THOMPSON RIVERS UNIVERSITY

Reconciliatory Action Research: Building Foundations of
Allyship Behaviour in a Science 10 Classroom
by
Serena Gomes Reves

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF
Master of Education
KAMLOOPS, BRITISH COLUMBIA
SEPTEMBER, 2020
Supervisor: Carol Rees; Committee members: Gloria Ramirez & Shelly Johnson

© Serena Gomes Reves, 2020

ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research was to build and implement curriculum that aims to support grade
10 science high school students with building empathy as a foundation of Reconciliation
towards allyship behavior. This study hoped to answer the questions: In what ways does a
curriculum that aims to foster empathy as a foundation for allyship behaviour impact the
developing empathy of science 10 students? Specifically: Is empathy developing? What kinds
of empathy are developing? What are the conditions that allow empathy to develop? This
qualitative study analyzed data through coding, identifying emergent codes, and thematic
analysis. Students appeared to be developing in the four types of empathy considered in the
study: cognitive empathy, intercultural cognitive empathy, affective empathy, and
intercultural affective empathy through the opportunities offered in the course. Four pillars
(identity development, building relationships, safety, and intercultural opportunities) emerged
as important conditions to foster empathy development along what the researcher called an
empathy arc- the students’ empathy (cognitive and affective), and intercultural empathy
(cognitive and affective) developmental journey.

Key words: cognitive empathy, affective empathy, intercultural empathy, First Peoples’
Principles of Learning, Reconciliation, Reconciliatory action, interculturally sensitive
teaching environments, interculturally sensitive learning environments.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This study was conducted on the traditional and unceded territory of the Tk’emlups te
Secwepemc within Secwepemcul’ecw. I recognize that this territory has always been a place
of teaching, learning and research, and I am grateful for the opportunity to be on this land.
Thank you to my family Chad, Griffin and Amora Reves, John, Laura and Sarah Gomes, and
Belanina Brant whose support and patience were greatly appreciated.
Thank you to my learning partner MJ Johnson (member of Tl’azt‘en Nation, from Dakelh
(Carrier) from Dene Territory, AEW), and Roberta Regnier (Deh Gah Got’ie Dene First
Nation in the Northwest Territories, AEW) for their support.
Thank you to my Intercultural teachers June Kelly, Shelly Johnson, Roxane Letterlough,
Michele Sorenson, the late Carrier Elder Estella Patrick, and Secwepemc Elder Mike
Arnouse who provided opportunities to build intercultural understanding, sensitivity, and
empathy.
Thank you to the Traditional Knowledge Keepers (TKK) for sharing their vast knowledge.
Mrs. Bernice Jensen (Okanagan and Secwepemc TKK and Cultural Education Coordinator
with the Kamloops Aboriginal Friendship Society, in partnership with School District 73),
Peter Michel (Secwepemc educator and storyteller from the Adams Lake band from the far
end of Adams Lake and at the head of the Lake, and Aboriginal family counsellor SD73),
Trudi Nielsen (descendant of the Inkumupulux people (Head of the Lake) from the
Suqnaqinx territory (Okanagan), as well as the Nlaka’pamux Nation from Boston Bar,
Aboriginal Resource Teacher SD 73), and Kenthen Thomas (of Secwépemc and Sylix
ancestry. His grandparents are Dr. Mary Thomas, Mark Thomas, Herbie and Vera Johnny.
His parents are Phyllis and Gerry Thomas and he has a son named Susep Soulle, Aboriginal
Resource Teacher SD73).
Thank you to Dr. Carol Rees, my supervisor, and Dr. Shelly Johnson and Dr. Gloria Ramirez
for your support and faith.
Thank you to my learning partners during my master’s degree without whom the inception
of this study and its primary concepts would not have solidified: Don Ferguson, Jennifer
Patton, Brandy Turner, and Barbara Hamblett.
Thank you to Alison Sidow and School District 73 for allowing me to conduct this research.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PART 1: BASIS FOR THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR CHANGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
PART 2: STRATEGIES FOR CHANGE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
THEORETICAL UNDERPINNINGS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37
CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
PART 1: EXPLORATION OF EMPATHY DEVELOPMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
PART 2: WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT ALLOW EMPATHY TO
DEVELOP? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
PART 1: STUDENTS DEVELOPMENT OF EMPATHY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .73
PART 2: CONDITIONS OF EMPATHY DEVELOPMENT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .79
PART 3: LOOKING THROUGH DIFFERENT LENSES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
PART 4: CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 98
A) LIST OF RECOMMENDATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
B) LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE WORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
C) A TEACHER’S REFLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
REFERENCES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
APPENDIX 1: DEFINITIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
APPENDIX 2: MEDICINE WHEEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
APPENDIX 2: STUDY APPROVALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .122

i

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Basis for the opportunities for change………………………………………….9
Figure 2: Strategies for change………………………………………...…………………27
Figure 3: Components of Universal Design……………………………………….……..36
Figure 4: Theoretical underpinnings…………………………….…….………..………..37
Figure 5: Steps in spirals of inquiry specific to this study……………………..………...39
Figure 6: Data collection tools for the study are shown……………………………..…..47
Figure 7: Connections between intercultural understanding, intercultural sensitivity,
intercultural cognitive and affective empathy……………………..…….……72
Figure 8: The empathy arc……………………………………………………………….73

ii

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Connections between strategies …………………………………………….….28
Table 2: Teaching strategies over a period of one semester (September to January)..…..40
Table 3: Student reflection questions for analysis…………………………………….…42
Table 4: Study participants: demographics and participation…………………….…..….45
Table 5: Data collected………………………………………………..…………….……48
Table 6: Codes: Descriptive words for different types of empathy………………………48

iii

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
Education has often been used as a weapon to indoctrinate colonized peoples, here
specifically Indigenous peoples, with the values, philosophies, ideologies and methodologies
of the dominant group. Education, then, is a vital key to sharing the truth of what has
happened throughout our Canadian history to the First Peoples. Education in Canada
therefore, must be tasked with shifting how we think about each other and addressing the
ways in which future generations can make amends for and move forward in a positive way
from our difficult shared history. In this introduction, I situate this study within the Calls to
Action of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (2015b), situate myself as an educator
within this mandate, and explain the purpose of this action research study.
In order to respectfully address First Nations, Métis and Inuit Peoples throughout this study,
I defer to an example from Dr. Jo-ann Archibald (Q’um Q’um Xiiem) (2008) a member of
the Sto:lo Nation. She demonstrates how to address the terms used to include all people of
Aboriginal ancestry. I, therefore, use “terms such as “First Nations,” “Aboriginal,”
“Indigenous” and “Indian” “interchangeably, as appropriate” (Archibald, 2008, p. xi).
Acknowledgement of past mistakes and the Truth & Reconciliation Commission
It has taken much time, but there is finally movement in the acknowledgment of past
mistakes, although it was, and continues to be, a slow approach. In 1991, the Royal
Commission on Aboriginal Peoples was appointed by the Canadian government to oversee
the examination of Aboriginal issues through hearings held nationwide. After several years
of inquiry, a report was released in November of 1996, a portion of which detailed the
atrocities endured by Aboriginal People in residential schools across Canada (Aboriginal
Healing Foundation, 2002). A statement of Reconciliation to all Aboriginal peoples of
Canada for the abuses in residential schools was shared in early 1998 by the Canadian
Government, and along with the announcement came funding to begin to address the
complex intergenerational healing needs of all those affected by residential schools: First
Nations, Inuit and Métis people (Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development,
Ontario, 1997). This acknowledgement evolved into the 2015 report of the Calls to Action

1

from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC). By acknowledging and acting upon
the Calls to Action put forth by the TRC, Canadian society can begin to make amends and
reform important relationships of trust, brotherhood, and sisterhood in working together to
move forward. A first step in addressing the TRC Calls to Action is through the actions of
teachers in educational settings.
My role as a white settler, educator and researcher
Regan (2010) suggests that situating the self within the work is important for the context of
the work. As the primary researcher, I identify as a first-generation white female settler with
Portuguese heritage. My interest in reconciliation through empathy and building allyship
behaviour comes from my personal work in social justice, my husband and children who
have Métis heritage, my counselling and educational training, and my interests in working
with high school students to create an empathetic society interested in the action of social
justice.
At the beginning of this research project, I knew that I needed to develop connections with
Indigenous community members and learn through honest conversations within the
relationships we built together. Only then could I implement and act on what I would learn
by shifting what I did in the classroom. Strategies would include attending to social
injustices and creating the opportunity for empathy development, in order to foster social
change towards a more just society (Sue, 2017). This work is therefore a collaboration that
could not be achieved without the input of Indigenous people.
I believe that it is of the utmost importance for reconciliatory pedagogy to be developed in
all areas of curricula in order to begin to address important Calls to Action in Canada
towards reconciliation. Reconciliatory pedagogy is necessary to acknowledge past mistakes,
to build relationships and to move forward together. There is a need to carve out space for
Indigenous voices within the current context of education, that have been overwritten or
silenced. I believe that for all teachers, including all voices have value and Indigenous
perspectives are essential to our collective understanding of the world. I believe in the central
importance of building relationships with local Indigenous Traditional Knowledge Keepers

2

(TKK) and Elders to begin to create a knowledge base for facilitating transformative learning
in the realm of social justice. For me, I am focusing that transformation on high school
students in the sciences. I know that ongoing action is necessary for authentic reconciliation
in all curricula. In addition, I understand it is deeply important for our children to gain as
much insight as possible into the humanity of all of us to avoid the percolation of resentment
and unrest in our society. I find myself asking the question, “If not now, then when?” (Reves
& Ferguson, 2018, p. 11)
The Assembly of First Nations (2010) reported that the qualifications of non-Indian teachers
and counsellors should be required to include “courses in Indian history and culture” (p 41).
These kinds of courses, can greatly shift a teacher’s philosophical values they take back to
the classroom, helping them have more authentic interactions with Indigenous students and
the Indigenous knowledge content (without appropriation) mandated in the curriculum. I
believe that through an honest personal commitment in learning about Indigenous cultures,
pedagogy, and methodology, teachers are better able to support students’ learning. I
understand the crucial importance of inviting an Elder or TKK to lessons to be culturally
accurate. I believe that, when students see the types of relationships formed between TKKs
/Elders and teachers and are able to experience their different teaching methods, they begin
to understand the nuances of mutual respect and relationship building.
Unpacking personal privilege: self-reflection of identity and values
Non-indigenous people situated in reconciliatory work must contemplate their own “stake in
colonial dominance and reparations” (Cannon, 2012, p. 33) through the disruption of the
us/them dichotomy that continues to sustain the inability of effecting change or recompense
for colonial grievances. McIntosh (2012) suggested that an honest examination of personal
privileges and the power structures that continue to perpetuate these power differentials, is
an important piece of understanding oppression and the challenges different groups face.
Self-awareness is gained through the analysis of these power structures. Asking “How do
you know what you know? What is it that you need to unlearn? What is it that you need to
learn?” (Kovach et al., 2015, p. 42) can help individuals to analyze their power and privilege.
The awareness of types of privileges, and how individuals or groups can experience

3

intersectionality of these privileges helps to build empathy and intercultural sensitivity,
which are key pieces to this exercise. There is always a danger in the complacency of the
dominant group due to a lack of understanding and awareness of how their privileges affect
their daily life. Complacency breeds systemic racism, sustainment of imbalanced power
systems, and continued oppression of marginalized groups resulting in the stagnation of
personal and social evolution towards equity. Through the process and action of the
identification and understanding of privilege differentials, oppression, and power systems,
individuals are able to foster efficacy and begin to fundamentally change how power systems
are perpetuated (McIntosh, 2012).
Just as Ann Bishop (2002) acknowledged both her privileges and oppressions in order to
situate herself within her work, so must I as a means to clarify my approach to the work of
reconciliation and developing empathy in science 10 curriculum. As a white, first generation,
European Canadian female, I must acknowledge how my social location and identity allow
me privileges (being white), and in other situations experience oppression (being a woman).
My formative years fostered the colonial system of defining and identifying Indigeneity
through a colonial lens. This recognition of my position highlights a responsibility to address
and work against oppressive systems to decolonize my classroom and the curriculum in
order to answer the TRC’s Calls to Action. Since I identify mainly from a place of privilege,
I acknowledge that I must try to embody empathy and allyship behaviour towards members
of groups experiencing oppression. Within the context of this study, this means I must
embody allyship behaviour and empathy to those who are engaged in reconciliation through
decolonization and indigenization within educational realms.
I began this research project because I felt that this acknowledgement was simply no longer
enough and did not begin to answer the TRC’s Calls to Action. I realized that critical
reflection was only the first step in my personal journey, and I needed to respond to the TRC
Calls to Action in my teaching. Teacher action is a point articulated by both Freire (1989) in
the praxis of teaching against oppression, and Gorski (2008) in the sociopolitical act of
becoming an intercultural educator. Therefore, I must take action and this study is continued
attempt in answering the 2015 TRC Calls to Action. I fully recognize that this action is only

4

the first in a life long series of actions within my teaching career. I decided to focus this
study on opportunities for students to build empathy within the context of my science 10
classroom as a basis for moving towards reconciliation, and I wondered how I could develop
empathy within my students as a foundation of allyship behaviour.
Developing Empathy as a Foundation of allyship behaviour
Empathy, described as the ability to understand what another person is feeling, has been
identified as one of the key human factors that can better our planet (Hunt, 2008; Nussbaum,
2015). These relationships create the space for social action; the beginning of allyship
behaviour. Call to Action 63 iii of the TRC report (2015) includes “building students
capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy and mutual respect” (TRC, 2015, Call to
Action 63. iii). By incorporating this Call to Action into a classroom, the learning shifts to a
more student-centered approach where relationships become the main focus. Freeman,
McDonald, and Morcom (2018) said “reconciliation is about friendships” (p. 12), and within
these relationships shared values are identified that ease defensiveness and promote trust
(Gonzalez et al., 2015). Growth of empathy and the opportunity to practice empathy-inaction, within the context of relationships with marginalized people, begins to form the
foundation of allyship behaviour.
Washington & Evans (1991) define allies as members of a privileged group who support and
advocate for members of an oppressed group. Becoming or being an ally is not an identity,
but a behaviour, an ongoing action of equity. It is the role of a behind-the-scenes supporter
who understands the nuances of this role, and one that can only be bestowed by marginalized
individuals. At times, this role may require active listening and learning from others’
experiences. At other times it may require the support and amplification of Indigenous
voices. Sometimes, it may require direct intervention when there is social injustice. Yet,
other times, it may require one to step back to consider their own personal privileges and
unintended actions that cloud the lens through which the world is interpreted. The role is a
changing one and there is no single correct way to demonstrate allyship.
Purpose

5

The purpose of this research is to build and implement curriculum that aims to support grade
10 science high school students with building empathy as a foundation of Reconciliation
towards allyship behavior.
Focusing on grade 10 students
Science 10 falls within my specialty area and, due to my school assignment, I focused on the
two grade 10 classes I taught in the semester of the study. The act of teaching in and of itself
creates power differentials between the teacher and the students. Freire (1989) proposed the
use of “dialogic relations” (p. 67) to diminish power differentials, as the act of dialogue
where both students and teachers learn from one another through discussion. This is a
strategy used often in my classroom to discuss topics and for feedback.
The goal of adolescence, the period between childhood and adulthood, generally from age 12
to 17, was to answer these two questions: Who am I? and Where do I fit in? (Erikson, 1959).
Grade 10 students, 14-16 years of age, fall within this developmental stage. Adolescents’
social interactions primarily occur within peer groups at this stage, where they begin to
develop their personal values and future directions, resulting in identity development. During
this stage, adolescents’ description of identity expands to also include personality traits and
attitudes (Erikson, 1959). Adolescents must decide to which degree their racial or cultural
backgrounds will be a part of their identity and they often begin to explore their heritage
during this developmental time (Phinney & Kohatsu, 1997). A further aspect of students’
identity development is how by “engaging [in] intercultural contact (learning about others)
and reflecting on your own cultural heritage (learning about yourself) results in the
complementary prerequisites for intercultural understanding” (Schwarzenthal et al., 2017, p.
389). Grade 10 students, aged 15 and 16 years, are in the midst of this development, perhaps
a critical time to build these skills, and which is yet another reason why they were selected as
the focus of this research.
Empathy has been found to be an important factor linking adolescents’ identity development
and interpersonal relationships, and these good relationships are foundational for adolescent
identity development (Doumen et al., 2012; Klimstra et al., 2013; Meeus et al., 2002; Nawaz,

6

2011; Rassart et al., 2012). Poor group dynamics in collaborative opportunities has long been
an ongoing issue in which students only want to work with their friends, but even this has led
to an imbalance of assignment completion by a select few students who do that work of the
group. These dynamics also undermines the richness that comes from working with diverse
people to learn their diverse perspectives. I wondered how focusing on the development of
relationships in the classroom may shift students perceptions, as it is through these
relationships with one another that students will be able to shift their behaviour and thinking
towards sensitivity, understanding and empathy.
Students at this age are in the midst of identifying how they fit in with their peer groups and
in society (Doumen et al., 2012). In my experience, students tend to fall into two categories
in their personal development: they are ready to begin thinking for themselves and are
developing their own ideas, or they are continuing to perpetuate philosophies that come from
the home. To continue to foster student’s social emotional learning, students at the grade 10
age must be provided opportunities to be critical thinkers; to step outside of themselves to
see from other’s perspectives and viewpoints; to listen and understand and accept each other.
In this study, I hoped to foster empathy within students’ primary social interactions in peer
relationships by introducing opportunities for intercultural understanding and mutual respect
through learning with Secwepemc Knowledge Keepers and on the land, and ultimately build
the foundations for students’ allyship behavior.
Research Question
There is not one unique way to foster empathy, allyship behaviour, or personal
transformation. Instead, it is through a series of opportunities and skill-building that students
can be empowered to make social change a reality; a movement towards authentic
reconciliation. I propose to explore how to teach towards reconciliation in a grade 10 science
cohort by fostering empathy as a foundation to allyship behaviour. Through literature
searches, I identified a gap in the literature with regards to supporting the development of
empathy with this particular age group. It is important to note the following studies for their
contributions to the work of building empathy and the development of allyship: Gordon
(2005) has developed a highly regarded Roots of Empathy program which focuses on

7

children from preschool to grade 9, and MacMath and Hall (2019) provide insight for
teaching reconciliation to grade 3 and 4 students. There is a tradition of research looking at
how the fostering of empathy can contribute to the development of allyship amongst
university undergraduate (Tanchuk et al., 2018), graduate students (Macdonald & Markides,
2018), and in teacher training programs (Aitken & Radford, 2018; MacMath & Hall, 2019;
Madden, 2014; Morcom & Freeman, 2018). I was unable to identify literature on the
development of empathy in high school students, aside from a small study of seven grade 10
students who incorporated critical reflection to build critical consciousness towards
marginalized Indigenous groups (Stock & Grover, 2013), and I found no other literature on
building allyship behaviour in high school students. There were no high school examples of
building empathy within a British Columbian context; No past studies have looked at
fostering this kind of holistic ensoulment (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) of the science 10
curriculum in an interior British Columbian context, which is where my research will take
place. I have identified a significant gap in the literature.
Keys to my research on building empathy in the science classroom include: attending
Indigenous cultural events and participating when appropriate, inviting Elders to the
classroom and on field trips, and the inclusion of TKKs in the guide of the methodology as
well as to help find and build resources that support reconciliation. There is extreme
importance of “[working] with Indigenous people, families and communities rather than
continuing to work in a system that speaks for Indigenous people” (Freeman et al., 2018, p.
10) and to take this position seriously to move authentically towards reconciliation.
With these considerations in mind, this research addresses the overarching question: In what
ways does a curriculum that aims to fosters empathy as a foundation for allyship behaviour
impact the developing empathy of science 10 students? Specifically: Is Empathy developing?
What kinds of empathy are developing? What are the conditions that allow empathy to
develop?

8

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review is divided into two parts. In the first I present and discuss literature
related to components that are the basis for the change needed in response to the TRC Calls
to Action in education, in order to build empathy as a foundation for allyship behaviour. In
the second part I present and discuss literature related to strategies for building empathy in
education as a foundation for allyship behaviour, starting with the fundamental and
overarching principles, the First Peoples’ Principles of learning (The First Nations Education
Steering Committee, 2014). Strategies aligned with the First Peoples’ Principles of learning
include understanding privilege; critical multiculturalism; inclusion and inclusive education;
respecting diversity (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018), and universal design for learning (Katz,
2012a).
Part 1: Basis for the Opportunities for Change

The Canadian
Context

Truth and
Reconciliation
Calls to Action
in Education

First
Peoples
Principles
of
Learning

BC Ministry
of Education
on
redesigned
curriculum

Teacher’s
personal
journey &
Reconciliatory
action

Building
Empathy
and Mutual
Respect

Intercultural
Sensitivity &
Intercultural
Understanding

Opportunities
for change

Allyship
Behaviour

Figure 1. Basis for the Opportunities for Change figure shows the significant past, present
and future components that guide the study’s literature review within the context of this
study.

9

Canadian Context: A Just Society?
Fifty years ago, Pierre Elliot Trudeau shaped the Canadian contemporary narrative through
the incorporation of John Stuart Mill’s (1871) notion of the ‘just society’ (Reindeau, 2000)
into Canadian policy. This vision created a path with a humanitarian focus, on which
Canadians still continue to evolve and work towards. The Canada that we know of today has
been molded by the patriation of our Constitution in 1982 (Canadian Constitution Act,
1982), the entrenchment of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982 (Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms, 1982), the passage of the Multicultural Act in 1988 (Canadian
Multicultural Act, 1988), and most recently in the TRC of Canada in 2015 (Truth and
Reconciliation Commission, 2015). These are powerful examples of how our country has
continued to develop into a more equitable, kind, and welcoming place than it was prior to
the appointment of Pierre E. Trudeau as Prime Minister of Canada in 1968. He and his
government published the White Paper in 1969 (Chretien, 1969). The White paper replaced
the Indian Act (Indian Act, 1876) to eliminate the category of Indian over a five-year period
that would result in the loss of rights and traditional lands (Chretien, 1969). There was
opposition from several groups including the National Indian Brotherhood (now referred to
as the Assembly of First Nations), and its provincial chapters. Rejection of the White paper
also came from Harold Cardinal, a Cree leader of the Indian Association of Alberta (IAA)
who with IAA, together, wrote Citizens Plus, which became known as the Red Paper
(Lagace & Sinclair, 2015). Opposition to the White Paper also came from the Union of
British Columbia Indian Chiefs who penned A Declaration of Indian Rights: The BC Indian
Position Paper, called the Brown Paper (Union of BC Indian Chiefs, 1970). Due to the
criticism and activism response from Indigenous peoples and advocacy groups, the White
Paper was formally withdrawn by the Trudeau government on March 17, 1971 (Lagace &
Sinclair, 2015). What followed was a period of time in which activism against the White
Paper continued. In Calder vs. British Columbia, 1973, the Supreme court decided that
Aboriginal title to land existed before European colonization of North America. In 1975 the
World council of Indigenous Peoples was founded in Port Alberni, BC. This activism
continued to the late 1970’s when talk of a Canadian constitution began to circulate. Bill
Wilson (Hemas Kla-Lee-Lee-Kla), Kwagiulth (Kwakwaka’wakw) hereditary chief) was
influential in creating a successful proposal to enshrine Indigenous rights through the

10

amendment of the Constitution Act, 1982 (Tennant, 2008). The important work of a group of
activists led by George Manuel, (then president of the Union of BC Indian Chiefs)
approximately 1000 strong travelled to Ottawa from Vancouver to publicize their concerns
over the abolishment of Aboriginal rights in the proposed Canadian Constitution (Indigenous
Foundations, 2009). And when the peaceful demonstration did not move the Trudeau
government’s position, delegations moved internationally to spread their message first to the
United Nations in New York and then to Europe (Indigenous Foundations, 2009). Elijah
Harper (Oji-Cree, Red Sucker Lake Reserve) leader of the Red Sucker Lake First Nation in
1978, was elected in 1981 as the first Aboriginal person to sit on the Manitoban legislature,
and then in 1986 joined the Cabinet as minister without portfolio, responsible for Native
Affairs. Later, in 1987, he stood fast in light of the lack of First Nations consultation or
recognition in the constitutional discussions around the Meech Lake accord (Marshall,
2013). Harry Daniels, of Métis heritage and the president of the Native Council of Canada
in 1982, worked tirelessly to have the Métis people recognized in section 35 of the
Constitution Act 1982 (Indigenous Corporate Training inc., 2016). All of this work together
caused the Trudeau government to reconsider, negotiate, and to agree to demands put forth
by Aboriginal organizations. The Canadian government included Section 35 into the
“Canadian Constitution to specifically recognize and affirm Aboriginal and treaty rights”
(Hanson, 2009, para.10), and later to amend Section 37 which obligated both federal and
provincial governments to consult with Aboriginal peoples on any further issues. Many
individuals and groups together laid the foundation to implement the Constitution in 1982,
the entrenchment of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in 1982, and the passage of the
Multicultural Act in 1988. However, there is still much work to be done. Prejudice still exists
in our society and at times it seems to be on the rise. The rise of populism and identity
politics throughout Western societies seems to be shifting public perception towards an
emphasis on differences rather than on our own common humanity. Judging from the tone of
our own political discourse at times, we in Canada are not immune to these influences. As a
public-school teacher in our liberal democracy, I am tasked with preparing our students for a
future role in civil society- to create our own instance of Mill’s just society (1871; Reves &
Ferguson, 2018).

11

Truth and Reconciliation
Most Canadians today are aware of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) of
Canada and of its Calls to Action published in 2015. In order to achieve an understanding of
these Calls to Action, it is helpful to examine some of the historical context that has shaped
them.
There is a long, troubled history and heritage of fraught relationships, consultations, reports,
official and otherwise and largely ignored by the state, between Indigenous and other
peoples in Canada that have occurred going back to first contact. Due to its role in some of
the steps that subsequently resulted in the Truth and Reconciliation Councils Calls to Action
(2015), we will begin with a closer look at the formation of The Royal Commission on
Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) in 1991, an official examination of Canada’s faulty relationship
with Aboriginal peoples. This inquiry was tasked with broadly investigating and making
specific recommendations to “… restore justice to the relationship between Aboriginal and
non-Aboriginal people in Canada and to propose practical solutions to stubborn problems.”
(RCAP, 1996, p.685). In 1996, the commission released their 4000-page report which
concluded that a:
renewed relationship between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people in Canada be
established on the basis of justice and fairness…[and t]o begin the process, the
federal, provincial and territorial governments, on behalf of the people of Canada,
and national Aboriginal organizations, on behalf of the Aboriginal peoples of
Canada, commit themselves to building a renewed relationship based on the
principles of mutual recognition, mutual respect, sharing and mutual responsibility;
these principles to form the ethical basis of relations between Aboriginal and nonAboriginal societies in the future and to be enshrined in a new Royal Proclamation
and its companion legislation (RCAP, 1996, p. 685).
The origins of the TRC are found in this report, in Chapter 10 entitled “Residential Schools”
(RCAP, 1996). A reading of Chapter 10 of the RCAP drives home a sickening understanding
of the core depravity of government policy as a function of Treaty rights towards Aboriginal
people in Canada. From the original vision of the education goals of the residential school

12

program to “civilize” the “savages” (RCAP, 1996, p. 309), to the implementation of this
vision through strategies and policies meant to strip the rights of Indigenous people, to the
financial disregard and neglect of the programs through the time of their implementation, to
the state-sanctioned violence perpetrated on its wards in both physical and sexual natures,
the only reasonable conclusion that can be reached is that Aboriginal people have been
considered as ‘less than’ for most of our country’s history. This fundamental Canadian truth
laid bare provided all the rationale needed for the commission to formulate the
recommendations that would eventually frame the investigation for the TRC (Reves &
Ferguson, 2018).
But why not “start afresh” as the RCAP (1996) puts it? Why not put the past behind us and
move on? There is much history of this kind of discourse occurring in Canadian history in
the late 1970’s through to the 1990’s as these truths emerged. Indeed, the conditions for this
discourse persist today in governmental, social, and educational settings. According to
contemporary international thought, attempting to ignore the past and simply move on does
not work. Instead, we need to look at reconciliatory attempts made by other countries around
the world such as post-war Germany, Ireland, South Africa, Rwanda, Cyprus, Australia,
Israel, and Sri Lanka as examples of the normativity and logic of engaging with the past
rather than simply moving on (Aitken & Ratford, 2018; Czyzewski, 2011; Eisenberg, 2018;
Snyder, 2010). We are proud to consider Canada as a country of social justice,
multiculturalism, humanitarianism, and respect. However, the alternatives to reconciliation
are the tribalism, violence, and endless economic strife of regions such as the Balkans,
central Africa, and the Caucuses, why indeed (Reves & Ferguson, 2018).
The Truth and Reconciliation Council’s Calls to Action in Education
The TRC’s Calls to Action (2015) were based on the call from Indigenous Elders,
communities, and scholars for the need for change to policies governing the many branches
of both Federal and Provincial sectors. With a focus on education, in 2012, the Aboriginal
Advisory Circle defined Indigenizing education as “the transformation of existing academy
by including Indigenous knowledges, voices, critiques, scholars, students and materials” (p.
4) and provides a guideline with which to frame the Indigenization of education. The Calls to

13

Action take this up and further clarify what this needs to look like in educational realms. The
educational Calls to Action are broken into two sections: 1. directed at federal, provincial
and territorial governments in consultations and collaboration with Survivors, Aboriginal
peoples, and educators to provide opportunities and safe learning environments for
Indigenous students where Indigenous history and voice is evident in the kindergarten to
grade 12 curriculum and the funding required to support these in teacher education, to
Aboriginal schools, and establish senior level governmental positions (assistant deputy
minister level or higher) dedicated to Aboriginal educational content (TRC Calls to Action,
62); 2. directed at the Canadian Ministers of Education Council to maintain an annual
commitment to Aboriginal education issues to develop and implement the curriculum
kindergarten to grade 12 (TRC Calls to Action, 63 i), to share best practice and share
information on teaching residential school and Aboriginal history curriculum and learning
resources (TRC Calls to Action, 63 ii), to build “student capacity for intercultural
understanding, empathy and mutual respect” (TRC Calls to Action, 63, iii), and to “identify
teacher training needs related to the above” (TRC Calls to Action, 63 iv).
The TRC Call to Action 63 iii (2015) in its entirety states “We call upon the Council of
Ministers of Education, Canada to maintain an annual commitment to Aboriginal education
issues, including … iii. Building student capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy,
and mutual respect.” This is not only a task to be undertaken at the Ministry level, but is a
touchstone for educators at the grassroots level. These touchstones help educators foster
students who are respectful of their own rights and the rights of others; who are thoughtful in
regards to the interdependence of individuals with each other and the environment; and who
are empathetic and appreciative of multiple perspectives. But it takes time to implement new
policy from a top down approach. TRC Call to Action 63 iii (2015) deeply resonated with
me and I could not wait, so I decided to personally take up Call to Action 63 iii, first in
building my own capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy and mutual respect as
reconciliatory action, so that I could better teach my students the same.
In the consideration of the Call to Action 63 iii (2015) and how one could go about teaching
intercultural understanding, empathy and mutual respect, further investigation into the

14

literature cited of the TRC final report was conducted. In the summary of the final report of
the TRC (2015) three studies are cited that add to the interpretation and understanding of
empathy within the context of this Call to Action. Specifically, two aspects of empathy
emerge, the cognitive as perspective taking, and the affective as emotional connectedness
(Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio, 2007, Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007).
Developing empathy is the education of the heart and mind. Improving empathy helps
students to become critical thinkers who are actively engaged and armed with deep
knowledge and understanding of the past. Students who are compassionate citizens, are able
to make ethical judgements of past ancestral actions in order to make knowledgeable
decisions upon the current responsibilities to right historical injustices (Summary of the
TRC, 2015, p. 239-241). This understanding is required to fully conceptualize the depth of
the educational Calls to Action from the TRC. This understanding, along with the
development of empathy, calls individuals to act upon their learning and understanding,
transforming themselves in the process.
First Peoples Principles of Learning
In 2006 and 2007 the First Nations Education Steering Committee (FNESC) and the BC
Ministry of Education partnered to create the English 12 First Peoples course. One hundred
and eleven members from diverse First Nations communities made up the FNESC, an
independent and non-profit organization that works on behalf of First Nations education.
This group helped ensure that the course would be authentic in First Peoples’ values in both
teaching and learning. The diversity of the Indigenous groups represented in the FNESC
means that there is no single expression of education related principles. In the development
of the British Columbia’s English 12 First Peoples’ course it became evident that there
would need to be a guide with which non-Indigenous teachers could consider the lens
through which a course is taught- thinking about how we teach, and beyond what we teach
(FNESC, 2008). These principles were developed in 2006-2007 through the work of
Indigenous Elders, Scholars and Knowledge-Keepers with the FNESC and the Ministry of
Education of BC. In 2014, however, the FNESC published the First Peoples’ Principles of
learning (FPPOL) more broadly to help guide non-Indigenous BC teachers to teach
Indigenous content within other courses (FNESC, 2014). The FFPOL represent the “strong

15

similarities in the ways of knowing and learning, and commonalities in cultural constructs
and worldviews among Indigenous peoples in British Columbia” (Chrona, 2014, para. 1). As
these principles were published by the FNESC in 2014 more broadly, so closely to the TRC
(2015) Calls to Action, naturally they became the foundation from which to focus more
authentically on First Peoples’ experiences, values, beliefs and lived realities.
The FPPOL are student-centred, creating space for the inclusion of all students, as they are
molded after students’ own needs and students’ personal potentials. Taking a holistic
approach to education, they address the well-being of students, their families, their
communities, their history, their ancestors, and their individuality (FNESC, 2014). Supported
by the notion that learners create their own knowledge within the social constructs that make
up their experiences, they place emphasis on relationships and collaboration (Fosnot, 1996;
Steff & Gale, 1995; Dewey, 1938; Hegel 1807/1949; Kant 1781/1946; Vico 1725/1968). The
FPPOL advocate for learning that is embedded in memory, history and in stories told by
Elders and TKKs (FNESC, 2014). They consider relationships, and interconnectedness of
people with the land, themselves and others, and how people fit into the broader concept of
society (FNESC, 2014). Students are asked to be reflective in this practice in regards to
meaning and connection making for deeper understanding. In order for authentic learning to
stem from reflection (an integral piece of students’ knowledge-making), educators must be
patient and provide dedicated time (FNESC, 2014). The FPPOL provide the opportunity for
student autonomy in regards to motivation and ways to gain knowledge so that student
learning is personalized and focused around the learner’s strengths and talents. Although
public education can not truly recreate Indigenous culture authentically, working with
Indigenous TKKs to honestly include Indigenous voices, knowledge and ways of knowing
into the curriculum can help to create the relationships necessary to seed the development of
empathy through shifts in perceptions and understanding, thus creating the space for change.
Ministry of Education redesigned curriculum
In response to the educational calls from the TRC and Indigenous and non-Indigenous
educational theorists, and from the FNESC, the Ministry of Education of British Columbia
included the infusion of the FPPOL within the 2016-2017 redrafted provincial curriculum

16

(BC Ministry of Education, 2018a). In addition, it incorporates First Peoples’ Indigenous
knowledge specific to the course content and the application of First peoples’ perspectives
and knowledge, their ways of knowing, and local knowledge as sources of information
(British Columbia Ministry of Education, 2018a). The FPPOL are highlighted within the
core competencies. Social awareness and responsibility is the core competency within
personal and social learning that relates specifically to this study. Social awareness and
responsibility “[involve] the awareness, understanding, and appreciation of connections
among people, including between people and the natural environment” (BC Ministry of
Education, 2018b, para. 1) and interacting in these relationships in respectful and caring
ways. The FFPOL’s and core competencies will be embedded concurrently throughout the
course. It must be said that care must be taken by the teacher to incorporate First Peoples’
perspectives and knowledge without appropriation.
Teacher’s personal journey and Reconciliatory Action
When a teacher undergoes their own journey of unpacking their personal privilege, there
must be a shift within their pedagogical approach to teaching. This process can be started
through the consideration of the implications of critical multiculturalism, the implementation
of meaningful inclusive education in the classroom, and the additional of respectful diversity
curricula in response to the TRC Calls to Action. In order for this to take place, two
overarching conditions must be met: teachers must want to be allies and that members of
marginalized groups must want help. If teachers are to truly work towards being allies, the
work must always be “with” members of the marginalized group through the fostering of
relationships, a key component of allyship (Freeman et al., 2018). Attending cultural events
(Powwow), recognizing important days (Day of Sucwentwecw and Orange shirt day- B.C.,
Graduation), making connections with Indigenous workers in schools, and building
relationships with TKKs and Elders are important foundational components to working with
students, families and communities. These relationships provide opportunities for lived
experience and lived reality that make allyship work personal and cause shifts in the mental
and emotional quadrants (Gonzalez et al., 2015; Sue, 2017). Without a fundamental shift in
the teacher’s philosophy and pedagogy, reconciliation through decolonization and
Indigenization will be only surface level, essentially lip service.

17

Bear (2000) shared that the basis of Aboriginal philosophy is that “existence consists of
energy. [Where] all things are animate, imbued with spirit, and [in constant] motion . . . [and
the] interrelationships between all entities are of paramount importance” (p. 78). This was
my personal wake up call. It caused me to consider the manner in which I understand my
students and the situations in which they exist. It caused me to shift my pedagogy to a more
student-centered approach. Bear (2000) goes on to say that “the idea of all things being in
constant motion . . . leads to a holistic and cyclical view of the world. . . [and] one has to
look at the whole to begin to see patterns” (p. 78). The shift to the holistic consideration of
the student then begins to take into account the four dimensions: mental, spiritual, physical
and emotional (Katz with Lamoreaux, 2018). Another aspect of shifting to a holistic
perspective is the consideration of students’ voice in the creation and development of the
classroom to fit their needs. The Canadian Council on learning- Aboriginal Learning
Knowledge Centre (2007) furthers this line of thinking by sharing the key attributes of
Aboriginal learning as holistic, a lifelong process, experiential, rooted in Aboriginal
languages and cultures, spiritually oriented, a communal activity, and an integration of
Aboriginal and Western knowledge. Elder Mike Arnouse (Secwepemc from Adams Lake
band, lives in Kamloops, B.C., personal communication, July 2017) attested to the above
when he said “It is time to get out of our heads, as the intellect is taking over and the
Eurocentric way of categorizing everything is affecting our connectedness with the Earth and
each other” (personal communication, July, 2017). The realignment of our
interconnectedness is an important consideration in education. As an educator, I began the
search for strategies that could encompass all of the pieces necessary for the holistic
development of socially conscientious students who are empathetic in their dealings with
others and their world, and that could help students move in a direction towards allyship
behaviour and reconciliatory action.
Intercultural sensitivity and understanding towards Intercultural Empathy
Three main ideas arise from the literature in attempting to understand the basis that can move
individuals, teachers and students alike, from intercultural sensitivity and understanding
towards intercultural empathy. These are the foundations of intercultural sensitivity and

18

understanding, culturally relevant teaching and interculturally sensitive teaching
environments, and critical consciousness.
Intercultural sensitivity and understanding. As a first step in addressing the TRC Calls to
Action as mandated through the curricular changes within the new BC curriculum, teachers
must build their own intercultural sensitivity and intercultural understanding of Indigenous
people in Canada. Intercultural sensitivity is defined as how an individual makes sense of
cultural differences in values and beliefs of others and the experience of difference based on
these constructions (Paige & Bennett, 2015). Intercultural understanding is defined by the
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA) (2019) as:
recognising culture and developing respect, interacting and empathising with others, and
reflecting on intercultural experiences and taking responsibility. Intercultural sensitivity and
intercultural understanding must first be fostered within the teacher for there to be
transference to students through shifts in the teaching styles and delivery of course material.
Development of teacher’s intercultural sensitivity and intercultural understanding require an
investment in their own learning journey, the building of relationships, and a shift in
pedagogy to a culturally relevant method.
Culturally relevant teaching and culturally sensitive teaching environments. In her work
focusing on issues facing African American students, Ladson-Billings (1995) suggests that
three criteria must be met to be considered culturally relevant teaching: an ability to develop
students academically, a willingness to nurture and support cultural competence, and the
development of a sociopolitical or critical consciousness. To better understand LadsonBillings (1995) work, her criteria definitions must be further clarified. Cultural competence
is defined as “a set of skills and developmental experiences constituting an ongoing
awareness of important differences among individuals from communities with different
backgrounds related to biological, environmental, historical, political, psychological,
religious, and other social aspects of heritage.” (Piotrowski & Stark, 2019, para 1). LadsonBillings’ (1995) three pillars that foster interculturally sensitive teaching environments by
culturally relevant teachers (CRT’s) are the conceptions of self and others, the manner in
which social relations are structured, and the conceptions of knowledge. CRT’s had the

19

following understanding of self and others: the belief that all students are capable of
academic success, see their pedagogy as flexible and unpredictable (responsive to the
situation), see themselves as members of a community, and see teaching as a means to give
back to this community. CRT’s consciously create social environments where they maintain
fluid student-teacher relationships, demonstrate a connectedness with all students, developed
a community of learners and encouraged students to work collaboratively and be responsible
for one another. CRT’s also think about knowledge as being malleable- it is shared, recycled
and constructed, and must be viewed critically. CRT’s are passionate about knowledge and
learning and must scaffold to facilitate learning using multifaceted to incorporate multiple
forms of excellence (Ladson-Billings, 1995). The interculturally sensitive class environment
should foster a community of learners who are respectful of each others’ values and beliefs
and recognize both the differences and similarities between themselves and their peers.
Teachers must be open to the new and continuous learning that comes with engaging in all
aspects of culturally relevant teaching and in the creation of culturally sensitive teaching
environments (Ladson-Billings, 1995).
Critical consciousness. Critical consciousness is defined by Freire (1973, 2000), is an
“individual’s awareness of oppressive systemic forces” and the “sense of efficacy and
engagement in action against oppression” (Heberle et al., 2020, p. 1). The development of
critical consciousness can help individuals in the identification of oppressive systems.
Critical consciousness is made up of three parts: critical reflection, critical motivation, and
critical action meaning that to fully conceptualize the movement to empathy, and then to
allyship behaviour, this idea must be engaged with in all three sections (Watts et al., 2011).
Critical reflection can aid in the identification of oppressive systems that can help individuals
build their intercultural sensitivity through the experience of difference based on social
constructions and the reflection of intercultural experiences (Paige & Bennett, 2015;
ACARA, 2019). Critical motivation and critical action go hand in hand as motivation drives
the action, together these are important pieces of the development of intercultural
understanding through empathizing with others and taking responsibility (ACARA, 2019).
Foundational to this above process is empathizing with others to understand their
perspectives and see how the system enacts oppression. Through the development of

20

empathy, observations can be made of how systemic forces continue to perpetuate
oppression and start to build motivation for action.
Towards empathy. The studies of Bennett (1993) and Bennett & Castiglioni (2004)
note that foundational to the development of intercultural sensitivity is the skill of empathy
and empathy development. Recall that Call to Action 63 iii of the TRC report (2015) states
that “building students capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy and mutual respect”
is a way of working towards reconciliation in schools (TRC, 2015, Call to Action 63.iii). In
answering this call, the intricacies of building intercultural empathy must be investigated. In
looking for ways to go about expanding empathy in students towards intercultural empathy
there is a direct attempt in this study to include Indigenous voice, perspectives and
opportunities to learn about Secwepemc culture and teachings, without appropriation. In
their work “From Intercultural Awareness to Intercultural Empathy” Zhu (2011) defined
intercultural empathy as “the ability to place [the self] into the cultural background of the
target [group]” and the “[ability] to effectively communicate [an] understanding of that
world” (p. 116).
Empathy is important for putting ourselves in other peoples’ shoes, but as Harrison (2017)
states, non-Indigenous teachers and students can never truly know what it means to be and
feel Indigenous. For this reason, non-Indigenous teachers and students need ways to
understand the experiences of others without integrating or re-writing over these stories with
their own experiences. It is important to prevent judging of Indigenous stories and ways of
knowing that people from outside the culture do not understand (Harrison, 2017). It has been
suggested that both students and teachers learn to “listen for other ways of knowing, apart
from explanatory and propositional knowledge” (Harrison, 2017, p 278), which is the more
common forms of learning in Western schools.
In Hanson’s (2019) study of teachers incorporating Indigenous literature in Arts education, a
participant made the point that:
You have to go through it through empathy… Empathy allows you to understand
how it’s related to you- whether it’s because we’re all human, whether it’s because

21

we live in this place called Canada… whatever connection we have. (quote from a
teacher, Katherena, in Hanson, 2019).
Concerns have been raised in regard to negative behaviour that can occur from the use of
empathy (Breithaupt, 2018). Bloom (2016) shares how a short-term focus on someone who
draws attention to themselves can cause an empathizer to miss the big picture and
opportunities to find long term solutions having the greatest benefit for the most people. In a
science 10 context this means that I will need to be extra vigilant in how students are
interaction with one another. As a cause of a possible hyper focus, Bloom (2016) explains
how empathy can be manipulated: promoting making judgements and side taking through
moral evaluations (Todorovetal, 2009), causing quick interventions that can calm or decide
conflicts (Kurzban et al., 2007), as rewarding for the empathizer (Breithaupt, 2018), as
empathetic vampirism (Cavell, 2004), and as empathetic cruelty (Young, 2016). Even though
there are issues to empathy as a construct, it is real, and people can feel they understand and
connect with one another. This connection and understanding can cause shifts in behaviour
towards allyship behaviour. These above works (studies, as well as, theoretical and
philosophical arguments) further highlight that empathy cannot be simply an emotional
response to a situation, but can be a starting point as “an emotion for working across
differences,” (Todd, 2003, p.43). Empathy then needs to be part of a tool set curated for
building relationships.
Building empathy
The foundation of allyship behaviour is seen to be the development of empathy in the
cognitive and affective realms. However, as my research progressed a broader definition of
these definitions of empathy began to evolve.
Evolution of the definition of empathy for the context of the study. To begin the
consideration of the data collected, I began with the definitions from the Vossen et al. (2015)
study on adolescent empathy. However, during the study, it became evident that these
definitions of cognitive empathy and affective empathy would need to be broadened to the

22

specific context as the student responses are dynamic and I needed to also account for
empathy with intercultural nuances.
Cognitive empathy from Vossen et al. (2015) study is defined as “the
comprehension/understanding of another person’s emotion” (Hogan, 1969), and from
multiple sources this definition was created: the ability to take another’s perspective and
understand another’s emotions (Gordon, 2005; Hogan, 1969; Immordino-Yang & Domasio,
2007; Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007). Considering cognitive empathy in this context, the
term cognitive implies that there is a mental action in the acquisition of knowledge about
others, understanding others and in perspective taking through students’ thoughts,
experiences and, perhaps, their senses. Building from these definitions, to include different
nuances and to account for the context and the developmental stages of adolescents in the
study, cognitive empathy was defined as: the mental action of connecting with others in
listening, thinking about, and understanding others’ perspectives. The nuances in
intercultural cognitive empathy must also be accounted for within the wider definition of
cognitive empathy. Intercultural cognitive empathy is defined as understanding, listening,
and perspective taking from the point of view of other cultures.
Similarly, affective empathy definitions also needed broadening for the specific context of
this study. From the Vossen et al. (2015) study, affective empathy is defined as “the
experience of another person’s emotion” (Mehabrian & Epstein, 1972). From multiple
sources affective empathy is defined as: emotional connectedness in the experiencing of
another person’s emotional state (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio, 2007,
Mehabrian & Epstein, 1972; Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007). Another consideration of
affective empathy comes from studies conducted with adolescent participants on conflict
resolution and its dependence on affective empathy development. de Wied et al. (2007)
shared that adolescent’s affective empathy is “positively linked to problem solving” (p. 53).
Building from these definitions to include different nuances and to account for the context
and the developmental stages of adolescents in the study, I defined affective empathy as:
emotional connectedness with others, feeling with others, the internalization of emotional
connections felt with others, and a better ability to problem solve within relationships.

23

Another aspect of intercultural affective empathy used here, comes from research on allyship
in prejudice reduction (Gonzalez et al., 2015). Gonzalez et al. (2015) suggests that evidence
for empathy can be seen when there is alignment of core values between individuals that
possibly reduces conflict and prejudice. Then, to account for the intercultural nuances of
affective empathy, intercultural affective empathy is defined as emotional connectedness
with the traditions, values, beliefs and people’s experiences of other cultures and alignment
of core values.
An important point to touch upon is the differentiation of affective empathy from sympathy.
While both are emotional reactions to the perceived emotions of others, in the case of
affective empathy there is emotional congruence, while with sympathy, the experience of
emotions are ones of concerns and sorrow (Vossen et al., 2015). This study was not focused
on sympathy, and so data is not included.
From empathy to allyship behaviour. Empathy can help us take action through prosocial
activism, in the words of Hoffman (1989) prosocial activism is “sustained action in the
service of improving another person’s or group’s life condition either by working with them
or by trying to change society on their behalf” (p.65). Empathy education must promote the
growth of the skills that enable critical analysis and the critical reflection needed to learn and
act appropriately for reconciliation and social justice, as called for by the 2015 TRC holistic
perspective of empathy.
Allyship behaviour. The commonly accepted definition of an ally is a person whose
personal identity classifies them as members of a majority or dominant socially constructed
group who actively supports and advocates for members of a minority group (Washington &
Evans, 1991). The development of social justice allies has been extensively researched in the
past thirty years (Broido, 2000; Duhigg et al., 2000; Gonzalez et al., 2015; Tatum, 1994;
Washington & Evans, 1991). Allyship then, can be considered to be the practice of being an
ally.
My feelings about what it is to be an ally come from the work of Morcom and Freeman’s
(2018) paper “Niinwi-Kiinwa-Kiinwi: Building Non-Indigenous Allies in Education through

24

Indigenous pedagogy”. Morcom is of Anishinaabe heritage and Freeman has spent much of
her professional life working within an Anishinaabe context. Freeman is an invited ally of
the Anishinaabe people. An ally is invited by the nation with whom they are working. An
ally is specific to a particular Nation and particular First Nations philosophies and heritage.
Allies are committed to reconciliatory action informed by the particular Indigenous
philosophy of the people with whom they work. Allies actively support social justice issues
and offer support through the establishment of meaningful relationships with the Indigenous
peoples and communities where they live and work. Allies are accountable to the
communities with whom they live and work. Allyship is a journey, a continuous process of
self-reflexivity, learning, and acting in a de-colonizing manner. The right of a person to be
identified as an ally comes from the particular invitation. Therefore, being identified as an
ally is limited to the specific context of that invitation. Allyship is an ongoing action and is
not universal. It will change community to community, person to person, and classroom to
classroom. Only Indigenous persons can claim allies within the context of reconciliation.
“Indigenous Peoples are the only ones that can deem a non-Indigenous person an ally”
(Smith et al., 2016, p.6).
In a personal communication from Shelly Johnson (Keeseekoose First Nation, Kamloops, B.
C.,), she restated that “no one gets to self claim allyship. That identifier is for others to
bestow on someone. It is ongoing in that one day they may see one as being an ally and the
next day as not. It’s not a one-time identifier that covers the rest of your life” (personal
communication, August 2019). This study is focused on the Secwepemc philosophies and
heritage because we live and work on the unceded territory of the Secwepemc people. I hope
to work with my students and help to be an ally builder with Secwepemc people. I hope for a
future where my students can work alongside me in reconciliatory actions.
In working together towards reconciliation, these definitions must be considered within this
work, and one the researcher must be continually reflective and cognizant of. Another
revelation is that a teacher can not create allies, but can, perhaps, develop allyship behaviour
within the cohort of students with which they work by focusing on providing opportunities
for students to build empathy as one of the components of allyship behaviour.

25

A number of studies have suggested that fostering allyship behaviour in our students will
enable us to facilitate a change in attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours towards minority groups.
For example, Broido (2000) reported that allyship behaviour seems to promote the selfreflection of one’s own identity and core values that lead to a greater understanding and
desirability for fairness and equity for others. The further alignment of core values between
groups promote a focus on the positives between groups which can reduce conflict and
prejudice (Gonzalez et al., 2015) and according to Munin and Speight (2010), allies report
higher levels of empathy and compassion for others who are not like them. Allyship
behaviour must be learned through self-reflection and transformation. Transformational
learning, described as the forming and reforming of meaning that requires the acquisition of
new information, upsetting prior knowledge and triggering a change in perceptions and ideas
(Mezirow, 1997). Transformation occurs when learning touches a deep part of your being.
Relationships are the key to building allies and allyship behaviour. This component
underpins critical reflection, building allyship behaviour, and ultimately in a fundamental
shift of being that will result in authentic and lasting reconciliation. The strategies
implemented in the science classroom may simply provide opportunities for the planting of
the seeds for personal transformation and allyship behaviour.

26

Part 2: Strategies for Change: Towards building empathy as a fundamental component
of allyship behaviour

First Peoples’ Principles of Learning
Unpacking
personal
privilege
UPP

Universal Design
for Learning

Critical
Multiculturalism

Model

CM

UDL

Empathy

Respecting
Diversity
RD

Inclusion and
Inclusive
Education
IE

Figure 2. Strategies for change: towards building empathy as a fundamental component to
allyship behaviour. Highlighted are the five strategies implemented in the course that put the
First Peoples’ Principles of Learning into action. All five strategies help to develop empathy.

The strategies for change discussed in this section (figure 2) of the literature review are the
classroom strategies that the teacher can use to implement the First Peoples’ Principles of
Learning. These strategies are, unpacking person privilege (UPP), critical multiculturalism
(CM), inclusion and inclusive education (IE), respecting diversity (RD) (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018), universal design for learning (UDL) (Katz, 2012a).

27

First Peoples’ Principles of Learning in action
The First Peoples’ Principles of learning are the overarching principles that guide educators
in our response to the Calls to Action in education. They are grounded in the theories of the
social construction of knowledge. They show us that when we empower the students, they
can perpetuate a micro-society within the classroom that fosters inclusion, respect, empathy
and relational understanding of one another. The FPPOL suggests that a student centered,
experiential approach to the curriculum that fosters the building of a classroom community,
where peer learning is a main method of meaning making, can result in the most meaningful
learning.
Fostering the capacity for empathy, mutual respect, intercultural understanding and an
appreciation of place, which are elements of social justice, may help to develop allyship
behaviour in our grade 10 science students. From the science 10 curricular competencies, the
following relate directly to social justice and reconciliation: 1) in processing and analyzing
data and information that there be application of First Peoples’ perspectives and knowledge,
other ways of knowing, and local knowledge as informational resources, and 2) in
communication, that students be able to express and reflect on a variety of experiences,
perspectives, and worldviews through place (BC Ministry of Education, 2018).
Below Table 1 describes how the FPPOL’s relate to the strategies to be discussed:
Table 1.
Connections between strategies. Table 1 shows the connections between FPPOL, First
Peoples’ Principles of Learning; and each of the five strategies used to in create the
curriculum that was implemented in this study. These five strategies are: UPP, Unpacking
personal privilege; CM Critical Multiculturalism; IE, Inclusion and inclusive education; RD,
Respecting Diversity (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018); UDL, Universal Design for Learning
(Katz, 2012a). They are described below.
FPPOL

UPP

CM

IE

RD (Katz

UDL

with

(Katz,

Lamoureux, 2012a)
2018)

Model

28

Learning ultimately supports the
ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

wellbeing of the self, the family, the
community, the land, the spirits, and the
ancestors
Learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective
(focused on connectedness, on reciprocal
relationships, and a sense of place)
Learning involves recognizing the
consequences of one’s actions
Learning involves generational roles and
responsibilities

ü

Learning involves patience and time
ü

ü

ü

ü

Learning recognizes the role of
Indigenous knowledge

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Learning is embedded in memory, history
and story.
Learning requires exploration of one’s
identity
Learning involves recognizing that some
knowledge is sacred and only shared with

ü

ü

permissions and/or in certain situations

By implementing these strategies, it is my hope that teachers will support students in
building intercultural sensitivity, intercultural understanding, and empathy and mutual
respect which are the foundations for responding to the TRC Calls to Action and building
allyship behaviour, as discussed in part one of this literature review.

29

Unpacking personal privilege (UPP)- the teacher’s role
The teacher must be cognizant of their role in perpetuating or breaking down of privileges
that exist in their classroom and in their curriculum and making these known to students.
Hyslop (2016) stated that one purpose of implementing Indigenous content in school systems
is for the dominant group to unpack their assumptions and to begin analyzing how power and
privilege affect education. This must be done in an authentic way, with Indigenous education
partners. Gonzalez, Riggle, and Rotosky (2015), Sue (2017), Stock (2013), Pete (2016), and
Freeman, McDonald, and Morcom (2018) all call for individuals to undergo a process of
recognition of self and privileges in the work of reconciliation to critically reflect upon the
impacts of these on personal social location. Sue’s (2017) article supports this notion of
critical reflection in the characteristics embodied by a white ally:
(a) nuanced understanding of institutional racism and white privilege, (b) continual
self-reflection of one’s own racism, and (c) commitment to using privilege to
promote equity, (d) engagement and participation in actions that interrupt and
challenge racism, (e) active participation in coalition building with [marginalized
individuals], (f) overcoming societal forces that attempt to silence white allies (p.
709).
These characteristics address the behaviours and cultural competency required for
individuals to work towards allyship behaviour or becoming an ally. Empathy-in-action,
within the context of relationships with marginalized people, begins to set a foundation of
allyship behaviour. Freeman et al. (2018) highlight that allyship behaviour is best learned
through opportunities to build relationships, as these create the space for social action and
are the bridge between ally behaviour and transformation towards reconciliation. Teachers
are tasked with undergoing this process themselves to approach educational reconciliation in
the ways necessary for students to explore their own personal heritage, as a means of
exploring their personal identity and biases.

30

Critical Multiculturalism (CM)
St. Denis (2011) points out that when Indigenous content and perspectives are subsumed into
the broad umbrella of multiculturalism, these voices are quietened and lost within yet
another colonial framework. Multiculturalism is used to trivialize Indigenous issues and
“collapse Aboriginal rights into ethnic and minority issues” (St. Denis, 2011, p. 315).
Implicated in education, is that although teachers are obligated to engage with
multiculturalism, there are no specific mandated manifestations of multiculturalism within
the classroom. St. Denis (2011) suggests that when Canadian multiculturalism and diversity
are discussed in schools, that Indigenous content and perspectives must be honored first and
separately. This is a complicating factor in reference to Trudeau Sr’s ‘Just Society’ in its
attempt to lump all cultures together within the multicultural act of 1988. St. Denis calls
Canadian teachers to find a way to specifically honor Indigenous knowledge outside of the
multicultural lens.
Another way forward is the consideration of May & Sleeter’s (2010) proposal of critical
multiculturalism as a very important perspective within the classroom. Specifically, that
critical multiculturalism has a much more lasting effect for students and teachers when
learning is used “to identify the material, political, and ideological underpinnings of
inequality” (May & Sleeter, 2010, p. 10) in all areas of education. Although this is a tall
order, teaching students to be critical thinkers raises their abilities to process information at
higher levels and to question the structures of their world for transformative action. This
echoes the important work began by Freire (1970) where he discusses education as the
starting place for critical pedagogy and critical consciousness. Freire (1970) asserts that
through social critique and action, oppression can be alleviated. It can again be reiterated that
education is a place that can foster a first step towards reconciliation for students.
Inclusion and inclusive education (IE)

31

A globally recognized goal of educational systems has been inclusion and inclusive
education (Curcic, 2009; Katz, 2012b). According to Katz1 (2013) there are two types of
inclusion: academic inclusion and social inclusion. Academic inclusion addresses the need
for students to have the opportunity to interact within the academic context of a regular
classroom. Social inclusion as it relates to education looks like a learning community that
fosters a sense of belonging and individual acceptance. The Royal Commission of
Aboriginal Peoples (1996b) stated that the child is born with integrity and worth, and as
such, demands acknowledgement and respect. Those children that do not receive respect
“cannot become what is meant to be” (p. 404), showing the relationship between a positive
sense of self and a safe place to learn. Markus and Kitayama (1991) describe the formation
of positive self worth through interdependent relationships. When acknowledgement of each
child’s unique gifts is made, then students will become intrinsically motivated to learn. This
is of particular interest to Katz (2013) who explored how student development in social and
emotional realms is affected by social inclusion, and how these directly relate to student’s
resiliency, citizenship and mental health, as well as, positively influencing academic
motivation and achievement. Utilizing this question as her inquiry, Katz with Lamoureux
(2018) developed a respecting diversity (RD) lesson set and a concurrent universal design for
education model.
Respecting Diversity (RD) and Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018; Katz method, 2012a).
The Katz with Lamoureaux (2018) work in “Ensouling our schools” brings together
Indigenous knowledge and universal design for learning together in a manner that celebrates
and weaves these philosophies together. Pidgeon (2008) called for an educational “wholistic
model that incorporates the inter-connectedness of the physical, emotional, spiritual, and
intellectual realms” (p. 354). The Katz with Lameroux2 method proposed in Ensouling our
Jennifer Katz Ph. D. is an Associate Professor in the Faculty of Education at the University
of British Columbia. She previously held an associate professor position at the University of
Manitoba in Inclusive Education. Dr. Katz works extensively with First Nation Elders and
communities in Manitoba, Alberta and Quebec. Katz works extensively with Lamoureux of
Anishnabeg heritage (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018). See footnote 2.
2
Kevin Lamoureaux, Anishnabeg, currently serves as the Education Lead for the National
Centre for Truth and Reconciliation while on leave from the position of Associate VicePresident, Indigenous Affairs at the University of Winnipeg. Lamoureaux has served as a
1

32

schools, 2018, reveals the connections between UDL (Katz, 2012a) and Indigenous
teachings. One Elder (unidentified) said about the Katz three block method “[Jennifer Katz
has] formalized the teachings of our Elders… [to the audience] I want you to listen and hear
the whispers of your grandmothers speaking to you,” (Katz, 2012, p. 197). In the three-block
system, Katz created a system intended to meet the need of diverse learners, but this system
also deeply connects with Indigenous culture and beliefs. The more engaged and connected
students become in their learning, through their lives and world events, the more they begin
to react in emotional and passionate ways towards what they are learning.
This study draws upon the theoretical foundation of Universal Design for Learning
particularly the work of Katz with Lamoureux (2018). From Katz (2012a), there are three
blocks or bases to fostering intercultural sensitivity, intercultural understanding, empathy
and mutual respect. The first block, social and emotional learning, is addressed by building
caring communities of learners through a RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) program. The
second block, inclusive instructional practice, considers the physical and instructional
environments and teacher planning incorporating evidence-based practice on Understanding
by Design (Brown, 2004; Wiggins & McTighe, 2005), Differentiated Instruction (Beecher &
Sweeny, 2008; Tomlinson & Imbeau, 2010), Curriculum Integration (Drake & Burns, 2004),
Inquiry (Brusca-Vega, & Yasutake, 2011), and Assessment for Learning (William et al.,
2004). The third block, an increase in student engagement and achievement and the
development of higher order and deeper thinking has been shown to come from student
autonomy (Hafen et al., 2012; You & Sharkey, 2009). This last block matches with
motivation theory from Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, where there is a pattern of basic
human needs: physiological, safety; psychological needs: social needs, esteem; and self
fulfillment needs: self-actualization. The most basic foundation is of physiological needs that
require having access to air, food, drink and shelter. Then, safety needs mean the protection
from elements, security, law, order, stability. Then, love and belonging which includes
faculty member at the University of Winnipeg and the University of Manitoba, and is a well
known national public speaker. He has served as a co-chair for the Manitoba Provincial Task
Force of Educational Outcomes for Children in Care, scholar-in residence for several school
divisions, and education consultant throughout Manitoba and across Canada. (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018).
33

friendship, trust and acceptance, and being part of a group. Then, self-esteem is thought of as
mastery, independence, responsibility and fulfillment of cognitive and aesthetic needs. And
lastly, self-actualization is the ability to realize personal potential, and seek personal growth
and higher-level experiences. These stages all build upon one another in a particular fashion
to enable an individual to move on to the next level (Maslow, 1943). A classroom
environment where all student’s needs can be met provides the place where students will be
able to empathize more easily with others. The RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set
is set up so that basic needs are satisfied first in creating a safe environment in the class,
second psychological needs of belonging are created through the opportunities to begin to
build relationships and through the act of celebrating individual’s unique contributions
through the multiple intelligences. Lastly, the self-fulfillment stage is reached through the
opportunities provided through the implementation of the UDL (Katz, 2012a) model for the
remainder of the year, as students are able to engage with class members in varying projects
and discussions, and create final products that celebrate all group members abilities.
These strategies hope to answer this call to work within the curricular and core constraints in
an ever-evolving pedagogy, where elements from UDL (Katz, 2012a) have been
incorporated. These strategies will address challenges students face both academically and
socially with in the classroom. The RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set highlights
the uniqueness of each student in the classroom and celebrates their particular set of
strengths. Students complete a multiple intelligence survey from Katz with Lamoureux
(2018) to determine areas of strength and areas to work on. Within the RD (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018) program students are asked to compare working with a group made up of
only students who share their particular strength with a group made up of a diverse strength
set (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018). Shifting the classroom to allow for different ways of
demonstrating learning, both individually and in group work, offered all students the
opportunity to showcase their strengths, while continuing to work on other areas. To be truly
moving towards reconciliation, UDL (Katz, 2012a) was chosen as it contains the
foundational elements for building empathy, self-reflection, RD (Katz with Lamoureux,
2018) lessons, and increasing opportunities for relationships within the classroom. Katz and

34

St. Denise (1991) share that both “the spirit and the heart are essential ways of knowing”
(p.31) in Indigenous ways of being in the world.
Teachers are tasked with the most important responsibility of teaching future generations.
This means that education’s best practice is built on the needs of society at the time of the
curriculum changes. The new BC curriculum, however, attempts to shift the focus from the
content to the students, which aligns with the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set
and UDL (Katz, 2012a) models. These strategies can help foster socially conscientious
students, who are concerned about each other and the world around them. As a researcher,
there was much to chose from in terms of what I could implement in my classroom.
Ultimately, the three strategies that overlap and that I could chose to explore in science 10
are 1) RD lesson set, 2) Universal Design for Learning and 3) Application of the First
Peoples’ Principles of Learning.
Universal Design for Learning
Universal design comes from the architectural world of accessibility where the goal of the
design is to create “environments to be usable by all people, to the greatest extent possible,
without the need for adaptation or specialized design” (Quote from Ron Mace in Connell at
al., 1997, para 1). Taken into an educational context, UDL (Katz, 2012a) is the ability for all
students to find success in the classroom through the access of the material at their level
based on student’s personal ability, their full participation and engagement in their own
learning, and personal progress in the curriculum. This method, which employs a cognitive
psychology basis, is the understanding that learning comes from cognitive and
developmental psychology where “the key principle . . . is that people learn best by actively
constructing their own understanding” (Mixon, 2009, p. 23). This is well-suited to the needs
of both Indigenous and non-Indigenous students, as they build knowledge within a preexisting framework of experience. This idea was further supported by Roxane Letterlough
(St’at’imc Nation, Tsalalh Band, Kamloops, B.C.), when she shared that in educational
arenas “what is good for all, is not necessarily good for First Nations people, but what is
good for First Nations people, is good for all” (personal communication, March 2017).

35

The UDL (Katz, 2012a) model requires reflective teaching practices, in which the tasks
created consider the students in the class. This method employs the student’s engagement
through their ability to manage learning activities and to help each other in reaching personal
goals. Relevant, meaningful learning promotes students to take responsibility for their own
learning and creates a safe learning environment where they are self-motivated to reach their
potential through problem solving relevant issues affecting the world around them (Mixon,
2009).
The UDL (Katz, 2012a) model is designed to build empathy, mutual respect, intercultural
understanding, intercultural sensitivity and be inclusive of all learners. Therefore, using UDL
(Katz, 2012a) as a strategy can build these skills in our students. Katz with Lamoureux
(2018) book “Ensouling our schools” weaves together UDL (Katz, 2012a) and Indigenous
approaches, such as the First Peoples’ Principles of Learning, guided by the medicine wheel
(health in the realms of mental, emotional, spiritual and physical), while developing higher
order thinking and critical analysis skills.
It is hoped that through the implementation of the strategies discussed here in part two of the
literature review, the action components of the First Peoples’ Principles of Learning, will
help students to foster empathy and mutual respect through building intercultural sensitivity
and intercultural understanding. These are the components for allyship behavior, in response
to the Calls to Action of the TRC.

36

This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY-SANC

Spiritual
Emotional

Physical

Intercultural
understanding
FPPOL
Mental

Respecting
Diversity

Components of
Universal Design for
Learning
Critical
Analysis

Multiple
intelligences
s

First Peoples
Principles of Learning

Intercultural
sensitivity

Figure 3. Components of Universal design for learning model by Katz with Lamoureaux
(2018) in “ensouling our schools.”

37

Theoretical Underpinnings

First Peoples
Principles of
Learning

Intercultural
understanding

Allyship
Empathy
Mutual
respect

Behaviour

Intercultural
sensitivity

Figure 4. This study aims to develop the foundations of allyship behaviour through building
empathy. Empathy as an inclusive term includes literature that draws upon: intercultural
understanding, First Peoples’ Principles of Learning, mutual respect, and intercultural
sensitivity can contribute to empathy. These theories are related and are necessary for
building allyship behaviour.

This study is founded on the understanding that empathy plays a central role in the
development of adolescents’ social behavior (Vosen et al., 2015), in this case allyship
behavior (Denis & Bailey, 2016). Teachers have a responsibility to help build students’
empathy, in conjunction with understanding and respect for Indigenous peoples, as a step
towards the building of allyship behavior. In the words of a white settler teacher in Denis &
Bailey’s (2016) study “our main responsibility is to come out of the ignorance and give
future generations a better education that builds empathy, understanding, and respect” (p.
149). Ghosh and Abdi (2013) state that “knowledge is socially constructed,” (p. 75) meaning
that it is through engaging with community members and each other that students can come
to know and build empathy understanding and respect, the foundations of allyship behaviour.
38

Empathy is not isolated; it develops in conjunction with growing understanding. Teachers
need to create curriculum that is interculturally sensitive and builds intercultural
understanding and mutual respect so that students can develop empathy as the foundation for
allyship behaviour. First Peoples’ Principles provide the overarching guidelines for
curriculum development that is interculturally sensitive and builds intercultural
understanding (FNESC, 2014). By following these guidelines and developing such
curriculum, empathy can develop and build the foundation for allyship behaviour.

39

CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY
Study Design
This study is a transformative action research design in which the teacher is also the
researcher. The study is transformative in that it aims to bring about positive change. The
qualitative method can provide more in-depth knowledge of the ways that students’ empathy
developed. The qualitative nature of the study will allow for deeper investigation and will
explore students’ and teachers’ impressions.
To help in thinking about this research the PR used the spirals of inquiry handbook (Kaser &
Halbert, 2017). Process below, beginning at the

Scanning at the school level:
May 2018 identified 2 main
theses within the student
responses when compared to
the OECD Principles of Learning:

sign.

Focusing
Learners at the centre:
-All students need to feel included and that they belong
Horizontal connections:
-how are students connecting with one another, their school
and their community?
Developing a hunch: My
hunch is that developing
empathy is the key for
building intercultural
understanding, intercultural
sensitivity, and mutual
respect, allyship behaviour
and addressing the calls to
action.

- Learners at the centre
-horizontal connections

Checking: Data analysis
completed after the end
of the course

Taking Action: Implement RD
and UDL (Katz, 2012a), FPPOL,
CM, IS concurrently. Gather
Data.

Learning: Learn new strategies that will
address hunch. Implement RD (Katz
with Lamoureux, 2018) and UDL ( Katz,
2012a), and FPPOL in science 10 to
foster intercultural understanding,
intercultural sensitivity, empathy and
mutual respect.

Figure 5: Steps in spirals of inquiry specific to this study. Graphic credit: (Halberg & Kaser,
2013).

40

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

41

Spirals of inquiry is an action research model that allows for the continual refining of the
needs of our students. This strategy also allows for reflective professional practice that
Schon (1983) proposed as a means of continually developing teaching practices. Schon
(1983) proposed two levels of reflection: reflection-in-action and reflections-on-action.
Reflection-in-action is characterized by “continual interpretation, investigation and reflective
conversations with oneself about the problem while employing the information gained from
past experiences to inform and guide new actions,” (Sellars, 2013, p 5) in other words,
problem solving in the moment with relevant experience to guide the teacher’s decisions.
While reflection-on-action is reflection after the problem, situation or event, to analyze the
decisions made and their appropriateness. This reflection is an ongoing process of refining
my teaching practice and in this context, helped to shape the study.
This is an action research study as it is an interactive design where the researcher introduces
the changes and interventions (actions) to observe and record how her actions influences the
outcomes (Susman & Evered, 1978). The study aims to find out how students’ empathy
develops through curriculum that engages students in mutual respect, intercultural sensitivity
and intercultural understanding, to support them towards allyship behaviour and ultimately
to help address the Calls to Action of the TRC (2015). An action research study is a
systematic procedure that gathers information to improve practice.
It is expected that implementation of “Strategies in Action,” including the RD (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018) and Universal Design for Learning model (Katz, 2012a) alongside of the
FPPOL will help to build students’ empathy as a foundation of allyship behaviour within this
cohort of science 10.
Strategies in Action- a step by step guide to curricular activities and Data collection
Table 2.
Teaching strategies over a period of one semester (September - January)
Strategies in Action
Week 1:

41

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

42

-Acknowledgement of the land
-Research study introduction (paper work sent home)- due back in one week
-Parental/Guardian and Student Consent
-Respecting diversity lesson set (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018), multiple intelligences,
diversity
Weeks 1- 6: Chemistry
-

Curricular tasks, group work, weekly seating change

-

Student reflective Journals

-

Indigenous connection lessons

-

Presentation about chemical processes from local Indigenous TKK

Week 7-10: Energy
-

Curricular tasks, group/collaborative work, seating changes

-

Indigenous connections lessons

-

Week 11- Field trip organized in partnership with MJ Johnson.
- Presenters: Peter Michel, Kenthen Thomas and Trudi Nielsen.
- Theme: Indigenous understanding of energy and interconnectedness.
- Welcome and acknowledgement
- opportunity to participate in a smudge
- Intercultural Learning activities
- Lunch prepared by Roberta and MJ
- Intercultural Learning activities
- student video reflections at the end of the day

Week 10-16: Biology
-

Curricular tasks, seating changes

-

Indigenous connection lessons

-

Group discussion about personal genetic history

-

Peer and self-review after group projects

42

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

43

o Week 15: Group Project Reflections
-

Ethical science debate

Week 17 – 18: Space
-

Indigenous connections lessons

-

Student centered inquiry

Week 19: Final Exam week/wrap up

Table 3.
Student Reflection Questions for Analysis
Week Student Reflection Questions Addressed

Other Data
Collected

1

Why is diversity important?

6

After a Secwepemc Traditional Knowledge Keeper Mrs. Bernice
Jensen visit:
•

What are some of your overall impressions from the Knowledge
Keeper’s presentation on Secwepemc cultural understanding of
chemical processes and energy transfer?

•

How does a Secwepemc Knowledge Keeper’s visits help us
better understand Secwepemcul’ecw (the land) and Secwepemc
culture? What importance does this have to you?

11

Student Reflections from the Field trip3 Themed: Indigenous views on
Energy and interconnectedness

3

Field trip: Planning for this field trip event began in September with the teacher’s learning
partner, MJ Johnson (Carrier from Dene First Nation), with input from Roberta Regnier (Deh
Gah Got’ie Dene First Nation in the Northwest Territories), both Aboriginal Education
workers (AEW) at the school where the study was conducted. MJ Johnson and the teacher
43

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

44

15

Student reflections collected from group projects and working together

19

These questions were posed in week 19 as wrap up questions at the

End-of-course

end-of-course.

discussions

•

Student reflection on core and curricular competencies

•

Medicine wheel activity4 considering four quadrants of
learning. Thinking about Science 10 curriculum (what we
learned) and core competencies (how we learned) to describe
your personal growth in:
-

Mental quadrant (assignments)

-

Spiritual quadrant (connection with your heart)

-

Physical quadrant (physical things we did)

-

Emotional quadrant (how you felt about science and how
you dealt with any struggles you encountered

Context
School context
The study was conducted in an urban, 50-year-old high school, with approximately 1000
students. The average class size in the school is 28 students. The school sits upon unceded
Secwepemc territory. The school is situated in a middle-sized city in the interior of British
Columbia, and serves students with a wide range of socioeconomic and racial backgrounds.

developed a field trip themed Energy and Interconnectedness with SD73 TKKs Peter Michel,
Kenthen Thomas, and Trudi Nielsen.
4
Medicine Wheel Activity: Developed in partnership between MJ Johnson and the teacher
Serena Reves, with input from Brandy Turner (another science teacher) to gain a better
understanding of how students developed over the course in the four realms: mental,
emotional, physical and spiritual. See Appendix 1: Medicine Wheel Activity: Science 10
Reflection
44

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

45

Classroom context
Over the course of one semester, all students in Grade 10 Science, whether participating in
the study or not, participated in all ‘Strategies for Action’ (Table 2) activities in the
classroom. Students did not know who consented to be part of the study and who had not,
unless they have themselves discussed or shared that information. All data collected (Table
2) from participants in the study was embedded within the curriculum and was not separate
from the learning outcomes of the course. Qualitative data came from student reflective
journals, an end-of- course discussion (video recorded), and a teacher’s recollections journal.
Curricular Framework
The classroom curricular frame work is woven together using the overarching First Peoples’
Principles of Learning, and including the Katz three block model of Universal Design for
Learning, Respecting Diversity (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018), Inclusive education, and
Critical Multiculturalism. Using these curricular approaches to inform each other, shapes
what and how the course is delivered and the tasks the students are asked to accomplish to
achieve the learning outcomes of the course and the core curriculum. These strategies foster
an environment that is culturally responsive to Indigenous knowledge (without
appropriation) and perspectives that are embedded throughout the curriculum.
Informed consent invitations
To ensure that students do not feel coerced to join the study because of the power differential
between the teacher and students, the supervisor, Dr. Carol Rees, invited students to
participate through informed consent. The invitation began with Dr. Rees explaining the
study and providing the introduction letter, parental consent and student assent
documentation to go home for parent/guardian approval (Appendix 1). No incentives for
participation were offered or given. As participants are adolescents, a group with a particular
set of needs, they must be active participants in this process and their consent is vital for this
process to be successful. Both the letter of parental consent and student assent were received
for that student to be included in the study. There were 53 permission forms provided to
enrolled students in the two science 10 classes taught by the principal researcher. Three
parent information sessions (one during the day and one in the evening held at the school,
45

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

46

and another evening session was held on the local reserve at a popular coffee shop) were
offered for parents and guardians to meet with the principal researcher, her supervisor and
one member of her thesis committee. Unfortunately, these information sessions were only
attended by one parent in the morning session.
This study has been approved concurrently by the governing ethics board at Thompson
Rivers University and the Superintendent of the school district, and on-site permission from
the Principal was received to conduct the research study. Permission letters are provided in
the appendix. All participants received parental permission to participate, and participant
assent was required before the collection of data commenced. No participants were excluded
from the analyses.
Participants and Demographics
Twenty-six students initially accepted the invitation to participate, one student withdrew
from the class at the end of the first week, and another student withdrew from the class prior
to the end of the study. No data was used from these students in the data set. Therefore, there
are 24 participants in this study. In the class, there were students with a range of abilities
including students with: learning disabilities, chronic health issues, autism spectrum
disorder, mental health issues, and English language learners. Table 4 shows the pseudonyms
for the participants, their demographics, the activities they participated in, and submitted
responses.
Table 4.
Study Participants. Demographics and Participation
Pseudonym

Age

Ethnic self-identity

Student participation in activities
and data collection

46

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

TKK Presentation

Group Reflections

Competency reflection

Medicine Wheel Activity

Caleb

16

Korean

ü

ü ü ü

ü

ü

Cathy

14

Japanese, Scottish, English

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Corey

15

Secwepemc, Navajo, Austrian, French

ü

ü

ü

ü

Daisy

15

Canadian, German

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Ella

16

absent

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Gwen

14

Hispanic, Scottish

ü

ü ü ü

ü

ü

Holly

15

Scottish, Welsh, Ukrainian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Jed

15

Canadian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Jean

15

Scottish, German, French

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Judy

15

English, French, Métis, Scottish,

ü

ü ü ü

ü

ü

ü ü

ü

ü

Field trip

RD Lessons Set

47

German
Kelly

15

Canadian, Irish, Norwegian

ü

Lana

15

Italian, American, Dutch, Canadian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Linda

14

Absent

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Lynn

15

Italian, Canadian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Maria

15

Canadian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Matt

15

Canadian, French

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

May

14

Japanese, Scottish, English

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Pearl

15

English

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Philip

15

Russian, Israeli

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Rose

14

Canadian, American

ü

ü ü ü

ü

ü

Ruby

14

Dutch, British, Italian

ü

ü

ü

ü

Steve

15

Dutch and Canadian

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

Teri

15

absent

ü

ü

ü

ü

ü

47

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

Theresa 15

48

ü

Canadian

ü ü ü

ü

ü

Overview of Data collection

Qualitative data

End of the course Discussion Groups
• Video recorded and transcribed

Documents
• Student Reflective journals (see Table 3)
• Teacher observations of student behaviour

Figure 6. Data collection tools for the study are shown.

Qualitative data (Table 5)
Table 5 below shows the Qualitative data collection of the study. The Qualitative data used
the students’ reflective journals responses (see table 3 for the questions posed), end-ofcourse discussion groups, and teacher observations of student’s behaviour from the teacher
journal. The discussions were conducted in both the middle and the end of the semester. The
middle of the semester video discussion was for demographic information only, where as the
end-of-course discussion was analyzed for the development of empathy over the course.
These were video recorded and transcribed. Students’ reflective journals were used
throughout the semester, wherein students respond to teacher reflective questions. The
teacher journal informed the study as to the observed students’ behaviour and if there were
changes that occur throughout the semester.

48

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

49

Table 5.
Data to be collected
Data Qualitative data:
Set

Document Name

1

End of semester

Description of data collected
Transcriptions of end-of-course discussions.

discussion groups
(semi-structured)
2

Students’ reflective

These reflections were collected throughout the semester.

journals
3

Teacher observations

Teacher’s observations of students’ behaviour from

of student behaviour

teacher journal.

Qualitative data analysis
To address the first research questions: Is Empathy developing? What kinds of empathy are
developing? qualitative data analysis was used to look for evidence of development of types
of empathy, in the students’ reflective journals collected throughout the semester and in the
transcripts of the end of semester discussions conducted. Table 6 below shows the broadened
definitions used for coding students’ data.
Table 6.
Codes: Descriptive words for different types of empathy.
Type of

Cognitive Empathy

Affective Empathy

Empathy
Descriptive Thinking about and listening to

Emotional connections and feeling with

words

others, understanding

others

perspectives of others

Internalization of emotional connections

49

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

50

Intercultural Cognitive

Intercultural Affective Empathy

Empathy

emotional connectedness with the

Understanding, listening, and

traditions, values, beliefs and people’s

perspective taking from the

experiences of other cultures and

point of view of other cultures

alignment of core values

(Hogan, 1969; Gordon, 2005;

(Mehabrian & Epstein, 1972; Gordon,

Immordino-Yang & Domasio,

2005; de Wied et al., 2007; ImmordinoYang & Domasio, 2007; Schonert-

2007, Schonert-Reichl &
Hymel, 2007; ACARA, 2019)

Reichl & Hymel, 2007; Gonzalez et al.,
2015; Paige & Bennett, 2015)

The student’s reflective journals were analyzed chronologically to see if there was empathy
development over the time in the course. This data set was triangulated against the end of the
semester discussions and the teacher journal, which were embedded at the end of each
section to demonstrate how students were feeling, and what they were experiencing during
that time, and then again at the end-of-course for their reflections of specific activities.
In addition, the teacher journal was analyzed for teacher’s impressions of student’s actions
and behaviours throughout the course in the development of types of empathy.
The student journals were analyzed first using the codes above for the different kinds of
empathy shown in the Table 6. Part way into the analysis, it became evident that there were
sub-categories of cognitive and affective empathy emerging, that are referred to as
Intercultural cognitive or affective empathy (Table 6, p. 49). The codes used are indicated in
Table 6. These same codes were then applied to the video transcripts.
To address the research question What are the conditions that allow empathy to develop?
students’ journal responses, students’ end-of-course discussion responses were again

50

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

51

analyzed and codes emerged from the data. Through multiple readings and consolidation,
codes were consolidated into themes.
Finally, the teacher journal was used to triangulate claims with other observations made by
the teacher about students’ behaviour and interactions with one another.
Trustworthiness. Trustworthiness will be found using triangulation across the end-of-course
discussions and the student reflections data sets, and using thick descriptions of student
responses from the data. In addition, triangulation occured through considering the
comments in the teacher journal.

51

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

52

CHAPTER 4 FINDINGS
In chapter 4 I speak in the 3rd person as it makes it helpful for the reader to better understand
when the students are speaking.
This thesis aims to address the research question: In what ways does a curriculum that aims
to foster empathy as a foundation for allyship behaviour impact the developing empathy of
science 10 students? Specifically, we want to know: Is Empathy developing? What kinds of
empathy are developing? What are the conditions that allow empathy to develop?
To address the research questions: Is Empathy developing? What kinds of empathy are
developing? What are the conditions that allow empathy to develop? A qualitative approach
was used. Three data sets were analyzed: 1. Students’ journal entries in response to ten
questions asked over the course of the semester, after key learning activities, 2. Transcripts
of discussions conducted at the end of the semester, and 3. Teacher’s reflective journal.
Part 1: Exploration of Empathy development
Is empathy developing? What kinds of empathy are developing?
In general, evidence from the students’ journal responses and transcripts from teacherstudent discussions’ responses at the end-of-course suggests that students’ empathy was
developing throughout the course. This finding is supported by reported observations in the
teacher’s reflective journal.
In the journal responses and end-of-course discussions, cognitive empathy (the mental action
of connecting with others in listening, thinking about, and understanding others’
perspectives) and affective empathy (emotional connectedness with others, feeling with
others, aligning of values with others and the internalization of emotional connections felt
with others) responses far outnumbered those of sympathy. From the students’ journal
responses data set, there were 69 empathic responses in all; 38 responses (55%)
demonstrated cognitive empathy, 29 responses (42%) demonstrated affective empathy
52

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

53

whereas only two responses (3%) demonstrated sympathy. There were 49 responses showing
empathy in the end-of-course discussions, 16 (32%) of students’ responses demonstrated
cognitive empathy, 31 (63%) demonstrated affective empathy and two responses (4%)
demonstrated sympathy.
The teacher’s reflection journal entries concerning students’ interactions support the
suggestion that their empathy was developing throughout the course. For example, relative to
other years, the students worked especially well in groups, listening to each other and
compromising on tasks and organizational components. There were only two instances in the
entire semester, of over 100 different group opportunities, that required teacher intervention
to assist with partner challenges. Students began to build relationships outside of their
regular social circles within the class, with some percolating out of the class as new
friendships. By the end of the course, students seemed to feel very comfortable sharing their
ideas and thoughts about different topics in class discussions and debates. The next section
looks at how empathy was developing through the course.
How is Empathy developing?
Students’ journal responses were written on five occasions throughout the course in response
to specific learning experiences and guided by specific questions (see Table 3, p. 55) and
their responses at the end of course discussions often concerned these experiences. To
describe how students’ empathy was developing throughout the course, a chronological
approach was used. In this chronology, the sub-headings indicate the week number and
learning experience (in parenthesis) that students are reflecting on in their journals and
discussing at the end of course discussions. These were week 1 (RD (Katz with Lamoureux,
2018) lesson set); week 6 (TKK visit); week 11 (field trip); week 15 (reflections on group
work); week 19 (competency reflection) and week 19 (medicine wheel activity: see
Appendix 1). Within each sub-section, for each of the weeks (learning experiences), findings
from student journal responses were first shared followed by comments from the end of
course discussions, when students reflect back on their experiences.

53

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

54

Week 1 (Respecting Diversity Lesson Set)
The course began with the RD lesson set (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018), see Table 2, p. 54.
At the end of the lesson set the students were asked to reflect on the question: Why is
diversity important? This is directly related to cognitive empathy because acknowledging
diversity is the first step in understanding the importance of different perspectives. Student
responses showed cognitive empathy in their description of the importance that diversity
plays in their lives.
From Students’ Reflective Journals. The students’ responses show cognitive empathy in
their appreciation of the importance of understanding different perspectives. This is
exemplified in Caleb’s response “every single intelligence contributes to our life .... They are
all essential parts…[without diversity] our society will lack of something.” Philip’s comment
goes further when he showed his understanding that we are all one people. Philip stated:
“diversity is necessary for us to learn from each other’s abilities, opinions, and cultures, to
understand who we are as a human race.” Students also showed their appreciation that
everyone’s contribution is special and unique. For example, Pearl describes how “diversity is
necessary because everyone has their own skills and their own gifts that make our reality a
reality.”
Theresa takes her understanding to the next level where she appreciates the value of
divergent ideas or perspectives, she says: “Diversity means that everyone would have
different ideas to bring to the table, it encourages curiosity and growth in areas that you
aren’t familiar with.” Philip offers another understanding: “[Without diversity] we would be
like a hive mind all thinking one way without reflecting or going back and saying why.”
No responses collected in student journals at this point contained examples of affective
empathy.
From End-of- Course Discussions. In the end of course discussions, in comments where
students were reflecting back on the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) Lesson Set, students
demonstrated ways their work on the lesson set helped their developing cognitive empathy
54

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

55

when they spoke about the importance of understanding different perspectives. Daisy says:
“So, I have actually liked how we first, in the beginning, went over the different [multiple
intelligences] ... It just made it so that you were working with different people and you got
different perspectives on things.” Judy describes how the work with RD Lesson Set (Katz
with Lamoureux, 2018) at the beginning of the course, contributes to her developing
cognitive empathy by being open to others’ ways of working and learning. She said,
“Without doing [MI]... it was super awkward working with one another. But I feel since we
understand where, how other people work and learn differently we’re more open to those
options and can find a way to work.” May talked about the importance of not only
understanding different perspectives, but valuing them: “I feel like everyone learns
differently and has a different level of smarts, and it could be like one person has book
smarts and another has street smarts, and when you put them together– it’s just super
powerful.”
Week 6. (Traditional Knowledge Keeper visit)
On week 6 (end of the chemistry unit and as an introduction to the energy unit) a TKK, Mrs.
Bernice Jensen, was invited to visit the class and present on Secwepemc understanding of
chemical processes and energy transfer. Students watched a slide presentation and then had
the opportunity to see and feel artifacts, as well as, taste some dried berries important in
Secwepemc culture. In their journal responses following Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s visit,
Students were asked to reflect on two questions: What are some of your overall impressions
from the TKKs presentation of Secwepemc cultural understanding of chemical processes and
energy transfer? Why is it important for students to understand Secwepemcul’ecw (the
ancestral land) and Secwepemc culture?
When analyzing the students’ journal responses and their comments in the end-of-course
discussions, considering Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s presentation their developing intercultural
empathy can be seen in the way they attempt to understand Secwepemc culture and
Secwepemc worldviews, and communicate a developing understanding of that world (Zhu,
2011). It is important to emphasize that: of course, it is impossible for students to truly put

55

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

56

themselves in the shoes of Secwepemc people (Harrison, 2017). In the next section evidence
of students’ developing intercultural empathy is shared.
From Students’ Reflective Journals. In their journal responses to Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s
visit, students demonstrated their developing intercultural cognitive empathy when they (a)
show their interest and developing understanding of Secwepemc culture, and made personal
connections with their own lives, (b) show their understanding of the importance of learning
about Secwepemc culture because this land is the land of the Secwepemc people, (c) show
understanding of the benefits for everyone of developing understanding of Secwepemc
perspectives on present day issues.
(a) Matt shows his interest, developing understanding and personal connections to the
plants being discussed, as he has some of these in his own backyard: “I was pretty
amazed with how [the Secwepemc] used to cook food and how some plants are used
for medical use (wild plants/trees). Because I have some of the trees and plants, like
the Ponderosa.” Holly connected personally with Mrs. Bernice Jensen in some of the
experiences they share, demonstrating her affective empathy in her comment: “I also
made several connections from my own experience to hers.” Ella acknowledged the
feelings of interest of others towards the presentation, “other classmates felt the same
way and I think some wanted to learn more.” Caleb connected personally with the
information presented during Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s visit when he says “Nowadays,
we don't really have to think about survival in the woods … and nature, but
Secwepemc People did for thousands of years…One thing I could say about the
knowledge of the Secwepemc and my ancestors is that they have amazing and
incredible understanding of Nature and all scientific processes.”
(b) students showed their ability to understand and share perspectives of the Secwepemc
people towards the land and indicated the importance of respect for Secwepemc
perspectives of the land. Holly shares: [TKK visits] help us understand by explaining
why their teachings and ways are important. It helped us understand how important it
is to respect the land and everything on it”. And Matt provides the context
56

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

57

demonstrating his developing cognitive empathy when he said: “It's very important to
learn and understand what [Secwepemc people] had to go through dozens to
hundreds of years ago.” Students show that they understand the importance of
learning about Secwepemc culture as we all live in Secwepemc territory, referring to
this land as belonging to the Secwepemc people (when students referred to “their”
land). For example, May says, “It's important to me to learn about their culture
because we have lived on their land for so many years.” And Maria states “I feel that
it is respectful to understand and show that I care about the culture, especially
because we are always on their land.” Cathy shares “I live on Secwepemc territory,
and learning about their culture … helps me learn new information, and become
knowledgeable about the land I live on.” And Jean “The Knowledge Keepers really
help us understand different ways to do things and give us information... I think it's
extremely important to understand the land that we live on.” Caleb further processes
his developing understanding when he acknowledges past mistakes “we always have
to learn from the past and mistakes to proceed forward successfully.”
(c) Students also showed understanding of the benefits for everyone of developing
understanding of Secwepemc perspectives on present day issues. Daisy said:
“[Secwepemc people] also have different perspectives on things, so they share their
way from their own experiences.” Jed shared: “having these visits is the best way for
us to understand … that there are multiple ways things can be done”. Philip’s
response adds to this: “[TKK visits] show us from an alternative perspective how
[Secwepemc] people deal with issues that are present in modern society.”
Additionally, key quotes important for the discussion of the emerging conditions
highlighted by the students must be included here. Maria shared of the presentation:
“I think it was a cool way to teach kids about the Secwepemc culture and…
lifestyles.”
From End-of- Course Discussions. Analysis of end of course discussions support the view
that students are developing their intercultural cognitive empathy. Specifically, students
showed their appreciation of Secwepemc science knowledge. Daisy shares,

57

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

58

“It's like when [Secwepemc people] see like a plant it means something to them and
they have all [this knowledge] for why it's here. But for us when we walk it's like oh,
this is a plant, and we don’t realize what it can be used for.”
May showed her value of Secwepemc science when she added, “It made me realize
that science is in everything, it’s kind of a big part of [Secwepemc culture] and like being
able to understand how different plants and natural things can be used in a scientific way.”
Week 11 (Field trip)
On week 11, the students went on a field trip with three SD73 Traditional Knowledge
Keepers who were invited to share their understandings around the theme Energy and
Interconnectedness. Supporting this trip were MJ Johnson and Roberta Regnier (both AEWs)
and two non-Indigenous teachers, including the PR. The field trip theme and organization
were put together by MJ Johnson and the teacher principal researcher. Students participated
in a number of activities selected by the TKKs throughout the day. Students were asked to
record a video reflection for their journal on the day responding to the question: What are
your takeaways from the day? (Refer to the day’s layout in the methods, Table 2, p. 54.)
From Students’ Reflective Journals. Of the group of students who attended the optional
field trip, six were participants in this study. Students’ journal responses to the field trip
questions show that their cognitive and affective empathy were continuing to develop
through this experiential learning opportunity. Caleb described connections between the
Indigenous teachings and his own culture:
“I learned about First Nations understanding of interconnectedness of mother nature
and of other things. And I found those learnings are quite similar to Chi in East Asian
cultures. And like medicines they use similar methods to make medicines back in the
days in Korea as well. So, I found those really interesting.”
Theresa shows her developing affective intercultural empathy in the internalization in her
comment:
“I just feel like it was a really cool experience to learn about all the different ways
that energy is used in First Nations culture especially. And it just opened my eyes to
different ways that we can look at the world and think of how everyone and
58

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

59

everything is connected, internally and externally. Now I just feel like I can go about
the rest of my day and the rest of my week just thinking about this and looking
around my life for different opportunities to see energy and just the way that
everything is connected.”
From End-of-Course Discussions. Students’ comments at the end-of-course discussions
supported the findings from the journals. Students showed evidence of developing
intercultural cognitive empathy when they shared their developing intercultural
understanding, and when they made personal connections to Secwepemc culture. For
example, Caleb felt personal connections to his own cultural history,
For the First Nations [field trip] I thought it was really interesting because I know
[my cultural] history. Which is 13 hours away with a plane, but it is quite similar, like
the making of drums too. So, it's really similar, so I found it really interesting.
The field trip also prompted students to think about interconnectedness and energy, which
reflects a wholistic Secwepemc perspective. For example, Gwen said,
I was going to say my take on [the string and drum lesson]. I knew it was about the
drum, but I was thinking um about the tie to the middle because we are all connected
somehow. And he was talking about the fires and the water and Earth and …how it
was all connected somehow. So just I took it in the way that we are all connected
somehow.
The teacher notes in the teacher’s reflective journal that there was continued development of
cognitive and affective intercultural empathy as all students who attended the field trip spoke
about their experiences upon their return, sharing their perspectives of the day and the
activities with others. From the teacher journal, it was noted that Judy’s affective empathy
was also demonstrated through her ability to speak with most other participants and in her
statement: “I’ve made so many new friends.”
Week 15 (Reflections from Group Projects)
In week 15, to the wrap up of the genetics unit in which a number of group projects were
completed. Students’ work-groups were created with members each having strengths in
59

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

60

different multiple intelligences. The teacher journal describes how students showed cognitive
empathy when they shared understanding of the importance of the different strengths that
each individual brings to the group and their understanding of the importance of every
individual to the work of the collective. From her journal, the teacher recalls a conversation
that was overheard demonstrating how students were taking their personal strengths into
consideration when assigning individual tasks. For example, Lynn stated, “Linda is not here
today, but she is great at drawing, so she can draw that when she gets back.”
Students had the opportunity to describe their interactions with other group members in their
reflections. Students’ journal reflections show cognitive and affective empathy-in-action
when students explained their interactions in their groups. For example, Cathy wrote, “Our
group took the time to hear everyone's ideas and then as a group we decided how we were
going to do the assignment.” Two students also showed their developing cognitive empathy
when writing about their group’s method of peer assessment, both students commented on
what kinds of criteria they used and described their considerations. In both cases the students
were showing consideration of other peoples’ perspectives and personal situations and how
they valued their contributions to the group projects. Caleb said: “Mark was absent a lot of
times, but when present paid his best attention to the task and produced a great outcome” and
Philip stated: “Students' peer assessment marks were based on the days that they actually
attended the class and not on their contributions to the group's assignment.”
The teacher journal provides further insights into empathy-in-action. Apart from Lynn’s
conversation above, other groups of students showed their cognitive and affective empathy
when they were overheard in their first meetings sharing their multiple intelligences and then
discussing how to go about completing the assignment using these different strengths, in the
task division process.
The teacher did note that groups had their challenges, but that speedy solutions were found
by the students themselves and students were able to move along in their task completion
without teacher intervention. Students solutions included: group behaviour and expectation
contracts, contacting their friend who was absent that day and letting each other know if they
60

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

61

were going to be absent and planning around each other’s schedules. The teacher noted that
“students are willing to work with each other in any way asked or assigned, with no
complaints or requests for changes” demonstrating how students’ cognitive and affective
empathy were developing. Students also demonstrated cognitive and affective empathy
through consideration of different perspectives in discussion and compromise on how the
information was to be presented in the final project. Many students chose to highlight and
celebrate each other's strengths in finding creative ways to best showcase their learning. The
overall effect of students developing cognitive and affective empathy was that final projects
were of a higher quality, on average, than had been received in previous years.
From End-of-Course Discussions. Findings from the end of course discussions support the
findings from the journal responses. Looking back on the group work, Cathy shows her
appreciation of the diversity of her group and the value of different perspectives when she
says,
“I liked how, for example, [in] the genetics unit and the DNA, we got into small
groups and then did work together and, how we had the different multiple
intelligences. Because I feel like, at least from my group, I feel like we worked really
well because we all had different ideas that we could share.”
Theresa’s comment about the same project supports this,
“The projects I feel I liked the most this entire year were the ones [where] you got
into your groups, with people from the other intelligences: interpersonal, musical and
then you had to do the stations, like building the DNA structure, the alien one, and
the hybrid. I really liked that one because, you all help each other out. Like you are
never stuck on one thing. Like, it always made sense in the end.”
Pearl and Holly are two students who had the opportunity to work together on group
projects, but who are ‘not friends’ outside of the class. Their contribution demonstrates how
the mixing of multiple intelligences contributed to their understanding of the value of
different perspectives,
Pearl- So I actually, kind of really liked when you mixed [us] up [according to] our
intelligences, cause normally I work with people I think I’m similar with. Except that

61

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

62

I got to work with a whole bunch of different people. And we all put our ideas out
and make kind of like…
Holly- an ultimate team
Pearl- yeah!
Week 19 (Student’s final thoughts on the course)
In week 19, the final week of the course, the students were asked to write reflectively on two
topics: reflection on the core and curricular competencies and a medicine wheel reflective
writing activity (see Appendix 1).
Core and Curricular Competency Reflection. In the core and curricular competency
reflection, students demonstrated their developing cognitive and affective empathy by
acknowledging the importance of multiple intelligences and diversity generally and
acknowledging the benefits of understanding different perspectives. They also showed their
developing intercultural empathy by acknowledging the need for understanding Secwepemc
culture specifically. In this section examples will be shared.
Matt shows his developing affective empathy when he shares the importance of working
well together through building connections with group members,
“One thing I'm very good at is being involved in student activities and groups with
others. I can really get the job done if I put my mind to it, and have a really good
connection with my group members.”
Judy writes about how one of her greatest areas of growth has been learning about other’s
perspectives, “learning others different points of views.” Holly acknowledges the positive
effects that working with others had, “I think one of the main things that will stick with me is
the fact that working with new people might be great and that it's worth it to see.” Corey
shows how her intercultural empathy is developing when she said: “everyone learns in their
own ways. And some people having a liking for things more so than others. I think it's really
cool to be able to look at the different learning and understanding of my peers.”

62

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

63

Students showed their developing intercultural empathy when they spoke about how
important the course was for developing understanding of other cultures, and more
specifically Secwepemc culture. For example, Cathy shared that “science is a large part of
indigenous culture, [and] multiple intelligences encouraged me to try new learning styles.
And Caleb reflected on the field trip, “I am never going to forget the trip to McQueen lake
and all the First Nations practices and knowledge I have learned.”
Medicine Wheel Reflections. Students demonstrated their developing empathy in relation to
their growth in all four quadrants (mental, physical, emotional and spiritual) explored in this
activity. On the mental growth quadrant Caleb said, “Mentally this year in science 10 I think
I grew in [the] ability to understand other people's opinion and collectively word them or
express them positively, like in our ethical science portion.” From the physical growth
quadrant Theresa showed how her intercultural cognitive empathy was developing through
the TKKs visit, “When [Mrs. Bernice Jensen] came and spoke to us, and helped me to get to
know the First Nations culture better, with the tangible [materials] that she brought.”
From the spiritual growth quadrant students showed their developing cognitive empathy
when they talked about their developing perspectives of Secwepemc culture throughout the
course. For example, Maria said, “I did like the [Traditional Knowledge Keeper’s]
presentations because it gave me a sense of their perspective and that it does affect people”.
Gwen recalls the field trip and what has stayed with her, “On the field trip to McQueen lake,
talking about nature and other communities and beliefs really showed me how different
everyone’s [perspective] really is– I never thought about it before.”
Students showed their developing affective empathy in their responses in the spiritual and
emotional growth quadrants of the medicine wheel activity (see Appendix 1). Students
remembered the portions of the class that they deeply connected with, or that had an impact
on them. Theresa shared how she feels about the connections she has made in the class with
classmates and the teacher when she said,

63

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

64

“I got to know my classmates and teacher on a more intimate level than other classes,
that helped me understand the topics in science better. I found some parts of this class
difficult to understand, but when I asked about it, many people would offer help.”
Pearl describes her growing cognitive and affective empathy when she says, “I think that this
class made me more open and in tune with myself in a way. It definitely got me thinking
more about culture and diversity and things like that. So, I think I did improve in this.” Caleb
adds,
“I loved how I could connect to different cultures and learning through this course. I
usually have this mindset that separates myself and things here, because of my
ethnicity, but I grew to find similarities and connections this year. This [has] been a
really valuable experience this year.”
Linda sums up her developing intercultural affective empathy when she says, “Learning
about First Peoples’ cultures, learning about different learning styles, [and] having my own
opinion…” Cathy shared her construction of intercultural cognitive and affective empathy
within the context of science in her sharing,
“Learning about Indigenous culture and the way they use science in their daily life
connected with me. I realize science is not only technical and complicated, but it is a
part of a greater meaning and brings people together through many different aspects
and over many years of learning.”
From the emotional growth quadrant, Rose describes her affective empathy development
during the field trip, “One of the things that stuck with me was the field trip to McQueen
Lake. I liked learning about all of that and having a huge snowball fight was also fun.” From
the teacher journal:
“Now, the school frowns upon snowball fights, so I might get in trouble for sharing
this, but, the connections with the land and each other that day would have been
shattered if the adults had stepped in. The snowball fight did not last very long and
adults were present, no students got out of hand, and they were respectful when
anyone said ‘enough’ or ‘I’m out’ further demonstrating their ability and
64

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

65

development of affective empathy towards one another. The theme of the field trip
was Energy and interconnectedness- how much more connected could students be
with the environment and each other?”
Theresa shared the lasting effects of attending the field trip to McQueen lake, how it opened
her up to opportunity and the feelings she has about the class, the people in it, and different
cultures demonstrating her cognitive and affective empathy development: “Going to
McQueen Lake as a field trip open my heart and mind to how different cultures used
different practices, and how they thought about things. This class feels like we are all best
friends/family.”
In the teacher’s reflective journal, she noted that the field trip offered experiential learning
opportunities that cannot be replicated in the class. The field trip to McQueen Lake was
brought up repeatedly in class discussions by students who attended, and the manner in
which students discuss this trip showed that they have been changed by their participation in
this opportunity.
To sum up, at the end of the course, in the teacher’s reflective journal she wrote “the
students' empathy development is clear in their interactions with one another. The ease in
which they are in the classroom, the friendly classroom banter, ability to have group
discussions where everyone shares their opinions, and the way in which they interact with
the adults in the classroom all demonstrate how their “empathy-in-action” is developing.” It
seemed this was happening because the students, along with the teacher had co-created an
environment that had the right conditions. In the next section these conditions are explored.

Part 2: What are the Conditions that allow Empathy to Develop?
Two major themes emerged from students’ journal responses and their responses in
discussions, as being important underlying conditions for empathy development. These
emerging themes were: building relationships; and a safe, non-judgmental classroom
environment.
65

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

66

Building Relationships
Getting to know each other
Many different kinds of relationships developed over the course when students’ put their
empathy development into action, as they branched out of their isolated social circles to
begin engaging with others. Matt and Rose note that making new connections in the class
impacted their development of empathy: Matt shared “I have made new connections with
friends, and teachers. I did way better in chemistry this year than I did last year and that
makes me slightly happy knowing chemistry is my least favourite.” Rose said: “Science
class was fun, I liked that I had friends in it and was able to make new friends as well.”
In the class, the teacher continually mixed the students when she changed desk partners and
heterogeneous groups (bringing together students with different multiple intelligences) so
that all students in the class had opportunities to work alongside each other. In end-of-course
discussions students talked about how this helped them get to know each other and feel more
comfortable in the class. Kelly said,
I feel since we [learned about multiple intelligences and worked with different
people], it’s not awkward working with each other. Cause [before] when you go into
class … you stick to your friends, but now you can work with anyone and you get
along.
Theresa shares how she feels about the class,
I feel like this class more than other science classes- it was way more together and
like getting to know people and we had a lot of those kind of discussions. And
although they weren’t super science related, like, it kind of helped to get to know
everybody.
Pearl makes a direct reference to the classroom environment and shows how this helped her
to feel safe,
This year, I feel like, I felt like kind of better than other years. Because we were all
more close, I guess in a way. And we got to know each other, kind of like what
Theresa said, and it felt more safe.
Holly explained:
I don’t really know, like, what exactly it was- it had something to do with multiple

66

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

67

intelligences stuff, but we all know each other better now. So, at the beginning of the
year it was kind of group discussions and there was two people that would talk. And
then by the end of the year we’ve all said something in group discussions at some
point.
Jed talked about how he had got to know everyone’s name. “I know everybody’s name in the
class….I’m horrible with names, but I remember (there was lots of agreement from other
students when Jed made this comment).” In a journal response, Philip shares how the mixing
of students made him feel, “The extra movement and interaction between students led the
classroom to make it feel like we were back in elementary. This feeling makes a classroom
more welcoming and friendly.” Judy shared how she experienced the class, as a student new
to the school:
I guess with … me being new to the school, I found it … really easy to get to know
everyone, because of … how you were always … changing the seating arrangement
and stuff and how you were always making us do group stuff. So, it was just really
easy to get to know everyone and work with them in that way. And learn everyone
else’s way of learning.
Getting to know the teacher- Intergenerational classroom relationships
In the end-of-course discussions, students share the importance of getting to know the
teacher. Theresa shares,
“At the start of the class and the start of the semester I kind of like didn’t know you at
all. Wow, like I’ve never seen this girl before. And like I thought that you were like,
like I thought like wow, she’s not like a normal teacher. Like I assumed it would be
more like structured academic kind of style, and it was kind of unorganized and like
willy wonky everywhere. But then I got to know you and then I got to know your
teaching style and it was different. It was, yeah, like more like talking and class
discussions and not like textbooks and like all that.”
In the end-of-course discussion an exchange happened where Judy shared her recollection of
something from the first week of school that helped to create an environment that fostered
empathy.
67

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

68

Judy- This has nothing to do with anything but I thought it was really cool how
everyone wished your kid happy birthday at the beginning of the year – I just
remembered how we did that.
PR- oh down the hall, right- there was a kid down the hall?
Holly- No your daughter
Judy- no when your children were on the phone and we wished them a happy
birthday
over the phone
Kelly- That was so cool
Theresa- That was cute
Jed- a cool connection
PR- thank you, I totally forgot about that.
Jed further explains his development of cognitive and affective empathy in the development
of his student-teacher relationship when he said:
“I was going to say that we got to kind of know [the teacher] as a person as well.
Cause I mean that it was more than just a science class in some parts. [The teacher]
took the effort to get to know us, and [the teacher was] polite. [The teacher] talked
about [her] family and we talked about our family, what was going on. Wasn’t like
just do this because I am your teacher. There was more to it than that.”
Relationships between students in different science classes, taught by the same teacher
One of the interesting outcomes was that students from the two classes involved in the study
were also creating relationships in speaking about their experiences together. This following
exchange shows how the development of cognitive and affective empathy in students is
beginning to permeate out of the class and into the school.
Jed- I definitely talked about this class the most like of all the classes I have right
now.
And its funny cause I know there is a different block and I think, like you teach
a different block right now, right?
PR- yes
68

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

69

Jed- Yeah and there’s people in that class that I was talking, like we would talk
together, even though we aren’t in the same class. And we found ways to
connect just talk about what we were doing and stuff. So, it was interesting.
A safe non-judgmental classroom environment
Students talked about how the classroom helped them feel safe in sharing their opinions or
asking questions, and how the students and the teacher were involved in creating this safe
environment together. Ella demonstrated how using the multiple intelligences gave her
confidence in her group presentations when she said: “we can use certain multiple
intelligences that define who we are so it was kind of easier to do our presentations in a
comfortable spot.” Judy shared:
I’m normally a really shy person, but I noticed that … in this class I’m not … super
afraid to speak up. So …, I thought that was really cool cause normally I’m afraid I
would … be judged afterwards. But I don’t feel that here, so that’s really cool.”
Jed continued,
like out of all the classes, you are right, this is the one where I, ‘cause I have
people that are, and not everybody, but there are certain people they will just be
judgey for everybody. And it’s not nice, because you see them bring other people
down. They are saying mean things, and its harder to learn, you don’t feel as good.
It’s not, It’s not bullying but it’s very, it’s tough on you, Right? – kind of gets to that
point. And, I know you said its us, but there’s a lot of teacher’s that don’t even focus
on that, they don’t give time for that opportunity. Or some of them will just ignore it,
you know. Like if I said something really mean and you heard me, you wouldn’t just
pretend you didn’t hear it.
During end-of-course discussions, students were comfortable enough to engage in
courageous conversations and share their discomfort as shown in this example from Jed:
I think, it’s funny how we get a lot of people, we talk about judgement and all that,
and a lot of people would just immediately shut down another culture. Like I know
people that if they went [on the field trip], they would just immediately be like oh,
69

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

70

that’s just a waste of time. And they just say really terrible things about it. But if you
look at every culture there’s a lot of similarities. We just, it’s hard to find them
because we think we are like better cause we have this kind of view, or like it’s really
hard for people to understand a different way of doing things. But we’ve had lots of
different opportunities to figure out other cultures this year. So, it was good.
And in this example from Linda,
One thing that I wasn’t like huge on was like, students and [you], there were like
arguments … over like, things in science that we were like learning about and stuff.
From my point of view, it’s just my own opinion, Sometimes I felt like we were
getting… into a conflict … about something that wasn’t really like a big deal- from
like my point of view. Not saying that anyone didn’t have like a good reason.
Students shared how the teacher’s approach to the class fostered a safe environment for their
development. For example, Daisy said “And then I feel like [the teacher] made the classroom
a safe environment for people to ... come, and thanks for that, and it didn’t feel like unsafe or
anything or judged if you were smart enough.”
Students’ described how the teacher recognized and honoured diversity by including choice
in the kind of projects or the way they could present. Judy describes how this made her feel:
“I really like, … the choices of the projects we got to do, like chose something that interested
us or something that runs in our family. I thought that was really cool. It was like the options
that you gave us instead of just … here’s your thing and do it, right? So, I really liked that.”
Jed shares how this flexibility in the project's final product demonstrated the teacher’s
empathy-in-action: “we always kind of had a choice for all of our projects and stuff. It was
never just like oh you have to do a slideshow and a second slide show that you have to do, …
you could have written a song, or an interpretive dance. It doesn’t matter because… just
whatever works.”
The PR followed up on discussion points raised by students and asked:

70

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

71

“So, we talked about multiple intelligences, and we talked about different groups
together [on projects]. How has working with different people in the class affected
how you come to class, or has it. So, what impact has that had on your approach to
when it's, you know, [our] block science?”
Jed response comments on how multiple intelligences, classroom design, and group
assignments all combine to create a unique environment that fosters the development of
cognitive and affective empathy: “I was going to say, like, all of this, created a supportive
environment.”

71

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

72

CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION
This study was guided by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada’s Call to
Action 63 iii: building student capacity for intercultural understanding, empathy, and mutual
respect (2015). The opportunities offered to students follows from the idea that learners
create their own knowledge within the social constructs that make up their experiences
(Fosnot, 1996; Steff & Gale, 1995; Dewey, 1938; Hegel 1807/1949; Kant 1781/1946; Vico
1725/1968). This study focused on the development of empathy as foundational in answering
the above Call to Action. In this study the working definitions of cognitive and affective
empathy were cognitive empathy (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio, 2007,
Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007)– thinking about others, listening to others, understanding
perspectives of others; affective empathy (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio,
2007, Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007) – emotional connections with others, feeling with
others, internalization of emotional connections.
Data collected from the study suggest that the curriculum and strategies implemented in this
course empowered students to develop their empathy. Specifically, intercultural empathy
which is the key to moving towards allyship behaviour. The definitions of intercultural
empathy developed in this study included intercultural cognitive empathy – understanding,
listening, and perspective taking from the point of view of another culture and intercultural
affective empathy – emotional connectedness with the traditions, values, beliefs and people’s
experiences of another culture and alignment of core values. It is important to note, as
Harrison (2017) states, non-Indigenous teachers and students can never truly know what it
means to be and feel Indigenous.
Intercultural empathy is made up of two components: Intercultural understanding and
intercultural sensitivity. Intercultural understanding, a key component of the curriculum at all
school levels, is defined as “recognizing culture and developing respect, interacting and
empathizing with others, and reflecting on intercultural experiences and taking
responsibility” (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2019).
Intercultural sensitivity is defined as how an individual makes sense of cultural differences in
72

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

73

values and beliefs of others and the experience of difference based on these constructions
(Paige & Bennett, 2015). Below, Figure. 7 shows the connections between the definitions of
intercultural understanding and intercultural sensitivity with intercultural cognitive and
affective empathy. Data suggests that students developed their cognitive and affective
empathy, and intercultural cognitive and affective empathy over the course.

Intercultural Cognitive
Empathy
Reflecting (listening,
thinking,
understanding) and
respect- (perspective
taking) taking of other
cultures
Intercultural
Understanding

Making
sense/understanding
of beliefs and values of
other cultures
Intercultural
sensitivity
Feeling connected
with beliefs and
values of other
cultures
Intercultural Affective
Empathy

Figure 7. Connections between the definitions of intercultural understanding, intercultural
sensitivity, intercultural cognitive, and affective empathy.

In this chapter, part one will discuss the students developing empathy in relation to the
literature and part two of the discussion will focus on the conditions necessary for the
development of empathy to occur.

73

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

74

Part 1: Students developing empathy
In part 1, students’ developing empathy is discussed in relation to the literature, to address
the first two questions of the study: Did empathy develop? and How did empathy develop?

W

W

ho

gn
Co

am

I?

e
itiv

y
th
pa
m
e

Identity
development

o I fit
here d

i n?

athy
e emp
v
i
t
c
e
f
Af
s
onship
Relati rk
h
g
u
o
wo
T hr
roup
and g

Intercultural empathy
Indigenous and Secw
epemc learning
opportunities
Global examples

Building
Relationships

Safety

Gr
ou
p

Em
pa
t hy
– in
wo
–a
rk
ctio
an
dc
n
oll
ab
ora
tio
n

Intercultural
opportunities

The four pillars

Figure 8. The Empathy Arc. This diagram shows the progression students seemed to follow
in their empathy development this year. There is overlap in the movement through the
empathy arc. Supported by the conditions the students identified in their responses.

Did Empathy Develop? How did empathy develop?
There appeared to be a progression of empathy development through the course, I term this
an empathy arc (Figure 8). First students developed their cognitive empathy through the
respecting diversity lesson set and UDL (Katz, 2012a). They further developed their
affective empathy through their relationships with each other in group work and with the
teacher. They developed their intercultural empathy through their intercultural experiences.
These laid the foundations for their empathy in action, the beginnings of which can be seen

74

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

75

in their group work. This empathy arc is founded upon the students’ responses and in this
section, it is described and related to the literature.
Recalling Hanson’s (2019) study of teachers, one of the teacher-participants in that study
stated that in order to build empathy “you have to go through it, through empathy...to
understand how it’s related to you” (quote from a teacher, Katherena, in Hanson, 2019, p.
317). In this study, students demonstrate how they have gone through empathy, and how
they have come to understand how it is related to them.
At the beginning of the course, through the respecting diversity lesson set (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018), students developed their cognitive empathy, defined as perspective
taking (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio, 2007; and Schonert-Reichl & Hymel,
2007). Through the Respecting Diversity lesson set (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018), students,
including Caleb, Phillip, Pearl and Theresa (on page 55) came to appreciate their own
uniqueness and different ways of learning (multiple intelligences) and those of their
classmates, and to appreciate different perspectives. Students comments are supported by the
FPPOLs tell us that learning ultimately supports the wellbeing of the self; is holistic and
relational; and that learning requires the exploration of one’s identity (FNESC, 2014).
In their group work, students were beginning to act on their developing cognitive empathy,
considering each other’s uniqueness and perspectives, while working in diverse strategically
created groups on different projects. Looking back on the course in the end-of-course
discussions they talked about how they were able to work together by listening to everyone’s
perspectives and ideas. Students’ affective empathy, defined by Gordon (2005), ImmordinoYang & Domasio (2007), and Schonert-Reichl & Hymel (2007) as emotional connectedness,
appeared to be developing through the decisions of a group on how to proceed in the
assignment after identifying everyone’s strengths. Students responses supported the
strategies embedded from the FPPOL’s of learning as holistic, relational, involving the
recognition of the consequences of one’s actions and that learning involves patience and time
(FNESC, 2014). The teacher’s reflective journal notes that the end products created in group
projects were, on average, of a very high standard due to the ability for students to work

75

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

76

together through differences and challenges, and create a product that showcased each of the
students’ strengths.
de Wied et al. (2007) describe how the development of affective empathy is linked positively
with the ability to problem solve, which can be seen in the student responses and the
teacher’s reflective journal. Students’ responses also suggested cognitive and affective
empathy development when they talk about how groups came up with their own ways of
managing themselves, their tasks, and how they responded to challenges. The teacher’s
reflective journal notes only 2 instances in the semester of required intervention in groups,
much less than usually required in previous years. These responses support the FPPOL that
learning involves generational roles and responsibilities (FNESC, 2014).
Students also showed the progression of their developing empathy along the empathy arc
when, at the end of the course in their core and curricular reflections, they reflected back on
the activities in the course, beginning with the celebration of their uniqueness as multiple
intelligences, then extending that celebration to other students (cognitive empathy) and their
individual contributions through group-work (affective empathy), then to other cultures
(intercultural empathy) through their experiences in TKK presentations and field trips (Katz,
2012a). Their development along the empathy arc aligns with the FPPOLs that learning
requires exploration of one’s identity, is holistic and relational and takes time and patience
(FNESC, 2014). For example, Philip (p. 58, 61) and Matt (p. 67) both demonstrated their
developing cognitive and affective empathy in their reflections on how students’ diversity of
learning styles and expression of knowledge allowed for personalization of the experience,
as they worked with different partners in various capacities throughout the course. The
finding that students developed this appreciation of others’ perspectives through their group
projects aligns with the FPPOLs is demonstrated in the above responses as they describe
how their learning is both experiential and based on their connections with others (FNESC,
2014). Cathy’s intercultural empathy development allowed her to see that science is a part of
Indigenous culture supporting both Zhu’s (2011) definition of intercultural empathy, and the
FPPOL’s tenet that learning recognizes the role of Indigenous knowledge (FNESC, 2014).
She also shared insights into the relationships between building cognitive empathy through

76

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

77

multiple intelligences, and how that enabled and encouraged her to try new learning styles
(p. 62). Corey’s response suggests the growth of intercultural empathy in the way she looks
at and considers her peers’ different ways of learning and understanding (p. 63).
End-of-course discussions. The end of the course discussions shed light on how the
students’ empathy developed over the course with different opportunities to build cognitive
and affective empathy along with intercultural cognitive and affective empathy with peers
and with other cultures perspectives embedded throughout the course.
A few students recounted their experiences from the field trip including their understanding
of a story. This connects with many studies on how learners make sense of the world within
the social constructs that make up their experiences (Fosnot, 1996; Steff & Gale, 1995;
Dewey, 1938; Hegel 1807/1949; Kant 1781/1946; Vico 1725/1968). Students who are
developing intercultural empathy are still in the process of creating their own intercultural
understanding. Although Jed did not attend the field trip, he was eager to learn about and
understand what other students had experienced. Students responses align with the FPPOL’s
statements on how learning is holistic, experiential, recognizes the role of indigenous
knowledge and that learning takes time and patience (FNESC, 2014). Nuanced in the
reluctance to share specifics of stories or teachings from the field trips with others in the
class, but instead sharing their take aways acknowledges that some students recognize that
some knowledge is sacred and only shared with permission and or in certain situations
(FNESC, 2014).
Jed’s response (p. 70) supports McIntosh’s (2012) work in the unpacking of white privilege
which requires individuals to first acknowledge that privilege, oppressions and power
systems exist, so that power systems that perpetuate these can be changed. As a first step on
this journey, Jed demonstrates the beginning of privilege unpacking in his acknowledgment
of how his privilege leads him and his peers to have a particular view, sometimes making it
difficult for his peers “to understand different ways of doing things” (p. 71). He goes on to
say how this year, in this class, the students had been given the opportunity to develop
understandings of different cultures (develop intercultural empathy) based on the
77

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

78

experiences provided, and that this was a good experience. This connects back to the
FPPOL’s in that learning is experiential (FNESC, 2014). Studies conducted by Bennett
(1993) and Bennett & Castiglioni (2004) show that empathy and empathy development are
foundational components to the development of intercultural sensitivity (leading to
intercultural empathy). Jed appears to be developing empathy in his responses throughout the
course, aligning with the FPPOL that learning takes time and patience (FNESC, 2014). Paige
& Bennett (2015) defined intercultural sensitivity (leading to intercultural empathy) as the
individual’s attempt to make sense of the experience of difference based on the constructions
of value and beliefs. Jed demonstrates this in his attempt to make sense of the cultural
differences of Indigenous beliefs and the experience of this difference. His response also
supports the FPPOL’s tenet in the recognition of the role of Indigenous knowledge.
Cognitive and affective empathy development appears to be occurring in the reflections from
the end-of-course discussions. Katz with Lamoureux (2018) RD lesson set provides the
foundation through which students can begin to understand others perspectives. Daisy, Judy
and May’s responses all attest to the development of cognitive empathy and the creation of
the foundation that enabled them to work together through challenges to create exemplary
products of understanding, connecting to the FFPOL that learning is relational (FNESC,
2014). de Wied et al. (2007) describe how conflict resolution is dependent on the
development of affective empathy, and the student responses align with this.
The medicine wheel activity (see Appendix 1), co-created by MJ Johnson and the teacher,
asked the students to consider the four quadrants of their learning: mental, emotional,
spiritual and physical (Sue, 2017) by reflecting on their learning throughout the course.
Asking students to reflect at the end of the course on their learning recognizes the FPPOL’s
point that “learning involves patience and time” (FNESC, 2014). Data collection from all
four quadrants suggests that all types of empathy are developing. In the mental quadrant,
Caleb describes how he can understand his peers’ perspectives and then communicate this
understanding to others, this supports Zhu’s (2011) description of intercultural empathy as
the “[ability] to effectively communicate [an] understanding” (p. 116). From the physical
quadrant of her medicine wheel activity, Theresa (p. 64) shared how the hands-on
opportunities provided in the Indigenous presentation and field trip helped her to better
78

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

79

understand different cultures, as hands-on learning aligns with the way she learns best (Katz
with Lamoureux, 2018; FNESC, 2014). From the emotional quadrant, Theresa shares how
the development of empathy in the classroom manifested as her personal ability to know
both the teacher and other students on a level that she has not before experienced in any
other classes, and how those relationships, highlighted by FNESC (2014) to be a key
component of learning, helped her better understand topics, and to seek out help when she
needed it. Theresa’s comment supports Erikson’s (1959) theories suggesting the importance
of building good relationships as a key to finding the answer to ‘Where do I fit in?’ Rose
further supports how relationships support the development of empathy of many students in
the class in her description of the non-judgmental discussions when students offer their
perspectives on different topics. In support of Gordon (2005), Immordino-Yang & Domasio
(2007), Schonert-Reichl & Hymel’s (2007) definition of cognitive empathy, we see Maria
and Gwen’s comments (p. 64) from the spiritual quadrant suggest a development of empathy
in their descriptions of thinking about and understanding different perspectives and in their
appreciation of diversity. From her spiritual quadrant, Theresa, also shares the lasting effects
of attending the field trip to McQueen lake, how it changed her perspectives on different
cultures, and how she feels about this class being as close as a family (p. 66) connecting to
the FNESC (2014) emphasis on the well-being of the self, the intercultural experiences and
relationship development as vehicles for learning.
Pearl, Caleb, Linda and Cathy all share how the opportunity to learn about different cultures,
specifically Indigenous cultures, diversity, and the connections to science impacted them by
pushing them to think about other cultures and diversity. This shows that they are improving
their intercultural empathy. The development the students refer to corresponds to their
growth in their personal empathy arc. Students described the process of making sense of
intercultural teachings and how the intercultural experiences provided in the classroom
allowed them to experience different perspectives. This aligns with Paige & Bennett’s (2015)
understanding of intercultural sensitivity (leading to intercultural empathy) in how an
individual makes sense of and experiences differences. Students' understanding became
clearer as the course went on, with one culminating activity being this medicine wheel
activity. When provided with multiple reflective activities, students responses showed
79

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

80

clearer intercultural understanding, a stepping stone to intercultural empathy, in their
recognition of, empathizing with and reflection on their intercultural experiences supporting
the ACARA’s (2019) definition of intercultural understanding.
Part 2: Conditions of Empathy Development
From the analysis of students’ responses in this study, emerged the conditions that allowed
empathy to develop. The two conditions identified were providing opportunities to get to
know everyone in the class and a safe non-judgmental classroom environment. In the model
developed for the empathy arc (Figure 8), these conditions have been expanded into four
pillars. The first is identity development which emerged as part of learning about diversity,
the second is providing opportunities for building relationships, the third is the creation of a
safe environment within which students do not feel judged, and the fourth is the creation of
the Indigenous cultural learning opportunities (with MJ).
Pillar 1: Identity development in adolescence and its connection to empathy
There is much research on the development of teacher empathy in teacher training programs
(Aitken & Radford, 2018; MacMath & Hall, 2019; Madden, 2014; Morcom & Freeman,
2018), but there is little research on the embedding of opportunities to develop student
empathy within the context of science curriculum. Recall that grade 10 students, 14-16 years
old, are in the midst of identity development attempting to answer the questions: Who am I?
and Where do I fit in? (Erikson, 1959). One might wonder: what do identity development
and the development of empathy have in common? At first, identity development, with its
internal focus, and empathy development, with its outward focus, may not seem connected.
However, studies show that identity development (Who am I?) and interpersonal
relationships (Where do I fit in?) are not dealt with separately, but at the same time during
adolescent development, and that empathy is the factor that connects them (Doumen et al.,
2012; Klimstra et al., 2013; Meeus et al., 2002; Nawaz, 2011; Rassart et al.,2012). The RD
(Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set helps adolescents to answer their own question and

80

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

81

understand themselves first, Who am I? by considering their personal strengths through the
multiple intelligence tool (Erikson, 1959; Katz with Lamoureux, 2018).
Who am I? This point aligns with the First Peoples’ principles of learning in that “learning
requires exploration of one’s identity” (FNESC, 2014). The RD (Katz with Lamoureux,
2018) lesson set helps students answer this question first by asking students to identify their
own personal strengths through a multiple intelligence tool (Erikson, 1959; Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018). The ability to begin the class from a place of celebration of student’s
uniqueness and appreciation of the gifts they already possess, sets up an ability to develop
students academically from where they are, the first criteria for culturally relevant teaching
(Ladson-Billings, 1995). This is evident in Ella’s quote from page 70 because she talks about
how multiple intelligences helped her identify her own personal strengths, which she could
then use to demonstrate her understanding on a project. Showing how cognitive empathy and
its development also have an effect on shaping students’ identities, Theresa describes how
her curiosity and personal growth benefit, as she is encouraged in both areas through the
exposure to diversity in others. Understanding and developing the concept of the self by
answering first ‘who am I?’ and then having the ability to celebrate diversity in further
discovery of ‘where do I fit in?’ satisfy Ladson-Billings’ (1995) first pillar of interculturally
sensitive teaching environments (Erikson, 1959).
Within this important time frame of adolescence identity development focusing on Who am
I? Phinney and Kohatsu (1997) found that adolescents must decide to which degree their
racial or cultural backgrounds will be a part of their identity, and that this time is when there
is an exploration of their heritage. Caleb does this often in his responses as he attempts to
come to an intercultural understanding of his own Korean heritage alongside learning about
Indigenous culture. It must be said that, although it is gratifying to see Caleb making
connections between Korean and Secwepemc cultures, and Caleb obviously meant no
disrespect, it is important to make clear for students the uniqueness of each culture. Also
demonstrated in the above comment, is Schwarzenthal et al.’s (2017) description of how
intercultural understanding is created through reflection on personal culture and the learning

81

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

82

about other cultures concurrently in Caleb’s description of his and other cultures in his
responses (p. 68 and 75).
Pillar 2: Building Relationships
Relationships are the key to: the alignment of values (Gonzalez et al., 2015), empathy
development (Doumen et al., 2012), adolescent identity development (Klimstra et al., 2013;
Nawaz, 2011; and Rassart et al., 2012), reconciliation (Freeman et al., 2018), conflict
resolution (de Wied et al., 2007) and are the foundation of allyship behaviour development
(Freeman et al., 2018). In response to the TRC Calls to Action (2015), and aligned with
Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs, and Erikson (1959) theory of adolescent identity
development theory, the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set and UDL (Katz,
2012a) were chosen for this curriculum as these programs contain the elements for building
empathy for others through the celebration of diversity and create the basis for building
relationships within the class (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018). The following identifies the
parts of this journey from the inward gaze of adolescence (Erikson, 1959) to a more outward
gaze where others' diverse gifts are celebrated and others' perspectives are considered
Where do I fit in?
The RD lesson set (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) further helps students to make connections
with others, in a community of learners, to satisfy the second question of Where do I fit in?
(Erikson, 1959; Ladson-Billings, 1995). Students began to discover where they belonged in
the classroom community, within their social relationships, and the creation of relationships
to gain a better understanding of themselves within the context of a greater world and their
place within this world (Ladson -Billings, 1995; BC Ministry of Education, 2018). Philip (p.
55) supports this understanding in his discussion about how learning about diversity is
needed to be able to see beyond difference to the commonalities between all people of the
“human race.”

82

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

83

In end-of-course discussions, Jed acknowledged that he got to know everyone’s name in the
class (p. 79), and he emphasized that it was unusual to know everyone’s name, and his
response was met with many students agreeing to his comment. This revelation further
supports Erikson’s (1959) claim that relationships help to answer students’ question of
Where do I fit in? (Erikson, 1943; Doumen et al., 2012; Klimstra et al., 2013; Meeus et al.,
2002; Nawaz, 2011; Rassart et al., 2012). Philip further supports these claims when he
described the conditions of the classroom that allowed for the ability to get to know one
another in his response on p. 68 that states how moving around the class to talk with each
other, made the class feel more welcoming and friendly. Judy also supports the above claims
in her response that due to the regular changes in seating and group work made it easy to get
to know her peers and to work with everyone, especially helpful as she was new to the
school. If empathy is the link between identity development and interpersonal relationships,
then it is through these relationships that students will have the opportunity to start to shift
their behaviour and thinking in more sensitive, understanding and empathetic ways (Doumen
et al., 2012; Klimstra et al., 2013; Meeus et al., 2002; Nawaz, 2011; Rassart et al., 2012).
Freire (1989) proposed “dialogical relations” (p. 67), or teaching through dialogue whereby
there is an even distribution of power through all participants and there is reciprocal learning
between all participants. To achieve this even distribution of power in the classroom, the
teacher needed to act with “intellectual humility” (Spiegel, 2012), meaning a kind of openmindedness that sets her on the same level as her students. This strategy was commonly used
in the classroom by the teacher to provide an atmosphere where she could better understand
students’ conceptualization of curriculum and gain valuable feedback on tasks, assignments
or general information about how students were feeling about the work in the classroom.
Although the pillars of the empathy arc described separates, they are actually interconnected.
This interconnection of pillars is indicated in the students’ comments. Theresa, p. 67,
identifies how belonging to a class that implements teaching through dialogue results in a
learning environment that she described as “more together” and that these discussions
allowed students to get to know each other better. Holly’s response adds to this p. 63 where
she connects the strengths found through the multiple intelligence activity celebrating

83

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

84

individuals for the gifts they have, to the relationships where students were honored for their
individual strengths and to a safe environment to express themselves. Many times, high
school can be a place where students do not feel like they belong, or that they do not have
the ability to be successful, and the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set creates
opportunity for further consideration and a change of perspective.
On page 56, May discusses how the ability to combine personal strengths in collaborative
group work results in positively surprising outcomes, supporting the idea of social inclusion
that students at this age yearn for (Katz, 2012a). Collaboration provided students the
opportunity to develop their social relationships within the community of learners (LadsonBillings, 1995).
Answering Where do I fit in? also begins to open students up to the development of affective
empathy, where students can begin to shift their thinking to understanding others (Doumen
et al., 2012; Klimstra et al., 2013; Meeus et al., 2002; Nawaz, 2011; Rassartet al., 2012).
Another emergent condition in pillar 2 was intergenerational classroom relationships.
Theresa shares on p. 68 how she was unsure at first about the course and the tasks being
asked in the beginning with the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set, but that once
she got to know the teacher (through developing of an intergenerational relationship) and her
teaching style, which was more dialogue based, she felt more comfortable. Judy, then Holly,
then the rest of the discussion participants, recalled something from the first week of the year
that had stuck with them. It was the occasion when the teacher was on the phone talking
with her daughter. The teacher had told the class that it was her daughter’s birthday and the
class had wished her a happy birthday over the phone. Due to happenstance, this occasion
had helped to support the development of students’ affective empathy, and create the
opportunity for the alignment of shared values (Gonzalez et al., 2015). Jed also shares that
the relationships created in the class were not only with other students, but just as
importantly, with the teacher. This idea supports how relationships are the foundation of
many classroom aspects: creating a safe environment, mutual respect, space for trust to be
built, and a safe place to be vulnerable. His response on p. 81 can be interpreted that due to

84

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

85

the building of trust and vulnerability in a reciprocal relationship with the teacher, that he
was more willing to participate in learning opportunities.
Another interesting part of relationship building extended beyond the class. Students began
to build relationships with students in the other science 10 class taught by the same teacher.
As Jed describes on p. 81 students discussed the learning and discussions occurring in the
two different classes. This demonstrates how students were able to take what they were
learning outside of the classroom, extending their developing empathy into the school.
A number of students describe how safety and building relationships are so closely tied
together. Kelly sums up how the role of relationship creation is fundamental for the feeling
of safety when she described on p. 67 that by learning about multiple intelligences and then
provided with the opportunities to get to know other students through seating changes and
group activities she could work with anyone in the class and get along. Pearl perfectly sums
up how identity development, opportunities for relationships creation and a safe environment
all combine to create an ideal classroom setting where empathy can be developed in her
statement describing how she felt different this year as the class was closer because everyone
got to know each other which created a safe environment. It appears that through the
opportunities to get to know each other the students put empathy into action, helping to
create a safe environment together.
Pillar 3: Safe environment
The first important aspect of the safe environment was that the teacher was open to feedback
from students, and the students felt comfortable enough to engage in difficult or courageous
conversations. Freire’s (1970) described the development of a safe environment as the
beginning place for critical pedagogy and critical consciousness. Jed, p. 70, describes how in
this class students had the opportunity to consider how their points of view and privileges get
in students’ way of considering different ways of doing things and of finding similarities
between cultures. This supports May and Sleeter’s (2010) work on critical multiculturalism

85

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

86

and its lasting effects on both students and teachers when underpinnings of inequality are
identified in educational opportunities.
Linda takes the opportunity to express how she personally felt about when challenging
conversations would come up in class and the teacher and students would conflict over
opinions and topics. Her ability to express herself, and her comment on how differing
opinions were dealt with in the class demonstrates how the class environment follows Freire
(1989) “dialogical relations” (p. 67) with an equal sharing of power in the class between the
student and the teacher which helps to create a safe and judgment free environment. These
safe environments are supported by Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of needs in which safety is a
fundamental piece of the hierarchy, and adolescent and child psychology tells us that
students can only learn in safe environments. If students do not feel safe, they cannot learn.
Daisy, p. 83, further supports this when she thanks the teacher for creating a safe
environment free from academic judgement. One other outcome of using Freire’s (1989)
“dialogical relations” (p. 67) was that class discussions, as a strategy for knowledge
construction, resulted in the sharing, recycling, and critiquing of information.
Judy, p. 70, shares how she feels safe enough in the classroom to share her opinions free
from the judgement of others creating a sense of belonging and fulfilling self-esteem needs.
Jed, p. 70, further supports his when he indicates he knows the teacher would intervene in
issues of “mean behaviour” on the part of other students. Judy and Jed also shared how
important to them it was that the teacher provided choice in assignment selection and options
for displaying their learning.
Pillar 4: Opportunities to build intercultural empathy
To answer the Call to Action 63 iii “building students capacity for intercultural
understanding, empathy and mutual respect” (TRC, 2015, Call to Action 63.iii) there was a
direct attempt to include Indigenous voice, perspectives and opportunities in the curriculum
to learn about Indigenous, and sometimes specifically Secwepemc, culture and teachings.
The classroom structure, tasks, presentations and field trips were also developed as

86

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

87

reconciliatory action to begin to address the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s (2015)
Call to Action 63. iii. The course was structured so that there were ongoing opportunities for:
1. Building intercultural sensitivity, defined “how an individual makes sense of
cultural differences in values and beliefs of others and the experience of difference
based on these constructions” (Paige & Bennett, 2015) and
2. Building intercultural understanding defined as “recognizing culture and
developing respect, interacting and empathizing with others, and reflecting on
intercultural experiences and taking responsibility” (ACARA, 2019).
3. Building intercultural empathy defined as “the ability to place [the self] into the
cultural background of the target [group] and [the ability] to effectively communicate
[an] understanding of that world” (Zhu, 2011, p.116).
The intercultural Indigenous opportunities presented in the class would not have been
authentic without MJ Johnson, the teacher’s learning partner, as work must always be with
Indigenous people (Freeman et al., 2018). This partnership helped to guide the Indigenous
content presented in the course and many courageous conversations were had about proper
protocols and appropriate ways to introduce and discuss materials. MJ would also visit the
class often to connect with the members of the class and participate alongside the students
and the teacher. Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s presentation and the field trip were important events
in the class to move students towards building intercultural empathy through the
development of relationships (Freeman et al., 2018), where values are found to align
(Gonzalez et al., 2015), and the act of learning is experiential (FNESC, 2014) in its very
nature.
Of course, the presentations from TKKs were, in themselves, conditions of building
intercultural empathy development embedded throughout the semester. Without these
interactions there can be no intercultural sensitivity (experiencing of difference and making
sense of cultural differences in values and beliefs) or understanding (reflecting on
87

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

88

experiences) authentically created within the class (Paige & Bennett, 2015; ACARA, 2019).
These opportunities to be with TKKs and learn from them provides the opportunity to see
that “learning is embedded in memory, history, and story” (FNESC, 2014).
As well as building opportunities for Indigenous intercultural experiences with TKKs,
throughout the course there was also encouragement given to the students to consider
different cultures and their perspectives whenever possible in assignments, discussions, and
lesson and video material presented. The attempt of the teacher to develop within herself and
the students a set of skills and experiences to develop awareness of intercultural differences,
is supported by Ladson-Billings' (1995) second criteria of a teacher’s willingness to nurture
and support cultural competence for culturally relevant teaching.
Although non-Indigenous students and teachers can never truly know what it means to be
and feel Indigenous (Harrison, 2017), students were provided opportunities to build their
intercultural empathy through listening and building understanding of different perspectives
by participating in a presentation and a field trip. Opportunities for students to be with and
spend time learning from knowledge keepers creates the basis for the relationships required
for reconciliation (Freeman et al., 2018) where students and knowledge keepers can begin to
identify shared values (Gonzalez et al., 2015) that are necessary for building intercultural
empathy.
Mrs. Bernice Jensen’s presentation. The following examples of intercultural empathy
suggest that students were beginning to understand the importance of why we learned about
other cultures and why it is important to have other perspectives than their own, an integral
component of the development of empathy (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio,
2007, Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007). The students demonstrated their intercultural
cognitive empathy when they listened and were respectful with Mrs. Bernice Jensen and the
artifacts that she brought with her, supporting Zhu’s (2011) definition of intercultural
empathy.
Just as Canada and its citizens have acknowledged past mistakes in a statement of
Reconciliation to all Aboriginal peoples of Canada and engaged in active acts of
88

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

89

Reconciliation, Matt (p. 57) acknowledges that it is important to understand the history of
Indigenous cultures and what Indigenous people have gone through to appreciate why we are
learning about Indigenous and Secwepemc culture in our classrooms (Department of Indian
Affairs and Northern Development, Ontario. (1997; Truth and Reconciliation Commission,
2015). Caleb, p. 58, also supports the above acknowledgement and action in his description
of how acknowledging past mistakes is the key to moving forward successfully and that this
is why learning about Secwepemc history and culture is important to him demonstrating his
development of affective empathy. It could be that Matt and Caleb are beginning to address
the need to take responsibility which directly connects with the development of intercultural
understanding (ACARA, 2019).
Jed’s comment from page 58 demonstrates his intercultural cognitive empathy in his ability
to communicate his beginning understanding of Indigenous understanding of the processes at
work. In Harrison’s (2017) words, Jed had “listen[ed] for other ways of knowing, apart from
explanatory and propositional knowledge” (Harrison, 2017, p 278) when he talked about
how Indigenous people understood how different processes worked, without a scientific
explanation, but because Secwepemc People had figured it out through different ways. Jed
seems to be grasping the idea that Indigenous understanding of how processes work comes
from a different kind of thinking than is used in Western science.
Gonzalez et al.’s (2015) definition of intercultural affective empathy in the alignment of core
values was demonstrated by students in their discussions about how they feel about the land
we share with the Secwepemc people. Cathy and Maria, p 58, both describe how they
personally connect with the Secwepemc culture’s respect of the land, and how continuing to
learn about Secwepemc culture helps them learn new information about where we live. Jean
(p. 58) further supports the alignment of her values about the importance of understanding
the land with those of the Secwepemc people, when she discussed how Mrs. Bernice
Jensen’s presentation helped her to understand the land we live on better (Gonzalez et al.,
2015). All three students’ responses reflect the intent of the BC science 10 curricular
competencies in “express[ing] and reflect[ing] on a variety of experiences, perspectives, and
worldviews through place” (BC Ministry of Education, 2018).
89

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

90

The opportunity for students to experience these intercultural interactions is foundational in
building intercultural understanding as demonstrated in Matt’s response from p. 57 where he
highlights the importance of learning about local Secwepemc people and their experiences
on this land. Maria’s response from p. 58 highlights how intercultural experiences between
Indigenous people and students help to make learning about cultures accessible, and helping
to build their intercultural understanding and sensitivity through opportunities to interact
with people of different cultures (Paige & Bennett, 2015; Australian Curriculum, Assessment
and Reporting Authority, 2019). The teacher journal notes that students who attended the
field trip learning experience had a profound change in their intercultural understanding and
intercultural empathy (both cognitive and affective empathy).
The value of providing opportunities for lived experience with members of other cultures, as
suggested by Gonzalez et al. (2015) and Sue (2017), is shown in Jed’s comment that
acknowledges that authentic visits from Indigenous presenters is the best way to learn about
other cultures practices to understand that there are different ways of doing things. He goes
on to explain that having multiple cultural understandings is beneficial to everyone (p. 58)
supporting his development of intercultural empathy within the context that lived
experiences and lived reality are what makes learning personal and cause shifts within
(Gonzalez et al., 2015; Sue 2017).
Field trip. The Canadian Council on learning- Aboriginal Learning Knowledge Centre
(2007) suggests that, among other things, learning is experiential, rooted in Aboriginal
languages and culture, spiritually oriented, and a communal activity. The field trip was a
strategy implemented as a response to this suggestion and was co-created by MJ Johnson and
the teacher in bringing together TKKs that could present on the topics of Energy and
interconnectedness. Students and adults had the opportunity to share a meal together and
pass the day engaging with Indigenous stories and ways of knowing.
Students seemed to demonstrate their developing intercultural empathy in their deep
connections with the field trip experiences. In Theresa’s, p. 59, response, her intercultural
cognitive empathy is exemplified in her experience of learning about others and how it
opened her eyes to looking at the world through a different lens in new ways. Caleb’s, p. 59,
90

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

91

60, responses demonstrates his intercultural understanding in how his learning is related to
his own culture, supporting Schwarzenthal et al. (2017) work that learning about others and
reflecting on personal cultural heritage are “complimentary prerequisites for intercultural
understanding” (p. 389).
The students that attended the field trip began to display intercultural empathy in different
ways than students that did not attend, supporting FPPOLs a) “ultimately supports the wellbeing of the self, the family, the community, the land, the spirits, and the ancestors”, b) “is
holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential, and relational (focused on connectedness, on
reciprocal relationships, and a sense of place)” (FNESC, 2014). Although we can never get
into “the shoes of another” (Harrison, 2017, p. 270) culture, we know that getting students to
a point of appreciation, as much as they can, is the start of allyship behaviour.
Students also had the chance to share and celebrate their own cultural heritages in different
aspects of the course, providing the opportunity to reflect on their own cultures and the
cultures of others which are necessary for intercultural empathy (Schwarzenthal et al. (2017).
Schwarzenthal et al. (2017) share that learning about different cultures alongside reflecting
about your personal cultural heritage are “complementary prerequisites for intercultural
understanding” (p. 389). Caleb (p. 65) comments how connecting with a variety of different
cultures throughout the course impacted him, changing his mindset from one of separating
himself from others, to finding similarities and connections between different cultures,
making his learning a valuable experience this semester.
Summing up: The conditions for Intercultural Empathy to develop
This research is telling us that there needs to be a foundation built for the development of
intercultural empathy. Just as Maslow (1943) in his hierarchy of needs proposed, that basic
(physiological and safety needs), psychological (social and self-esteem needs), be in place
before students can reach self-fulfillment (self-actualization needs), this research suggests
that students’ self-esteem, belonging and safety needs must be satisfied before they can
develop intercultural empathy. For example, Theresa (p. 66) comments on how the class felt
to her in the way that her heart and mind were opened to intercultural experiences offered
throughout the course, satisfies this when she talks about safety, unconditional acceptance
91

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

92

and belonging, and highlights how a safe environment with these components makes her feel
like the class is relationally as close as “best friends/family”.
Through opportunities provided for students to identify shared values (Gonzalez et al.,
2015), build intercultural friendships as the foundation for Reconciliation (Freeman et al.,
2018), and build higher levels of empathy (Munin & Speight, 2010) students can begin to
work towards allyship behaviour. Adolescents, at this age, can develop empathy given the
right experiences in the classroom, through multiple perspectives, through the RD (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018) program at the outset of the course, and maintaining that celebration of
difference through the use of the UDL (Katz, 2012a) model, group projects, intercultural
presentations and field trips throughout the course.
Looking through different lenses
In this section the findings from this study will be examined through two different lenses;
Ladson-Billings (1995) culturally relevant teaching and the First Peoples’ Principles of
Learning (FPPOLs).
Ladson-Billings (1995)
Ladson-Billings (1995) tells us that there are two important factors in intercultural education:
culturally relevant teaching and interculturally sensitive teaching environments. Culturally
relevant teaching has three criteria: the teacher must be able to support students’ academic
development, have a willingness to nurture and support cultural competence, and be able to
develop sociopolitical or critical consciousness. Interculturally sensitive teaching
environments by culturally relevant teachers are supported by three pillars: conceptions of
the self and others, the manner in which social relations are structured, and the conceptions
of knowledge. The four pillars identified through this study align well with the LadsonBillings model. In this section these alignments will be discussed.
In Ladson-Billings’ (1995) work there are three main criteria must be satisfied for there to be
culturally relevant teaching.

92

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

93

a) supporting students’ academic development. Recall that the course started with the
RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set and then continued with a UDL (Katz,
2012) model. By starting with these lessons, students were celebrated on their unique
gifts right from the beginning of the course, celebrating their identity and creating a
safe place. This allowed for learning and academic achievement to progress from
where each student was academically. Implementing the UDL (Katz, 2012a) model
allowed the freedom for students to choose the manner comfortable for their learning
style in which to represent their knowledge and conceptual understandings. The
teacher’s reflective journal reports that there were half the number of failures in this
class, as in previous years. The teacher’s reflective journal also perceived higher
student engagement through an increase in attendance and participation in class
activities. The teacher’s reflective journal also notes that the curriculum at times was
complex and stretched students, and that these assignments were accomplished
within diverse groups.
b) Willingness to nurture and support cultural competency (set of skills and
experiences for ongoing awareness of important differences from communities of
different backgrounds (biological, environmental, historical, political, psychological,
religious, and other social aspects of heritage). By incorporating the RD (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set, the teacher was able to celebrate diversity within the
class community first, and then to incorporate that celebration of diversity out
towards other groups. The teacher working together with MJ, incorporated many
different intercultural experiences (presentations and field trips), tasks, and supports
within the curriculum to support students developing their (inter)cultural
competency.
c) Develop socio-political or critical consciousness. Critical consciousness defined as
the awareness of oppressive systemic forces, a sense of efficacy and an action.
Critical consciousness has three components; critical reflection (analysis of
inequality), critical motivation (perceived capacity to affect change), critical action
(engagement in activities for change). With regard to affecting change, the students
93

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

94

did demonstrate their efficacy as they felt empowered in their ability to provide
honest and timely feedback to the teacher, as opportunities happened regularly
throughout the course, to affect change. There were also some students who, in their
responses, began to identify cultural inequities, where they identify an imbalance of
power in different cultural beliefs and ways of knowing. This is an area that will
require more development in the future.
Interculturally sensitive teaching environments by culturally relevant teachers are supported
by three pillars (x, y, z below) from Ladson-Billings’ (1995) work:
x) Conceptions of the self and others. I began the first class with an acknowledgment
of the land on which the school is located to bring this information to the forefront as
important to the collective learning taking place. By starting with this, I was able to
create for students a beginning understanding that this course and the curriculum
found within would contain a purposeful intercultural component. Through
implementing the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set, and then the UDL
(Katz, 2012a) model I not only set up the foundation for success for all students, but
also engaged the students in creating a community of learners that due to the aspects
of the lessons had created relationships and reliance on one another. One other aspect
that the teacher ensured that classroom assistants and herself also became equal in
this community, sharing our own multiple intelligences and participating as equals.
One aspect of this is that the teacher was flexible and responsive in her pedagogy,
and the teacher was constantly problem solving in creative and unique ways. The
teacher would wish to think that in their attempt to bring intercultural learning
opportunities into the classroom they were able to give something back to the
community in which They live, which is one of the components within the
conceptions of self and others.
y) The manner in which social relations are structured. The class was structured to
have many discussions about topics through “dialogical relations” (Freire, 1989, p.
67) in which there is an equal dispersal of power. This allowed students the ability to
94

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

95

share and be honest with their learning, and address issues as they came up. This
further created a safe, non-judgmental environment where students felt free to ask all
of their questions without fear of ridicule. There was a fluid teacher-student
relationship where the teacher was sure to connect with all students daily, discussing
curricular topics and common interests further building trusting relationships.
Through the implementation of the RD lesson set and the UDL (Katz, 2012a) model
the teacher was able to create a community of learners who collaborated often on
group projects. Students were very good at including each other’s strengths on group
assignments, celebrating each other’s gifts within the groups, taking responsibility for
one another in group settings, and providing information when students were absent.
z) The conceptions of knowledge. Ladson-Billings (1995) said that knowledge is
malleable as in it is shared, recycled and constructed, and must be viewed critically.
The teacher used the strategy of “dialogical relations” (Freire, 1989, p. 67), and
through these discussions typically in a think, pair, share strategy, students were able
to reflect on and solidify their learning in many different topics. The ability to recycle
their thinking came about by the implementation of reflective practices in the course.
Ladson-Billings (1995) also suggests a scaffolding to facilitate learning and
multifaceted assessment including within the course to provide opportunities for
students to demonstrate excellence in understanding and ability. The teacher uses the
UDL (Katz, 2012a) model so students are able to access information at their level and
demonstrate their learning in whatever way they choose. Lastly, Ladson-Billings
(1995) said that conceptions of knowledge also foster a community of learners
respectful of each other’s values, beliefs, recognizing differences and similarities
between themselves and their peers. Through the continued offering of opportunities
for collaborative group work, intercultural learning opportunities and the students’
ability to reflect on their growth of empathy throughout the course, they show how
they have achieved this community of learners respectful of one another.
One aspect that Ladson-Billings did not take into account was the role of the student in
interculturally sensitive (teaching) environments. Even though the teacher is foundational in
95

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

96

creating this environment, the students themselves need to co-construct the environment for
learning to be successful in the long term. Most teachers are well aware that learning
environments are co-constructed between students and their teachers. Even though
interculturally sensitive teaching environments can be created by teachers, in order to
maintain these environments, the students must be willing participants and co-create the
learning environment together with the teacher. The co-construction of the interculturally
sensitive learning environment ensures that even when the teacher is not present that the
class continues to maintain this environment. This was seen in the teacher’s reflective
journal notes that teachers teaching on call (TTOC) when called to the classroom, as the
teacher was out sick, always made a point to tell the teacher how kind and friendly the
students were, and how pleasant it was to teach them.
First Peoples’ Principles of Learning
Although the FPPOL’s were an embedded strategy throughout the course, it is interesting to
note that the students identified many of the components in their responses throughout the
course:
•

Learning ultimately supports the well-being of the self, the family, the community,
the land, the spirits and the ancestors. Students reflected on how their learning made
them feel when they described using the multiple intelligences to firstly celebrate the
gifts they already possess. One student described how the relationships built between
the students and the teacher is built upon commonalities and alignment of values
within their respective families. Another piece of the above learning principle is that
the students took special interest when talking about the significance of learning
about the land during Mrs. Bernice Jensen‘s presentation. It was hoped that through
their experience students would be able to make connections with their communities
and share their learning to their homes. In the end-of-course discussions, students
shared that they had discussed this class at home more than other classes, and had
even shared some of the videos watched in class with people at home and that rich
conversations followed. This tenet aligns with the first pillar of the empathy arc:
identity development.

96

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

•

97

Learning is holistic, reflexive, reflective, experiential and relational (focused on
connectedness, on reciprocal relationships and a sense of place). The teacher
acknowledged the land as the first thing on the first day of school to ensure that
students understood a sense of place, to situate the learning before it began. The
teacher must create an environment that is flexible to accommodate students’ needs
at the moment, to be reflexive to current events. Another piece is that a safe
environment in which “dialogical relations” (Freire, 1989, p. 67) are used to disperse
power during group discussions helps to build reciprocal relationships and a sense of
belonging in students. The opportunities provided in the presentations the field trip,
and all curricular tasks created with an intercultural intent, align with the experiential
nature of learning. This tenet aligns with the empathy arc pillars 1) identity
development, and 2) safety.

•

Learning involves recognizing the consequences of one’s actions. Through reciprocal
relationships, group work and collaboration students were able to learn about
consequences of their actions through clear and natural consequences. Another
emergent data point was how students discussed looking back at history to
acknowledge past mistakes. This tenet aligns with empathy arc pillar 2: safety.

•

Learning involves generational roles and responsibilities. The role of the teacher is in
creating a safe environment that is an interculturally sensitive teaching environment.
Students, however, also have a role in that they will co-create the environment in
which the course exists. This co-construction of the environment means that should
the teacher need to be absent, the environment continues to be maintained because
the students take ownership and maintain the established environment. Which was
seen in both of the classes in the study from notes in the teacher’s reflective learning
journal that describes teachers teaching on call experiences. This tenet aligns with the
empathy arc pillar 2: safety.

•

Learning recognizes the roles of indigenous knowledge. Students made reference to
science being a part of indigenous culture. Showing that this particular student
understood that science exists in all cultures regardless of any intercultural

97

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

98

explanation of that understanding. This tenet aligns with empathy arc pillar 3:
intercultural opportunities.
•

Learning is embedded in memory, history and story. Much of the field trip activities
revolved around learning through story, which was new to a few students and it
stretched their abilities to make sense of information as it was presented. This tenet is
aligned with all four pillars of the empathy arc 1) identity development, 2) safety, 3)
intercultural opportunities, and 4) empathy-in-action.

•

Learning involves patience and time. For many students the empathy arc will
continue past the end of this course. For some students we saw development in their
responses throughout reflective activities in the class. Aligning with the above
FPPOL in that all students have their own learning journey and they all take different
time to learn different things, and that the construct of a semester system course does
not always fit the patience and time needed for individual students to achieve their
self-actualization within the course. This tenet is aligned with all four pillars of the
empathy arc 1) identity development, 2) safety, 3) intercultural opportunities, and 4)
empathy-in-action.

•

Learning requires exploration of one’s identity. Erikson (1959) proposed that
adolescent development answered two questions: Who am I? and Where do I fit in?
The ability for students to address both of these questions through the RD lesson set
from Katz with Lamoureux (2018) created a foundation from which students could
grow. Having a foundation where students were already celebrated for the gifts they
personally possessed, had set them up for success. They came to class already having
something. Too often, classes and assessments are organized in ways that continually
point out deficits within academics, or skills, or abilities. But the RD (Katz with
Lamoureux, 2018) program does not. We saw the development of Schwarzenthal et
al.’s (2017) description on the creation of intercultural understanding through the
reflection of personal culture, and learning about other cultures concurrently. This
tenet is aligned with all four pillars of the empathy arc 1) identity development, 2)
safety, 3) intercultural opportunities, and 4) empathy-in-action.

98

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

•

99

Learning involves recognizing that some knowledge is sacred and only shared with
permission and/or in certain situations. While on the field trip one of the presenters
TKKs stated and then reiterated that the learning being presented was for educational
purposes only. He made this extremely clear. However, I am not sure that the
students fully grasped what the presenter TKK was implying: that in this particular
case the knowledge being shared was with permission and to be shared for this
particular situation only. This tenet is aligned with all four pillars of the empathy arc
3) intercultural opportunities, and 4) empathy-in-action. These strategies, in places,
need more focus and attention to more fully develop them within the course.

List of recommendations
•

If the teacher is non-Indigenous, it is imperative to find an Indigenous learning
partner with whom you can engage in your own “dialogic relations” (Freire, 1989, p.
67) to have courageous conversations and build a strong relationship. Within this
relationship the integration of Indigenous content can be discussed and TKKs can be
invited to help support different curricular aspects.

•

Important to build relationships with local Indigenous people and community

•

There needs to be purposeful implementation of the four pillars found in this study:
identity development, building relationships, safety, and intercultural opportunities

•

Implementation of a safe, respectful, friendly environment that considers Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs and attempts to create an environment for the satisfaction of those
needs. The satisfaction of these needs are fundamental for adolescent identity
development and provide the base from which students can develop intercultural
empathy, the foundation of allyship behaviour.

•

There must be purposeful implementation of FFPOL, RD (Katz with Lamoureux,
2018) and UDL (Katz, 2012a) as the basis for the pillars and empathy arc as shown in
the empathy arc diagram.

•

Regardless of cultural heritage- Find a learning partner who will engage in honest
conversations about curriculum, who you can co-create with and share ideas. Your
practice, curricular strategies, and student experiences will be enriched.

99

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

•

100

Listening and Acting on Students’ voices to become co-creators of the learning
environment.

Limitations and Future Work
•

As a non-Indigenous teacher, although provided with resources, it does not feel
appropriate at times to teach Indigenous perspectives. TKKs, Aboriginal Education
Workers and school district staff are few and far between and the ability to have an
Aboriginal Education Worker in the classroom in a district of our size is a special
day. Unfortunately, the work still falls on the shoulders of Indigenous people within
this realm. I am not sure how I can help to alleviate this within my context. BUT, I
believe that doing something is better than doing nothing. I still have much to learn
and far to go.

•

Time. Time to create the relationships necessary for this work and time to develop
and implement this curriculum.

•

Having Supportive administration who recognize the importance of this work

•

Student buy in and engagement. This is why relationships are key to empathy
development as students very much affect the classroom environment.

•

Finding learning partners. I was extremely lucky to have found such a gracious
learning partner in MJ Johnson, and in support from Roberta Regnier Aboriginal
Education workers from the school. Having strong foundational relationships are key
to this work. For a variety of reasons AEW’s are not around for long at the same
school.

•

Indigenous student’s experiences from the course? Inappropriate to continue without
proper ethics and band approval.

•

This was a small study with twenty-four participants and in the future, it would be
interesting to extend the study to a larger group.

•

In future studies it would be interesting to investigate why parents and guardians did
not attend the information sessions.

•

This was a qualitative study and, in the future, it would be interesting to develop a
quantitative study with a larger group to further support findings.

100

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

•

101

In the future it would be interesting to investigate individual students’ empathy arc
development.

•

Within the classroom there must be more opportunities built in to discuss and explore
critical consciousness, to take a closer look at personal privileges and how that
affects our perceptions when learning about different ways of knowing and different
cultures.

•

In the future, it would be interesting to investigate empathy development of the same
students in a longitudinal study.

•

I will be sharing my completed thesis and findings with the people who helped to
create the opportunities for intercultural learning and understanding.

•

I must find a way to give back to the school community through sharing my findings
with students and parents through a presentation.

•

I must find ways to give back to the broader community through presenting at
professional development days and to pre-service teacher candidates

•

I plan to share my findings widely in future publishing opportunities

A Teacher’s Reflection: What did I learn?
The curriculum designed by the teacher supported the development of empathy.
Students need scaffolding to develop empathy, much like they would to build any other skill.
The scaffolding needed to build empathy included the implementation of the RD and UDL
programs (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018; Katz, 2012a), opportunities for collaborative
groupings, followed by the introduction of intercultural experiences, and then tasks that
blend intercultural learning with group assignments on topics in science.
For non-Indigenous teachers, Indigenous learning opportunities and experiences must be
developed with Indigenous colleagues and community members. Through working with MJ
Johnson, I was able to go forward with planning. It was through our work together with
TKKs from the community that we were able to create these learning opportunities for the
students. These opportunities must be embedded throughout the course strategically.

101

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

102

Looking at my work that I drew upon in this study. I can see that the students talked about
how the RD (Katz with Lamoureux, 2018) lesson set and the UDL model (Katz, 2012a)
allowed them to respect, build empathy for, and act upon their developed empathy for each
other in their group work. I can also see that they built intercultural understanding and
mutual respect through the opportunities provided.
“Dialogic relations” (Freire, 1989, p. 67) through class discussions are a strategy that
students mentioned often in their responses in the data collection. These discussions enabled
them to shape their thinking through dialogue either with a partner, in a small group, or the
entire class. As a teacher, I often use reflective practices to think about many aspects of what
I do. We know that learning is social, and the use of “dialogic relations” (Freire, 1989, p. 67)
as reflective practises in the classroom as a teaching strategy for students to develop their
thinking in dialogue resulted in interesting conversations. Students were able to grapple with
their understanding, listen and question each other, and able to share without the fear of
judgement. By listening and acting on students’ voices areas requiring attention, discussion,
and clarification were identified and addressed in the moment. Also in hearing students and
being flexible in teaching, allows students to feel empowered in their education. Feeling
power over one’s own destiny can be a motivating factor for students.
Indigenous knowledge and ways of knowing must be first highlighted within the curriculum
due to the Canadian context. One other aspect that came out of the discussion responses was
that there is room for other cultural infusions as a strategy to help support the development
of intercultural understanding (Schwarzenthal et al., 2017). When students were able to think
about their own cultural heritages, they seemed to be more open to learning about Indigenous
culture through the consideration of commonalities, and the discussion that although there
may be commonalities, that there are very different experiences and nuances specific to each
culture.
Learning is experiential, so as a teacher I must continue to find ways for students to engage
with the material in multiple ways, to bring in Indigenous TKKs, as well as offer other
opportunities for students to continue to build their intercultural empathy on a global scale.

102

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

103

What I know was reaffirmed by the study: that my practice must continue to evolve and shift
as the role in reconciliatory action needs to be responsive and reflective.
Although the learning environment, in this case an interculturally sensitive learning
environment, is initially created by the teacher, at some point there needs to be the
transference of shared responsibility in the co-creation of the environment to both students
and teachers- the cocreation of this environment is needed for empathy development and
Reconciliatory action. This co-construction can continue to perpetuate a positive intercultural
learning environment without the teacher.
All students are engaged in their own journey within the empathy arc and they must be
provided time and patience to build this skill.
Since students’ empathy developed through this work, and empathy is a foundation for
allyship behaviour, this study suggests that these students are moving along a continuum
towards allyship behaviour.

103

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

104

REFERENCES
Aboriginal Healing Foundation. (2002). The healing has begun: An Operational Update
from the Aboriginal Healing Foundation. https://www.ahf.ca/downloads/the-healing-hasbegun.pdf
Academica Group. (2016). How indigenization can support students while honouring
reconciliation. https://forum.academica.ca/forum/how-indigenization-can-support-studentswhile-honouring-reconciliation
Aitken, A., & Radford, L. (2018). Learning to teach for reconciliation in Canada: Potential,
resistance and stumbling forward. Teaching and Teacher Education, 75, 40–48.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.05.014
Archibald, J. (2008). Indigenous storywork: Educating the heart, mind, body, and spirit.
UBC Press.
Assembly of First Nations. (2010). First Nations control over First Nations education.
http://www.afn.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/2010-AFN-First-Nations-Contol-of-FirstNations-Education_sm.pdf
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2019). Intercultural
Understanding. https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/generalcapabilities/intercultural-understanding/
Battiste, M. (2002). Indigenous knowledge and pedagogy in First Nations education: A
literature review with recommendations.
https://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/education/24._2002_oct_marie_battiste_indigenousknowle
dgeandpedagogy_lit_review_for_min_working_group.pdf
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2020). Inclusive education resources.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/education-training/k-12/teach/teaching-tools/inclusiveeducation
Bear, L. L. (2000). Jagged worldviews colliding. In M. Battiste (Ed.), Reclaiming Indigenous
voice and vision (pp. 77-85). UBC Press.
Beecher, M., & Sweeny, S. M. (2008). Closing the achievement gap with curriculum
enrichment and differentiation: One school’s story. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(3),
502-530. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ810785.pdf

104

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

105

Bennett, M. J. (1993). Towards ethnorelativism: A developmental model of intercultural
sensitivity. In R. M Paige (Ed.), Education for the intercultural experience (2nd ed., pp. 2171). Intercultural Press.
Bennett, M. J. & Castoglioni, I. (2004) Embodied Ethnocentrism and the feeling of culture:
A key to training for intercultural competence. In D. Landis, J. Bennett & M. Bennett (Eds.),
Handbook of Intercultural Training (3rd ed, pp. 249-265). Sage.
http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781452231129.n10
Bishop, A. (2002). Becoming an ally: Breaking the cycle of oppression in people. Fernwood
Publishing.
Bloom, P. (2016). Against empathy. Harper Collins.
Boal, A. (1985). Theatre of the oppressed. Theatre Communications Group.
Breithaupt, F. (2018). The bad things we do because of empathy. Interdisciplinary Science
Reviews, 43(2), 166–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2018.1450928
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2018a). Science 10 curricular competencies.
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/science/10/courses
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2018b). Core competencies.
https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/competencies
British Columbia Ministry of Education. (2019). B.C Graduation Program: Policy Guide.
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/education/kindergarten-tograde12/support/graduation/graduation-policy-guide.pdf
British Columbia Teachers Federation (2016). A guide to allyship.
https://bctf.ca/uploadedFiles/Public/SocialJustice/EquityInclusion/Allyship%20handout.pdf
Broido, E. M. (2000). The development of social justice allies during college: A
phenomenological investigation. Journal of College Student Development, 41(1), 3–18.
charitycapstone.yolasite.com/resources/Broido2000.pdf
Brookefield, S. (2014). Teaching our own racism: incorporating personal narratives of
whiteness into anti-racist practice. Adult Learning, 25(3), 89-95.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1045159514534189
Brown, J. L. (2004). Making the most of understanding by design. Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
105

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

106

Bruska-Vega, R., Brown, K., & Yasutake, D. (2011). Science achievement of students in cotaught, inquiry-based classrooms. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 17(1),
22-31.
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedome, s 2, Part 1 of the Consititution Act, 1982, being
Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK), 1982, c 11. https://www.canada.ca/en/canadianheritage/services/how-rights-protected/guide-canadian-charter-rights-freedoms.html#a2b
Canadian Constutition Act, being Schedule B to the Canada Act (UK), 1982, c11.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/FullText.html
Canadian Multiculturalism Act, R.S.C., 1988, c. 31, assented to 21st July, 1988. https://lawslois.justice.gc.ca/PDF/C-18.7.pdf
Cavell, S. (2004). Cities of words: Pedagogical letters on a register of moral life. Belknap
Press.
Chrona, J. L. (2014). Educational applications of First Peoples’ principles of learning.
https://firstpeoplesprinciplesoflearning.wordpress.com/first-peoples-principles-of-learning/
Chunoo, V. S & Callahan, K. (2017). Pedagogy in action: Teaching culturally relevant
leadership. Journal of Leadership Studies, 11(3), 42-47. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21544
Clark, A.J. (2010). Empathy and sympathy: Therapeutic distinctions in counseling. Journal
of Mental Health Counseling, 32(2), 95-101.
https://doi.org/10.17744/mehc.32.2.228n116thw397504
Creswell, J. W. (2011). Creswell, J. W. Educational Research: Planning Conducting, and
Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Pearson.
Crétien, J. (1969). Statement of the Government of Canada on Indian Policy. Queen’s
Printer. https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/DAM/DAM-INTER-HQ/STAGING/textetext/cp1969_1100100010190_eng.pdf
Connell, B. R., Jones, M., Mace, R., Mueller, J., Mullick, A., Ostroff, E., Sanford, J.,
Steinfeld, E., Story, M., & Vanderheiden, G. (1997). The principles of universal design. The
Center for Universal Design.
https://projects.ncsu.edu/www/ncsu/design/sod5/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm
Curcic, S. (2009). Inclusion in PK-12: An international perspective. International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 13(5), 517-538. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603110801899585

106

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

107

Czyzewski, K. (2011). The truth and reconciliation commission of Canada: Insights into the
goal of transformative education. International Indigenous Policy Journal, 2(3), 4.
https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2011.2.3.4
Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. (1997). Gathering strength:
Canada’s Aboriginal action plan. Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Ottawa https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED450974.pdf
Denis, J. S. & Bailey, K.A. (2016). ‘You can’t have reconciliation without justice’: How
non-Indigenous participants in Canada’s truth and reconciliation process understand their
roles and goals. In S. Maddison & R. da Costa (Eds.), The limits of settler colonial
reconciliation (pp. 137-158). Springer.
Dewey, J (1938). Experience and education. Macmillan.
De Wied, M., Branje, S. J. T., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2007). Empathy and conflict resolution in
friendship relations among adolescents. Aggressive Behaviour, 33(1), 48-55.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20166
Drake, S. & Burns, R. (2004). Meeting Standards Through Integrated Curriculum.
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Doumen, S., Smits, I., Luyckx, K., Duriez, B., Vanhalst, J., Verschueren, K., & Goossens, L.
(2012). Identity and perceived peer relationship quality in emerging adulthood: The
mediating role of attachment-related emotions. Journal of Adolescence, 35, 1417-1425.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.01.003
Duhigg, J. M., Rostosky, S. S., Gray, B. E., & Wimsatt, M. K. (2010). Development of
heterosexuals into sexual minority allies: A qualitative exploration. Sexuality Research &
Social Policy, 7, 2-14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13178-010-0005-2
Eisenberg, A. (2018). The challenges of structural injustice to reconciliation: truth and
reconciliation in Canada. Ethics & Global Politics, 11(1), 22-30.
https://doi.org/10.1080/16544951.2018.1507387
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle: Selected papers. Psychological Issues.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity, youth, and crisis. Norton.
First Nations Education Steering Committee. (2014). First Peoples’ principles of
learning. FNESC. http://www.fnesc.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/PUB-LFPPOSTER-Principles-of-Learning-First-Peoples-poster-11x17.pdf

107

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

108

Fosnot, C. T. (2005). Constructivism: Theory, perspective, and practice. Teachers College
Press.
Freeman, K., McDonald, S., & Morcom, L. (2018). Truth and reconciliation in
your classroom: How to get started and who can help. Education Canada, 58(2), 10.
https://www.edcan.ca/articles/truth-reconciliation-classroom/
Freire, P. (1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Penguin.
Freire, P. (1989). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. Continuum.
Freire, P. (1998). Pedagogy of freedom: Ethics, democracy and civic courage. Rowman and
Little.
Ghosh, R., & Abdi, A. A. (2013). Education and the politics of difference: Select Canadian
perspectives. Canadian Scholars Press Inc.
Gini, G., Albiero, P., Benelli, B., & Altoè, G. (2007). Does empathy predict adolescents’
bullying and defending behavior? Aggressive Behavior, 33(5), 467–476.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.20204
Gonzalez, K. A., Riggle, E. D. B., & Rostosky, S. S. (2015). Cultivating positive feelings
and attitudes: A path to prejudice reduction and ally behavior. Translational Issues in
Psychological Science, 1(4), 372–381. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000049
Goodman, D. J. (2000). Motivating people from privileged groups to support social justice.
Teachers College Record, 102(6) 1061-1085.
https://sites.nd.edu/cstresearch/files/2012/03/Motivating-People-from-Privilege-to-JusticeGoodman-20001.pdf
Gordon, M. (2005). Roots of empathy: Changing the world, child by child. T.
Allen Publishers.
Gorski, P. C. (2008). Good Intentions are not enough: a decolonizing intercultural education.
Intercultural Education, 19(6) 515-525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14675980802568319
Hafen, C. A., Allen, J. P., Mikami, A. Y., Gregory, A., Hamre, B. & Pianta, R. C. (2012).
The pivotal role of adolescent autonomy in secondary school classrooms. Journal of Youth
and Adolescence, 41(3), 245-255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9739-2
Halbert, J. & Kaser, L. (2013). Spirals of Inquiry for Equity and Quality. BCPVPA Press.

108

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

109

Hanson, A. J. (2018). Relational encounters with Indigenous literatures. McGill Journal of
Education / Revue des science de l’education de McGill, 53(2) 312-330.
https://doi.org/10.7202/1058400ar
Hanson, E. (2009). Constitution Express.
https://indigenousfoundations.arts.ubc.ca/constitution_express/#:~:text=The%20Constitution
%20Express%20was%20a%20movement%20organized%20in,of%20the%20Canadian%20c
onstitution%20by%20the%20Trudeau%20government.
Harrison, N. (2017). Putting oneself in the shoes of another: issues of empathy and
intercultural understanding in the Australian geography curriculum. International Research
in Geographical and Environmental Education, 26(4), 269-280.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10382046.2016.1262509
Heberle, A. E., Rapa, L. J., & Farago, F. (2020). Critical consciousness in children and
adolescents: A systematic review, critical assessment, and recommendations for future
research. Psychological Bulletin, 146(6), 525-551. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000230
Hegel, G. W. (1807/1949). The phenomenology of mind (J.B. Baillie, Trans.). Allen Unwin.
Hoffman, M. L. (1989). Empathy and prosocial activism. In N. Eisenberg, J. Reykowski, &
Staub, E. (Eds.) Social and moral values: Individual and societal perspectives, 65-85.
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Hogan, R. (1969). Development of an empathy scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 33(3), 307. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027580
Hyslop, Katie. (2016). How to bring First Peoples’ into BC classrooms. The Tyee.
https://thetyee.ca/News/2016/11/03/First-Peoples-in-BC-Classrooms/
Hunt, L. 2008. Inventing human rights. Norton.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel, therefore we learn: The relevance
of affective and social neuroscience to education. Mind Brain Education, 1(1), 3–10.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-228X.2007.00004.x
Indian Act, R.S.C., 1970, c. 1-6. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/i-5/FullText.html
Indigenous Corporate Training inc. (2016, September 23). https://www.ictinc.ca/blog/harrydaniels-the-man-who-put-m%C3%A9tis-in-the-constitution

109

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

110

Kant, E. (1946). Critique of pure reason (J. M. D. Meiklejohn, Trans.). Dutton. (Original
work published 1781).
Kanu, Y., & Glor, M. (2006) ‘Currere’ to the rescue? Teachers as ‘amateur intellectuals’ in a
knowledge society. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 4(2), 101122. https://jcacs.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/jcacs/article/download/17007/15809
Kaser, L, & Halbert, J. (2017). The Spiral playbook. C21 Canada.
http://c21canada.org/playbook/
Katz, J. (2012a). Teaching to diversity: The Three-Block Model of Universal Design for
Learning. Portage & Main Press.
Katz, J. (2012b). Reimagining Inclusion. Canadian Association of Principals Journal.
Summer, 22-26.
Katz, J. (2012c). Making imagination real: Inclusive education and the three block model of
universal design for learning. Canadian Association of Principals Journal. Summer, 30-34.
Katz, J. (2013). The Three Block Model of Universal Design for Learning (UDL): Engaging
students in inclusive education. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1) 153-194.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/canajeducrevucan.36.1.153
Katz, J. with Lamoureaux, K. (2018). Ensouling Our Schools, A Universally Designed
Framework for Mental Health, Well-being, and Reconciliation. Portage and Main Press.
Katz, R. & St. Denis, V. (1991). Teacher as healer. Journal of Indigenous Studies, (2) 24-36.
Kincheloe, J.L, Steinberg, S.R. (1997) Changing Multiculturalism. Open University Press.
Klimstra, T., Luyckx, K., Branje, S., Teppers, E., Goossens, L., & Meeus, W. (2012).
Personality traits, interpersonal identity, and relationship stability: Longitudinal linkages in
late adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1661-1673.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9862-8
Kovach, M., Carriere. J., Montgomery, H., Barrett, M. J., Giles, C., (2015) Indigenous
presence: Experiencing and envisioning Indigenous knowledges within selected postsecondary sites of education and social work.
https://www.uregina.ca/socialwork/about/facultystaff/FacultySites/MontgomeryMontySite/Indigenous%20Presence.pdf

110

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

111

Kroger, J. (2007). Identity development: Adolescence through adulthood (2nd ed). Sage
Publications, Inc.
Kurzban, R., DeScioli, P., & O’Brien, E. (2007). Audience effects on moralistic punishment.
Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2): 75-84.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2006.06.001
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32: 465-491. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312032003465
Lagace, N., Sinclair, N. J. (2015). The White Paper,
1969. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/the-white-paper-1969
Lennon, R. & Eisenberg, N. (1987). Gender and age differences in empathy and sympathy.
In N. Eisenberg & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 195-217). Cambridge
University Press.
MacDonald, J., & Markides, J. (2018). Called to action: Dialogue around praxis for
reconciliation. McGill Journal of Education, 53(2), 213. https://doi.org/10.7202/1058395ar
MacMath, S. & Hall, H. (2018). Indigenous education: using the science of storywork to
teach with and within instead of about indigenous peoples. Journal of American Indian
Education, 57(2), 86-106. https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/jamerindieduc.57.2.0086
Madden, B. (2015). Pedagogical pathways for Indigenous education with/in
teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education: An International Journal of Research
and Studies, 51 (1), 1-15. http://daneshyari.com/article/preview/373920.pdf
Markus, H.R., Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion
and motivation. Psychological Review, 98 (2), 224-253. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033295X.98.2.224
Marshall, T. (2013, July 31). Elijah Harper. The Canadian Encyclopedia.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/elijah-harper
Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370396. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm
May, S., & Sleeter, C. E. (2010). Introduction. In S. May & C.E. Sleeter (Eds.).
Critical multiculturalism: Theory and praxis. (pp.1-16). Routledge.

111

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

112

McIntosh, P. (1989). White Privilege: Unpacking the invisible Knapsack Peace and
Freedom, 9-10; repr. in Independent School, 49 (1990), 31-35.
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED355141.pdf?utm#page=43
McIntosh, P. (2012). Reflections and future directions for privilege studies. Journal of Social
Issues, 68(1), 194-206. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01744.x
Meeus, W., Oosterwegel, A., & Vollebergh, A. (2002). Parental and peer attachment and
identity development in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 25, 93-106.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jado.2001.0451
Mehabrian, A., & Epstein, N. (1972). A measure of emotional empathy. Journal of
Personality, 40(4), 525-543. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1972.tb00078.x
Mestre Escriva, M. V., Samper Garcia, P., Frias Navarro, M. D., & Tur Porcar, A. M.
(2009). Are women more empathetic than men? A longitudinal study in adolescence. The
Spanish Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 76-83. http://roderic.uv.es/handle/10550/2341
Mezirow, J. (1997). Transformative learning: Theory to practice. New Directions for Adult &
continuing education, (74), 5.
Michel, P. (2017) EDUC 5990 Guest Speaker, July 12, 2017.
Mill, J. S. (1871). Utilitarianism. (4th ed.) Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer.
Mixon, L. (2009). Teaching Aboriginal Higher Learners: Professional development
workbook. Coastal Corridor Consortium.
Morcom, L., & Freeman, K. (2018). Niinwi - Kiinwa - Kiinwi: Building Non-Indigenous
Allies in Education through Indigenous Pedagogy. Canadian Journal of Education / Revue
canadienne de l’éducation (41)3, 808-833. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1192156.pdf
Munin, A., & Speight, S. L. (2010). Factors influencing the ally development of college
students. Equity and Excellence in Education, 43, 249-264.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10665681003704337
Nawaz, S. (2011). The relationship of parental and peer attachment bonds with the identity
development during adolescence. Journal of Social Sciences, 5, 104-119.
Nussbaum, M. C. (2013). Political emotions: why love matters for justice. Cambridge :
Harvard University Press.

112

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

113

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2017). The OECD
handbook for innovative learning environments. OECD Publishing.
Paige, R. M. & Bennett, J. M. (2015). Intercultural sensitivity. In J. M. Bennett (Ed.), The
Sage encyclopedia of intercultural competence. (pp.521-524) SAGE publication,
Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483346267.n170
Pete, S. (2016). 100 ways: Indigenizing & decolonizing academic programs. Aboriginal
Policy Studies, 6(1), 80. https://doi.org/10.5663/aps.v6i1.27455
Phinney, J., & Kohatsu, E. L. (1997) Ethnic and racial identity development and mental
health. In J. Schulenberg, J. Maggs, & K. Hurrelmann (Eds.), Health risks and
developmental transitions during adolescence (pp. 420-443). Cambridge University Press.
Pidgeon, M. (2008). Pushing against the margins: Indigenous theorizing of “success” and
retention in higher education. J. College Student Retention, 10 (3), 339-360.
https://doi.org/10.2190%2FCS.10.3.e
Piotrowski, N.A., & Stark, S. W. (2019). Cultural competence. Encyclopedia of health. (pp.
529-530). Salem Press.
Rassart, J., Luyckx, K., Apers, S., Goossens, E., & Moons, P. (2012). Identity dynamics and
peer relationship quality in adolescents with a chronic disease: The sample case of congenital
heart disease. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 33, 625-632.
https://journals.lww.com/jrnldbp/Abstract/2012/10000/Identity_Dynamics_and_Peer_Relati
onship_Quality_in.4.aspx
Reindeau, R. E. (2000). A brief history of Canada. Fitzhenry and Whiteside Limited.
Regan, P. (2010). Unsettling the settler within: Indian residential schools, truth telling, and
reconciliation in Canada. UBC Press.
https://lh.journals.yorku.ca/index.php/lh/article/view/39300/35600
Reves, S. and Ferguson, D. (2018). Fostering Allyship behavior in grade 10 science
students: an act of reconciliation. Thompson Rivers University, Kamloops, British
Columbia, Canada.
Royal commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996). Report of the Royal Commission on
Aboriginal Peoples. https://www.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/discover/aboriginal-heritage/royalcommission-aboriginal-peoples/Pages/final-report.aspx

113

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

114

Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. (1996b). The framework: lifelong, holistic
education. Volume 3 Gathering Strength, Chapter 5-Education. 404-415.
https://archive.org/stream/RoyalCommissionOnAboriginalPeoplesFinalReportVol.3/Royal%
20Commission%20on%20Aboriginal%20Peoples%20-%20Final%20Report%20%20Vol.%203_djvu.txt
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic
Books.
Schonert-Reichl, K. A., & Hymel, S. (2007). Educating the heart as well as the mind: Social
and emotional learning for school and life success. Education Canada, 47(2), 20–25.
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1205/937b9db62b8b68a2cba0c6ac6ccd5ed9bd09.pdf
Schwarzenthal, M., Juang, L. P., Schachner, M. K., van de Vijver, A. J. R., & Handrick, A.
(2017). From tolerance to understanding: Exploring the development of intercultural
competence in multiethnic contexts from early to late adolescence. Journal of Community &
Applied Social Psychology, 27, 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1002/ casp.2317
Sellers, M. (2017). Reflective practice. In Sellers, M. (2nd Ed), Reflective practice for
teachers (pp. 4-5). SAGE Publishers.
Shek, D. T. L., Chung, P. (2018). The quest for an alternative paradigm of STEM education
for young people. International Journal of Child and Adolescent Health, 11(3), 259-270.
Spiegel, J. S. (2012). Open-mindedness and intellectual humility. Theory and Research in
Education, 10(1), 27-38. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1477878512437472
Smith, J., Puckett, C., Simon, W. (2016) Indigenous allyship: An overview. Waterloo, ON:
Office of Aboriginal Initiatives, Wilfrid Laurier University, 2016.
https://healthsci.mcmaster.ca/docs/librariesprovider59/allyship/indigenous-allyship-anoverview.pdf?sfvrsn=29e4a8b9_2
Snyder, E. (2010). The ethics of reconciling: learning from Canada’s Truth
and Reconciliation Commission. Les ateliers de l’ethique, 5(2), 36-48.
https://doi.org/10.7202/1044313ar
St. Denis. A. (2011). Silencing Aboriginal curricular content and perspectives through
multiculturalism:“There are other children here”. Review of education, pedagogy, and
cultural studies, 33(4), 306-317. https://doi.org/10.1080/10714413.2011.597638
Steffe, L. P., & Gale, J. (Eds.) (1995). Constructivism in education. Earlbaum.

114

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

115

Stock, R., & Grover, S. C. (2013). Critical reflection in the secondary classroom:
Incorporating indigenous content in an anti-oppression framework. International Journal of
Children's Rights 21(4), 629-645. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718182-55680021
Sue, D. W. (2017). The challenges of becoming a white ally. Counseling Psychologist,
45(5), 706–716. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000017719323
Susman, G. I., Evered, R. D. (1978). An assessment of the scientific merits of action
Research. Administrative Science Quarterly, 23(4), 582-603.
http://www.goldenbridgesschool.org/uploads/1/9/5/4/19541249/teaching_white_students_ab
out_racism.pdf
Sytsma, S. (2009). The basics of experimental design: A quick and non-technical guide.
Academia.
https://www.academia.edu/30563825/The_Basics_of_Experimental_Design_A_Quick_and_
Non_Technical_Guide
Tennant, P. (2008, February 12). Bill Wilson. The Canadian Encyclopedia.
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/bill-wilson
Thompson Rivers University Aboriginal Law Survey Course. (2013). Truth and
reconciliation hearings, Kamloops. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPcgc7g63ts
Todorov, A., Pakrashi, M., & Oosterhof, N. N. (2009). Evaluating faces on trustworthiness
after minimal time exposure. Social Cognition, 27(6), 813–833.
https://guilfordjournals.com/doi/10.1521/soco.2009.27.6.813
Tomlinson, C. A., & Imbeau, M. B. (2010). Leading and managing a differentiated
classroom. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (2015a). Honouring the truth, reconciling for the
future: Summary of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
https://web-trc.ca/
Truth and Reconciliation Commission. (2015b). Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada: Calls to action. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/indigenouspeople/new-relationship/truth-and-reconciliation-commission-calls-to-action
Twenge, J. m. & Donnelly, K. (2016). Generational differences in American students’
reasons for going to college, 1971-2014: The rise of extrinsic motives. Journal of Social
Psychology 156(6), 620-629. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2016.1152214

115

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

116

Union of BC Indian Chiefs. (1970). A Declaration of Indian Rights: The BC Indian Position
Paper (excerpt). BC Studies, (200) Winter 2018/19.
https://ojs.library.ubc.ca/index.php/bcstudies/article/view/191423/188568
https://doi.org/10.2307/2392581
Sytsma, S. (2009). The basics of experimental design: A quick and non-technical guide.
Academia.
https://www.academia.edu/30563825/The_Basics_of_Experimental_Design_A_Quick_and_
Non_Technical_Guide
Tanchuk, N., Kruse, M., & McDonough, K. (2018). Indigenous course requirements: A
liberal- democratic justification. Philosophical Inquiry in Education, 25(2), 134–
153. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1197746.pdf
Tatum, B. (1994). Teaching white students about racism: The search for white allies and the
restoration of hope. Teacher’s College Record, 95(4), 462-76.
Vico, G. (1968). The new science (T. G. Bergin & M. H. Fisch, Trans.) (3rd rev. ed.).
Cornell University Press. (Original work published 1725).
Vossen, H. G. M., Piotrowski, J. T., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2015). Development of the
adolescent measure of empathy and sympathy (AMES). Personality and Individual
Differences, 74, 66–71.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S019188691400542X
Washington, J., & Evans, N. J. (1991). Becoming an ally. In N. J. Evans & V. A. Wall
(Eds.) Beyond tolerance: Gays, lesbians and bisexuals on campus (pp. 195–204). American
Association for Counseling and Development.
Watts, R. J., Diemer, M. A., & Voight, A. M. (2001). Critical consciousness: current status
and future directions. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 134, 43-57.
https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.310
Wiggins, J., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by Design. Prentice Hall.
William, D., Lee, C., Harrison, C., & Black, P. (2004). Teachers developing assessment for
learning: Impact on student achievement. Assessment in Education Principles Policy and
Practice, 11(1), 49-65.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0969594042000208994

116

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

117

You, S., & Sharkey, J. (2009). Testing a developmental-ecological model of
student engagement; a multi latent growth curve analysis. Educational Psychology, 29(6),
659-684.https://www.researchgate.net/publication/247513672_Testing_a_developmentalecological_model_of_student_engagement_A_multilevel_latent_growth_curve_analysis
Young, A. (2016). Empathic cruelty and the origins of the social brain. In S. Choudhury & J.
Slaby (Eds.), Critical neuroscience: A handbook of the social and cultural context of
neuroscience (pp. 159 - 176). New York: Wiley-Blackwell.
Zhu, H. (2011). From intercultural awareness to intercultural empathy. Canadian Center of
Science and Education, 4(1), 116-119. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080436.pdf

APPENDIX 1: DEFINITIONS
Allies: members of a privileged group who support and advocate for members of an
oppressed group (Washington & Evans, 1991).
White Ally: (a) nuanced understanding of institutional racism and white privilege, (b)
continual self-reflection of one’s own racism, and (c) commitment to using privilege to
promote equity, (d) engagement and participation in actions that interrupt and challenge
racism, (e) active participation in coalition building with [marginalized individuals], (f)
overcoming societal forces that attempt to silence white allies (p. 709).
Allyship behavior: Allyship (is) an active, consistent, and arduous practice of unlearning
and re-evaluating, in which a person of privilege seeks to operate in solidarity with a
marginalized group of people. Allyship is not an identity—it is a lifelong process of

117

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

118

building relationships based on trust, consistency, and accountability with marginalized
individuals and/or groups of people. Allyship is not self-defined—our work and our efforts
must be recognized by the people we seek to ally ourselves with (BCTF, 2016).
Calls to Action- TRC: The calls for change from the Truth and Reconciliation Council of
Canada to address ways in which individuals and groups can shift towards reconciliation
with the Indigenous peoples of Canada.
Core Competencies: “The Core Competencies are sets of intellectual, personal, and social
and emotional proficiencies that all students need in order to engage in deep, lifelong
learning” (British Columbia Ministry of Education, 2018b).
Critical Multiculturalism: is a pedagogy focused on the intersection of power, identity and
knowledge. Race, gender and class are linked forms of oppression rooted in social and
economic structures. These oppressive forces play out in the classroom, where students
construct their own understanding, identity and goals.
Critical Reflection (teacher): the act of being open to change and novelty in thinking about
current practice, which will benefit their future practice, and further develop the teacher’s
theoretical understanding of their purpose as educators. (Freire, 1998)
Culturally relevant teaching: considers the systems of oppression related to race, faith,
sexual orientation, gender, and class, with a particular focus on the advantages and
disadvantages students experience in educational settings. Additionally, it is concerned with
how these systems of oppression are maintained by educational systems and
methods of instruction, which fail to challenge the social status quo. (Ladson-Billings, 1995)
Curricular Competencies: “The curricular competencies are the skills, strategies, and
processes that students develop over time” (British Columbia Ministry of Education,
2018b).

118

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

119

Empathy: Empathy is described as the ability to understand what another person is feeling,
and has been identified as one of the key human factors that can better our planet (Hunt,
2008; Nussbaum, 2015).
Affective empathy: as emotional connectedness (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang &
Domasio, 2007, Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007). The working definition used in this study
included emotional connections with others, feeling with others, internalization of emotional
connections.
Cognitive Empathy: as perspective taking (Gordon, 2005; Immordino-Yang & Domasio,
2007, Schonert-Reichl & Hymel, 2007). The working definition in this study included
thinking about others, listening to others, understanding perspectives of others.
First Peoples’ Principles of Learning: a set of learning principles specific to First peoples’
of Canada, articulated by Indigenous Elders, scholars, and Knowledge Keepers to guide the
development of the curriculum and teaching. (Chrona, 2014).

Inclusion:
Academic inclusion: the need for students to have the opportunity to interact within the
academic context of a regular classroom (Katz, 2013).
Social inclusion: a learning community that fosters a sense of belonging and individual
acceptance (Katz, 2013).
Inclusive Education: All students should have equitable access to learning, opportunities
for achievement, and the pursuit of excellence in all aspects of their educational programs.
(British Columbia Ministry of Education, 2020).
Intercultural Empathy: the ability to place [the self] into the cultural background of
[another cultural group] and the ability to effectively communicate [a developing]
understanding of that world (Zhu, 2011, p.116). Note: as Harrison (2017) states, non119

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

120

Indigenous teachers and students can never truly know what it means to be and feel
Indigenous.
Intercultural Cognitive Empathy: Understanding, listening, and perspective taking from
the point of view of other cultures.
Intercultural Affective Empathy
emotional connectedness with the traditions, values, beliefs and people’s experiences of
other cultures and alignment of core values.
Intercultural understanding: recognising culture and developing respect, interacting and
empathising with others, and reflecting on intercultural experiences and taking
responsibility (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority, 2019).
Intercultural sensitivity: how an individual makes sense of cultural differences in values
and beliefs of others and the experience of difference based on these constructions (Paige &
Bennett, 2015).
Micro-aggressions: unintended and unconscious acts, or thoughts, of marginalization and
exclusion by a member of one group towards a member of another group that affect our
interpersonal interactions (Brookfield, 2014).
Personal Privilege: The power structures that a person enjoys that perpetuate power
differentials between groups of people (MacIntosh, 2012).
Universal Design for Learning (Katz Method): Katz’s three-block model of universal
design for learning which includes: social and emotional learning, inclusive instructional
practices, and systems and structures. (Katz, 2012a).

120

Co-created by Johnson, M. J., Reves, S. J.. and Turner, B. P. (2020). Science 10 reflection.

121

(Physical things we did)

(connection with

your heart)

Physical

Emotional (how you felt about
science and how you dealt
with any struggles you
encountered

Spiritual

(assignments)

Mental

Use this graphic organizer.
Thinking about the Science 10 curriculum (what we learned) and core competencies (how we learned) to describe your
personal growth in these 4 quadrants.

Science 10
RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION
121

Appendix 2: Medicine Wheel Activity: Science 10 Reflection Activity

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

122

Appendix 2: Study Approval

August 13, 2019
Mrs. Serena Reves
Faculty of Education and Social Work\Education
Thompson Rivers University
File Number: 102204
Approval Date: September 02, 2019
Expiry Date: September 01, 2020
Dear Mrs. Serena Reves,
The Research Ethics Board has reviewed your application titled 'Fostering allyship through
empathy and critical reflection in science 10'. Your application has been approved with
recommended minor revisions. You may begin the proposed research. This REB approval,
dated September 02, 2019, is valid for one year less a day: Sept 1, 2020
Reviewers noted:
Very detailed and well done! Also the 'informed written consent' needs to include most the
info from info letter such as risk/benefits, storage and disposal of data and so on.

122

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

123

Throughout the duration of this REB approval, all requests for modifications, renewals and
serious adverse event reports are submitted via the Research Portal. To continue your
proposed research beyond , you must submit a Renewal Form before . If your research ends
before, please submit a Final Report Form to close out REB approval monitoring efforts.
If you have any questions about the REB review & approval process, please contact the
Research Ethics Office via 250.852.7122. If you encounter any issues when working in the
Research Portal, please contact the Research Office at 250.371.5586.
Sincerely,
Joyce O'Mahony
Chair, Research Ethics Board

123

RUNNING HEAD: RECONCILIATORY RESEACH ACTION

124

124