The Preliminary Report

The committee was established, the researchers were recruited and the terms of reference were established in June 1979. While exploring graduate study at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Marianna Couchie met Barbara Burnaby, then an emerging authority on issues related to languages in Aboriginal education. Barbara, whose newly minted Ph.D. dissertation was so significant that it was published within the year, was the study team’s coordinator. The other two members were linguist John D. Nichols, and Kelleen Toohey, a graduate student with experience teaching in a northern Native school, whose doctoral research would focus on language and education in the Cree community of Fort Albany.

The rationale for the NNLP was clear: there was a “lack of consistent information about language education for northern schools”; this “made it difficult to develop policies, plan programs, train personnel and produce educational materials in an effective and coordinated” manner (Burnaby et al. 1980: 1).

The project focused on federal schools in DIAND’s three northern districts - - Sioux Lookout, Nakina and James Bay. It also included schools administered by provincial school boards falling within the jurisdiction of Ontario’s northern regional offices, serving students from these areas.

During the summer of 1979, the researchers wrote a preliminary report[1] (Burnaby et al, 1979), based in part on survey data collected by DIAND concerning language education in the northern communities. The preliminary report also summarized the relevant academic literature.

It clearly defined vernacular education, grounding it in the 1953 UNESCO report and in the 1967 Bilingual Education Act in the USA. Terms such as “transitional bilingualism”, “medium of instruction”, “subject of instruction” and “ESL” were explained. It provided an annotated bibliography of 42 articles and books - - including DIAND’s own 1976 publication on bilingual-bicultural programs - - and referred to an additional “extensive bibliography” derived from a search of the Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC) database  (Burnaby et al. 1979: 3-15).

The authors recognized that “bilingual education, in anything more than its transitional form, has not been tried in Native schools in northern Ontario . . . [and that t]his may well be what many Native communities wish to retain, although they may wish to improve the effectiveness of their language-teaching programs” (Burnaby et al., 1979: 15 emphasis added).

They referred to the National Indian Brotherhood’s 1972 support for vernacular education in Indian control of Indian education (ICIE), and to DIAND’s adoption of ICIE’s principles in 1973. They acknowledged PONA’s 1975 endorsement of vernacular education, and noted that the 1976 provincial Task Force on the Educational Needs of Native Peoples in Ontario had recommended that Native language instructors be certified and recognized as teachers (Burnaby et al. 1979: 16-18).

The preliminary report acknowledged the creation by DIAND of a Native Language Coordinator position in 1974, and recognized the tremendous work which had been carried out by Mary Mitchell: “It is largely the results of her work as co-ordinator and classroom consultant that make the [DIAND] Native language programs in the province as successful as they are today” (Burnaby et al., 1979: 19-20). The authors refer to DIAND’s efforts to promote syllabic literacy (see, e.g., DIAND 1976 & 1978), and to the establishment of a Native Language Advisory Committee in 1976 (Burnaby et al. 1979: 21).

In contrast, the researchers commented that, “Nothing on syllabic literacy or Native mother tongue programs has been directly initiated by the Ministry of Education since none of the provincial schools has a substantial number of students who come to school only or mainly Native speaking” (Burnaby et al, 1979: 21).[2]

In September 1979 the NNLP committee met in Toronto to discuss the preliminary report, to determine the structure of the final report, and to establish operating procedures.

Visits to the northern communities were undertaken between September 1979 and March 1980. The researchers, accompanied by representatives of the appropriate DIAND district office and/or Ministry regional office, and sometimes by a representative of one of the Native organizations, visited 15 federal and 5 provincial schools in a sample of 20 northern communities (Burnaby et al. 1980: 5):

They met with students, teachers and principals, Chiefs and Councils, School Committee/School Board members, parents and other community members “about present language teaching arrangements, problems and hopes for the future.” They observed classroom teaching and learning, examined resources for teaching languages, and asked about language usage in each of the communities (Burnaby et al. 1980: 5).

 Although community visits were not completed until March 1980, a first draft of the final report was circulated in January of that year - - important timing for government fiscal planning - - and the committee met in Toronto in January to discuss and revise this draft (Burnaby et al. 1980: 4).