs first
o Supplement community needs and match resources
Regional perspectives need to be respected - no one size-fits all approach
o Programming should also be community and family specific
Aim for consistency/long-term sustainability
Follow local protocols
Design OTL programs tied to seasons and people with expertise
Work with families and use existing infrastructure/camps
o Improves sustainability
Be intentional about developing on the land leaders
 Think about how to grow Northern experts in a holistic way
6





o Decolonize so that experts think of themselves as experts
Recognize and appreciate skills, but not in a token way
o Create safe spaces, in which everyone is a teacher
o Recognize the risk of burnout
Clarify and share expectations among all parties involved
Train the trainer within the framework of on the land leadership expectations
Craft messages to give value to OTL skills/knowledge and include role models
Value OTL skills/knowledge as the foundation of a new economic sector
(knowledge economy) that celebrates Northerners’ innovation
Support existing OTL leaders and staff
 Be clear about roles, responsibilities, and expectations
o Important to ensure all of the work isn’t on one person
o Separate administrative duties from program delivery or family/group host
experience
 Establish a network for program organizers
o Someone with expertise should be responsible for the network (e.g.
NWTRPA as the OTL connector)
o Online networking
 Develop an inventory of resource people
 Provide training for OTL leaders (e.g. how to cope with mental health issues in
isolated settings, first aid)
o Pay for training as a way to lengthen often short-term OTL jobs
o Move away from the ‘certification model’ and create new ways of
recognizing skills and knowledge
 Consider mixed models of employment (e.g. seconded employees)
 Mentoring for facilitators that recognizes different ways of working
Develop partnerships
 Breakdown silos and coordinate programs
 Share resources
 Partnerships can make training more accessible, especially for small
organizations
Recognize, celebrate, and learn from successful programs
 Deh Gah School is a model for all schools (e.g. listen to the community and
engender political will)
There were ancillary conversations that happened as participants discussed capacity.
First, they observed that OTL activities can be approached as a program with all the
7
attendant standards, rules, etc. OR as an experience that is part of the daily life of a
family/individual/group, in which case activities are those set out by the host. If we
think about OTL following the second model, “training,” in the Western sense of the
word, needs to be re-examined. Trying to insert OTL practitioners into a premade
program can create difficulties, be patronizing, and perhaps does a disservice
especially if culture-based, language-rich experiences are the objective. In
differentiating OTL programming and OTL experiences, there are different
opportunities and challenges. But either way, it is clear that intent is the best way to
deal with them and with capacity issues.
Second, participants explored how OTL activities are a way to grow a “knowledge
economy” in the NWT, through the valuing of OTL skills/knowledge and moving people
with these skills into expert positions whether it is in the tourism industry, education
system, forestry, water management, etc. This is part of the reasoning behind the Tłı̨chǫ
Wilderness Skills Program and Dechinta’s work.
8
Sophie Williah (Photo: NWTRPA)
B. Commitment
The first group of participants to visit this table observed two different kinds of
commitment in the challenges identified during the brainstorm, individual and
institutional. Challenges related to institutional commitment included governments,
both territorial and community, developing policies and allocating funds to support
OTL programs and educational administrators seeing the value in land-based
programs and organizing their schedules and funds accordingly. Individual
commitment, meanwhile, was related to personal realities such as livelihoods, limited
experience, and a lack of interest that might result in a failure to participate in or a
decision to quit a program.
Institutional
The problem of institutional commitment centred on the question of how do we
convince those in positions of power at all levels of government across the territory,
from MLAs to top-level bureaucrats to educational administrators to community
leaders, to truly value and invest in land-based programs.
The first step toward addressing this challenge seemed to be to stop working in
isolation, to create a network or coalition of OTL leaders. At the most basic level, this
group could share resources and experiences, which in some cases could help
individuals to make the case for OTL programs in their home organizations. A website
was suggested that featured information about who is working in this field, what kinds
of programs exist, available work opportunities, and resources. However, given the
need for advocacy, a more developed network was advised that could compile and
disseminate research and lobby governments for increased support for OTL activities.
The question of how to sustain a network was briefly discussed. Daniel T’Seleie, a
founding member of Dene Nahjo, an Indigenous leadership collective with members
across the territory, shared that one of the keys to that organization’s success is having
a paid staff member who is able to coordinate meetings and network initiatives. A
network can engender varying levels of engagement from a loosely associated group
that shares resources through an online portal to a set of individuals that makes faceto-face meetings a priority to a group that works more closely together on specific
projects. Should advocacy become a priority of this network, and there were some
who felt that it should be, there will need to be a greater degree of engagement and
also consensus.
9
A key challenge to swaying government and public opinion on the subject of OTL
programs is a lack of hard and fast evidence. We know as individuals and OTL leaders
through our experiences that land-based education is powerful and transformative.
The question is how to translate what we see in our programming to language and
metrics that will satisfy decision makers and funders. Some participants observed that
while there is lots of research showing that the classroom model of education is failing
students, there is not the same wealth of research available about OTL programs. This
is a gap that the network could fulfill, especially through collaborative work.
Individual
One of the first challenges identified was how do we let people know that our
programs exist. Dechinta uses their alumni networks to spread the word about their
programs. Another participant suggested taking advantage of GNWT wellness fairs.
Second, how do we attract participants? In terms of “enticing participants,” café
participants observed that OTL leaders need to create programs that are relevant. This
involves working with youth, families, and elders in advance to identify their goals. One
participant noted the importance of developing programs that work with existing skills,
knowledge, and resources. In other words, leaders should fit the program to the
people, not the other way around.
Evaluation tools can also help us to know if our programs are working and meeting
participants’ needs. Dechinta uses an intensive interview-based evaluation model to
ensure that its programs are relevant. Students participate in three long-form one-onone interviews over the course of their semester: intake, midpoint, and exit. They also
take part in daily community governance circles while on site to ensure that the
program is meeting their needs. Finally, Dechinta staff engage in informal follow-ups.
These varied evaluation tools allow for both daily changes to the program and more
long-term program development.
In addition to developing relevant programming, we must ensure that our programs
are accessible. For example, recognizing that it is impractical for potential participants
to leave children behind in their communities for a semester, Dechinta welcomes
students with families and provides child-centred activities on site (KidsU). Likewise,
Northern Youth provides participants with the appropriate gear because not all youth
have the necessary equipment to participate in a week-long canoe trip or land
camp.
10
Both Erin Freeland-Ballantyne (Dechinta) and Jill Gilday (Northern Youth) spoke about
the time it takes to get program participants from the point of expressing interest in a
program to showing up. Freeland-Ballantyne estimated approximately 40 hours is
devoted to providing one-on-one support through phone calls, emails, and
community visits. A significant part of this process is about building confidence. In the
case of participants, it is the confidence that they have the capacity to participate
and succeed. In the case of youth, it refers to building confidence in the program
itself. In other words, OTL leaders need to inform and reassure parents and guardians
that their children will be safe and secure.
This relates to another challenge that faces individuals working in the education
system, the belief on the part of parents that land-based education isn’t real
education and that scholastic success depends on sitting at a desk in a classroom for
6 hours every day. How can OTL leaders convince parents that OTL is real education?
Greta Sittichinli (Beaufort Delta District Educational Council) has observed the success
of children telling their stories to parents. At schools in her home region, show and tell
events where children shared photos and stories of their experiences at land camps
have been important in changing parental attitudes towards OTL programming.
This issue of convincing parents that OTL programs are truly educational brings us back
to the larger question of communicating to territorial and community leaders,
education officials, university administrators, and the public at large the value of OTL
programs.
One of the groups noted that in some cases livelihoods prevented or limited
participation in OTL programs. For example, employment in the resource sector is a
barrier to taking part in community-based OTL programs because workers are on a
strict schedule. Round table participants noted the need for OTL-related jobs. This
would require investing in training for community members and then hiring them to
programs. Having recently reviewed a number of Impact Benefit Agreements (IBAs),
Sean Magee (Nihat’Ni Dene, Lutsel K’e) observed that training programs included in
these documents focused on resource extraction, which reinforce community and
individual dependence on extractive industries. What if, Sean wondered, corporations
were required to support OTL training, which in turn could support individual livelihoods
and traditional economies?
11
Some of the round table participants have struggled with having contracted workers
show up to OTL programs. One solution proposed by Dahti Tsetso (Dehcho First
Nations) is to contract community governments to assist with the program logistics (i.e.
service agreements to hire cooks, elders, provide camp preparation and
maintenance). This is an approach that has worked effectively when organizing
programming in the Dehcho region. Both the regional and community offices benefit
from this arrangement; as the service needs of the program are met at the local level,
it enables short-term community employment and allows the community office to
generate some revenue.
(Photo: NWTRPA)
12
C. Outcomes
This table focused on measuring OTL project outcomes, sharing OTL program
experiences, and building the case for increased recognition and support of the value
that OTL programs provide. Specifically, this table addressed three questions:
1. How do schools assess learning outcomes with OTL programs?













Need to persuade the Department of Education, Culture, and Employment
(ECE) to quantify what is happening at Deh Gah School. Great programs and
learning taking place, but this is not being shared as widely as it should be.
ECE and District Education Councils need to invest in local successes rather than
southern experiences at teacher in-services
Develop and use case studies
Create an OTL skill-set that students need to demonstrate in order to gain credit
(e.g. setting camp). Links to multiple learning outcomes can be made
depending on the skill set (languages, math, sciences, northern studies, etc.).
Old Crow, YT, has resources to help define learning activities and outcomes
Old Crow, YT, also has a program to help students return to the community after
high school (students attend high school in Whitehorse and often don’t return to
the community after graduation). Students can attend school in Old Crow until
grade 9 and then spend grade 10 participating in school-run OTL programs and
then complete high school in Whitehorse. This approach is having a positive
impact on retention and could be looked at as an example for our programs.
Sachs Harbour, NT, is also using OTL programs to keep students in the community
Need to be creative to meet curriculum objectives with OTL programs
OTL programs/activities have strong links to Math and English Language Arts
(ELA) curriculum objectives
Ask kids (and other program participants) to self-evaluate
Ask kids to tell their own stories through journals, story-writing, demonstrations,
videos, etc.
Make links between CALM (Career and Life Management) hours and OTL
programs
Influence educators to value OTL programs with school credits
2. How do we share and learn about what is working and what is not?

We need to follow-up on this workshop and build momentum for our collective
work with OTL programs.
13














We should strive to have regular and frequent connection between programs.
There needs to be shared accountability to each other.
Create network between program leaders – the challenge is how to do this?
It is difficult to talk openly about program challenges and failures without risking
funding and participant enrolment
We need to start thinking about and framing challenges/failures as opportunities
to improve or build programs
Create a process to share program resources, knowledge, and plans
Develop strategic and business plan process and templates to help OTL
programs
Create mentorship opportunities so that OTL leaders can learn about planning
from each other
Create post-program de-briefing templates so that leaders can document what
they learned from each program
Create training and supports for program planning, goal-setting, and
administration
Create a website of best practices and resources
Create a directory of OTL programs and leaders
Create opportunities for OTL programs to partner with each other so they can
share resources (including funding) and learn from each other
Use storytelling to share program successes, challenges, and failures
It is important to identify challenges as often other programs have solutions! Can
be done through informal conversations, private websites, and regular
conferences/meetings.
3. How do we deliver on all the many outcomes that we promise funders?
This discussion started with the question of how do OTL programs demonstrate their
success to governments/funders and shifted to a discussion about how OTL leaders
can influence funders and government (both as a funder and a public policy-maker)
to value and support OTL programs. The feeling among participants was that
governments and funders are not recognizing the value of OTL programs and through
policy and funding requirements are negatively shifting programs away from their
desired program goals.

14


We need to influence funder/ECE goals to better align with the goals of OTL
projects that are successful. Funders should value good work and not push
programs to change what is working to match funder requirements.
Need to create stronger political support for the value of OTL programs
We can work together to create strength in numbers to mobilize change










We need to translate OTL programs and experiences for government and
funders
Need to advocate for OTL priorities, values, and outcomes
Conduct research on the long-term impacts of OTL programs (e.g. How do
people describe the longer-term impacts of their OTL program experiences?)
Need to study (and influence) government priorities and find the links with OTL
programs
Work with funders to make the connection between what is happening out on
the land and funder criteria
Work with funders so that they value (with their $) Dene knowledge and
traditions
Recognize that Dene families have infrastructure (camps and equipment) and
knowledge that funders and programs can access. Build on what some families
are already doing
Define what an OTL program is and what the benefits are
Get away from talking about OTL programs and activities and move towards
outcomes. Activities change from program to program (and even within one
program) but the outcomes remain the same. Funders should support the
outcomes and not care too much about the activities.
Create links between OTL programs and job skills
15
(Photo: Amy Lusk)
D. Safety
The groups who visited this table identified a wide range of safety concerns. They
included:






No Emergency Medical Service (EMS) for OTL activities, e.g. Medevac service
Lots of concern around how to manage risk
Liability – so much risk management that learning opportunities are
compromised
Difficulties in creating safe spaces, especially for women and mothers
Forced to organize under confines of colonial borders
Climate change is messing everything up
Participants identified a centralized resource centre for all things safety related as a
key priority. A resource centre would allow groups looking to develop OTL programs to
build on existing work, rather than reinventing the wheel. Ideally, any resources shared
would be flexible enough to be adapted to a specific OTL program/camp. In order to
meet legislative expectations around risk and safety, all levels of government must be
supportive of the resource centre and what it provides.
Some things that could be shared through a resource centre include:
 NWT standards for OTL camps
 Mental health plan
 Sample risk management plan
 Listing of training courses (e.g. first aid and lifesaving) and how to access the
training
 Sample safety plans (e.g. who to call if group is late returning or EMS required)
o May include registering trip with RCMP
 Environmental assessment protocols (procedures to protect the environment
and ideas on reducing the impact of OTL programs)
o May include waste management systems
 Resources for briefing program participants and sharing info with parents
o Site orientation and safety training as soon as people arrive – “What if”
scenarios like fire drills
o Nightly meetings at camp with all ‘staff’ (elders, volunteers, hosts, staff,
organizers, etc.) to check in on how participants are doing. Is everyone
participating? Does anyone need to be watched?
 Incident response tools (e.g. If an incident happens, how to debrief it and avoid
similar issues in future)
16


Ways to provide/accommodate childcare so you can have greater
participation
Suggestions on how to work with land owners/hosts to learn their protocols and
safety solutions (local knowledge)
o Also includes using local knowledge to respect sacred sites
Visitors to this table identified a tension between ensuring participants are safe and
eliminating risk to the point that participants do not learn and grow from the
experience. Participants discussed heightening perceived risk, but reducing actual
danger because often times, the best learning comes when the limits are being
pushed.
The group noted that vulnerable sector screening is important to ensuring the safety of
OTL program participants (vulnerable sector checks verify if an individual has a record
suspension for sex offences). However, it could also limit participation from potential
leaders or resource people. Round table participants suggested that if a person wishes
to support a program that would not pass a vulnerable sector check, they could be
partnered with someone. Further to this, a healing plan could be developed to
support this individual as they work through their issues.
Addressing lateral violence within OTL programs is another important aspect of
ensuring the safety and security of participants. Lateral violence consists of a set of
harmful practices from gossiping and bullying to physical violence that members of
oppressed groups engage in against each other as a result of marginalization. It is
often referred to as “internalized colonialism.” Round table participants identified a
number of possible solutions to addressing lateral violence in OTL programs:
establishing guidelines and rules for respect/trust with the whole group; using group
discussion to establish community norms to which all members are accountable; and
establishing protocols for how issues will be addressed and when/how you will remove
an individual if behaviour does not change.
17
WALK AND TALK/
SNOWSHOE CIRCLE
The morning’s sessions focused on capturing the challenges facing OTL leaders and
generating a host of possible solutions. In the afternoon, our intention was to begin to
narrow our focus in order to develop a handful of the solutions identified in the
morning that can become priorities for this group.
The first afternoon session found participants out on the trails, travelling by snowshoe
from the chalet to the lookout and back. We instituted this “walk and talk” for two
reasons: one, as a gathering of OTL leaders, we thought it was important to have an
OTL activity, however small; and two, as walking increases our creativity, we thought it
might be beneficial to take our thinking out on the trail.
At the start of the snowshoe, participants were asked to find a conversation buddy
with whom to share the first half of the walk, ideally someone they hadn’t worked with
before. They were encouraged to spend the first half of the walk fleshing out one of
the solutions identified in the morning that they felt was important. When we reached
the lookout, the participants were asked to find a different conversation buddy for the
second half of the walk and discuss a different potential solution. Not everyone stuck
to the assignment, but at the very least, it was an additional opportunity for
participants to “network.”
After the snowshoe, the participants returned to the round table to report on their
walks. Specifically, they were asked to share a solution with the group that that they
had developed with their conversation partner. These were recorded. Then the group
was supplied with dots to identify their top three priority solutions in anticipation of the
day’s final session, which was devoted to fleshing out four priority solutions. Perhaps
because people were tired, perhaps because of poor communication, these last two
sessions didn’t go quite as expected. The intention was to identify three of four
concrete activities that could inform future work amongst those present. However, a
number of the activities identified were perhaps best understood as general guidelines
for all OTL programming (such as prioritizing local knowledge and engaging elders
and families), rather than activity priorities for a group of OTL leaders. Nevertheless,
some key themes and objectives for the group emerged.
18
The priorities identified by the group in this order were:











Sharing resources
Tapping into local knowledge
Training - Train the trainer (how to teach); Land-based skills certification program
Bringing land and language together
Working group to advocate/address big issues (e.g. policy barriers)
Promote benefits of OTL to funders, family, youth, education system
Build relationships with families as the basis of programs
Collaborate on evidence-based research on OTL programs
Network of OTL practitioners
Risk management
Needs assessment of OTL programs
(Photo: NWTRPA)
19
MOVING FORWARD
In this final session, the group broke up into smaller groups to develop action plans for
the top four priorities. Given the limited time and the size of the task, these are best
understood as works in progress.
Sharing Resources Action Plan
What?
 Sharing contact information for round table participants
 Central hub
 Website with resources/best practices/community contacts
 Job or message board with opportunities/needs/trainers/skills on offer
 Blog for telling our stories
 (Semi-)annual network meeting
 Reach out to communities/elders
How?


Needs a staff person dedicated to this (RPA?)
Working group with other initiatives/organizations (e.g. Funders Collaborative;
Dene Nahjo; Municipal and Community Affairs; Health and Social Services;
Education, Culture, and Employment)
When?
 Jess to circulate contact information after meeting
 Jess to meet with OTL Funders Collaborative to discuss network options in April
Tapping Into Local Resources Action Plan
What?
 Recognizing, acknowledging, and enhancing the involvement of local
knowledge
Why?

It exists, it needs to be the basis of being on the land
How?
Working with resource people so that they are able to teach
20





Building relationships (i.e. Elders - resource-based, understand protocol
processes)
Also the land
Hands-on approach, as well as with observational processes
Resource list, community to be involved with identifying people
Who?




Everyone
Those who would like to be part of this process
Those who would like to facilitate this process
Community resource people that would like to be part of this and who are
available
When?
 Long before you start the planning process
 Always continue to follow up and update the relationship
Training Action Plan
What?
 Train the trainer - Help experts become teachers
1. Hard Skills – Teach participants how to learn from elders/experts; Facilitate
the passage/transfer of knowledge
2. Soft skills – Teach elders/experts how to deliver knowledge
3. Train facilitators to facilitate the transfer of knowledge; create a bridge
between elders and youth.
Why?

Stop loss of culture
How?





Tap into Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) mandate/other existing
programs
Deliver facilitation training
Source curriculum ideas…“gaps” to focus on
Develop/compile key competencies
How do we retain people (or create a database)
21
Who?




Community leaders
Teachers
Young people/elders
“Working Group” (Identify key OTL community members)
Bringing Land and Language Together Action Plan
What?
 Create a how-to guide to create conditions to introduce language instruction
(activities, space, etc.) to OTL programs
How?




Video resources (website)
Exemplars
Wiki
Methodology Workshop (e.g. Mentor-Apprentice Program [MAP])
Who?


Sean Magee offered to build a website. Suggestion that he wait until we see
who else might be able to host such information.
NWTRPA to initiate connecting people to find out who is doing language
instruction in OTL programming
22
(Photo: NWTRPA)
CONCLUSIONS/NEXT STEPS
An evaluation form was circulated to participants after the round table. The majority
of respondents cited the opportunity to meet with others working in OTL programming
as the most valuable part of the workshop. They also expressed a desire for a network
of OTL leaders. In the wake of the round table, an OTL leaders network seems an
important first step in supporting OTL programs in the NWT. Not only will it provide an
opportunity for sharing resources and best practices, but it can also serve as the
foundation for ancillary work such as advocacy, research, and resource
development.
A network requires an organization/individual to take responsibility for its functioning.
There seemed to be a general consensus that the NWTRPA was well-suited to take on
this role given that they are a non-profit with a history in the field and a mandate to
“promote the inclusion of recreation and parks as key to our way of life...by supporting
leaders, communities and partners through training, advocacy and networking.” With
that in mind, the On the Land Programs Consultant at the NWTRPA, Jess Dunkin, has
begun work on building the infrastructure for a network. As the network takes shape,
we will work toward meeting other goals and priorities set out during the meeting.
Based on the round table discussions, the current priorities are:
1. Develop an on the land leaders network:
a. Circulate updates about ongoing work quarterly in a newsletter.
b. Arrange a second face-to-face meeting of on the land leaders, perhaps
in conjunction with the NWTRPA conference in Yellowknife scheduled for
September 27-29.
2. Create an online hub for sharing resources and best practices:
a. Meet with Funders Collaborative to discuss digital collaboration.
b. Reach out to OTL to amass resources.
3. Work to raise the profile and communicate the successes of on the land
programs.
4. Pull together a training working group to develop/support an OTL leadership
training program that focuses on local knowledge and expertise.
5. Begin work on advocacy priorities:
a. Risk management;
b. Linking language and land.
23
APPENDIX A: PARTICIPANTS
Name
Organization
Chris Carthew
Deputy Commanding Officer, First Canadian Ranger
Patrol Group
Cindy Caisse
YKDFN
Dahti Tsetso
Resource Management Coordinator, Dehcho First
Nations
Daniel T’Seleie
Sahtu Youth Network Coordinator
Douglas Dillon
Aboriginal Tourism Development Officer, ITI
Erin FreelandBallantyne
Dean, Dechinta Bush University
Geoff Ray
Executive Director, NWTRPA
Gerry Antoine
Chief, Liidlii Kue First Nation
Greta Sittichinli
Assistant Superintendent, Beaufort-Delta Educational
Council
Iris Catholique
Project Director, Dene Nahjo
Jennie Vandermeer
Environmental Impacts Analyst, ENR
Jess Dunkin
On the Land Programs Consultant, NWTRPA
Jill Gilday
Project Director, Northern Youth Leadership
Mandee McDonald
Program Director, Dechinta Bush University
Mike Mitchell
Curator of Education and Public Programs, PWNHC
Nicole Garbutt
Director, Camp Connections
Paul Cressman
Program Development Officer, Tlicho Government
Roger Vail
Teacher, PWK High School
Scott McQueen
ENR, Traditional Economy Coordinator
Sean Magee
Nihat’Ni Dene (Lutsel K’e Rangers Program)
Steve Ellis
Northern Canada Program Lead, Tides Canada
Tammy Roberts
Executive Director, Foster Family Coalition
Tasha Stephenson
Tundra Science Camp
24
Tee Lim
Conservation Coordinator, CPAWS
Thomsen D'Hont
Research Assistant, Institute for Circumpolar Health
Research
Waheed Al Mahdy
First Canadian Ranger Patrol Group
Round Table Participants (Photo: NWTRPA)
25