Mitigating Social Risk in the Extractive Sector: Developing Intercultural Competence as a Tool for Negotiating Western-Indigenous Perspectives within the Undergraduate Mining Engineering Curriculum

Drawing upon critical, communications, and educational theories, this thesis develops a novel framing of the problem of social risk in the extractive sector, as it relates to the building of respectful relationships with indigenous peoples. Building upon Bakhtin’s dialogism, the thesis demonstrates the linkage of this aspect of social risk to professional education, and specifically, to the undergraduate mining engineering curriculum, and develops a framework for the development of skills related to intercultural competence in the education of mining engineers. The knowledge of social risk, as well as the level of intercultural competence, of students in the mining engineering program, is investigated through a mixture of surveys and focus groups – as is the impact of specific learning interventions. One aspect of this investigation is whether development of these attributes alters graduates’ conception of their identity as mining engineers, i.e. the range and scope of responsibilities, and understanding of to whom responsibilities are owed, and their role in building trusting relationships with communities. Survey results demonstrate that student openness to the perspectives of other cultures increases with exposure to the second year curriculum. Students became more knowledgeable about social dimensions of responsible mining, but not about cultural dimensions. Analysis of focus group data shows that students are highly motivated to improve community perspectives and acceptance. It is observed that students want to show respect for diverse peoples and communities where they will work, but they are hampered by their inability to appreciate the viewpoints of people who do not share their values. They embrace benefit sharing and environmental protection as norms, but they mistakenly conclude that opposition to mining is rooted in a lack of education rather than in cultural values. Three, sequential, threshold concepts are identified as impeding development of intercultural competence: Awareness and Acknowledgement of Different Forms of Knowledge; Recognition that Value Systems are a Function of Culture; Respect for varied perceptions of Social Wellbeing and Quality of Life. Future curriculum development in the undergraduate mining engineering program, as well as in other educational programs relevant to the extractive sector, can be effectively targeted by focusing on these threshold concepts.

From Where Do We Teach? Potential Positions in Public Education

This thesis is a conceptual examination of the positions from which we teach in public education. As it is philosophical in nature, it takes no qualitative or quantitative data. It offers a review of selected relevant literature and an analysis of personal and professional experience, with the intent to pose critical questions about teaching and learning. The framework of this thesis represents the following contentions: First, from its inception, public schooling served capital by preparing skilled labour for emerging industrial markets. This history is the hegemonic shadow that hangs over public education today. Second, movements toward the standardization of funding, curriculum, and evaluation support the further commodification of public schooling. The “accountability” that standardization offers, the “back to basics” that it aims for, is counter to the potential that public education might critically inform citizens and seek social justice. Third, movements toward the privatization of public schooling under the guise of “choice” and “mobility”, brought on by manufactured crisis, serve only to widen socio-economic inequities as capitalist neoliberal interests seek profit in both the product of public schools and in schooling itself. If we recognize and understand the power of public education to inform vast numbers of citizens who will, in turn, either maintain or reform society, we must ask: What do we want public education to be? What are the effects of continuing down historically conventional and increasingly standardized paths? What do progressive pedagogies offer? How might teachers destandardize their pedagogy and pursue equitable opportunities for marginalized students? How might students name themselves and their world, that they might play a part in its reimagining? For whom do we teach, and under what conditions? From where do we teach, and why? For educators to ask these questions, and to employ what they discover, will necessitate taking substantial risks. It will necessitate taking a stand and cannot be done alone. Teachers must seek out the collaboration of their students. They must offer students the time and the space to find their own voices, to create their own selves, and to envision previously uncharted paths on which we might walk together.