Reclaiming Indigenous Research in Higher Education ed. by Robin Starr Minthorn and Heather J. Shotton (review)

In their introduction to the edited volume, Reclaiming Indigenous Research in Higher Education, editors Robin Starr Zape-tah-hol-ah Minthorn (Kiowa/Apache/Umatilla/Nez Perce/Assiniboine) and Heather J. Shotton (Wichita/Kiowa/Cheyenne)¹ frame their text as an effort to "reclaim our space in academia, to reclaim Indigenous research in higher education" (p. 2). In doing so, they intend to both hold up and extend existing Indigenous scholarship in the field. The book makes it clear that there is no singular approach to Indigenous research, and beyond speaking from their positions as members of diverse Indigenous nations, the contributors tackle multiple issues, employ distinct methods/methodologies, and emphasize different opportunities, offerings, and challenges of Indigenous research in and on higher education.

Apart from simply providing a space to bring together the work of several Native American, Native Hawaiian, and Alaska Native higher education scholars, the book emphasizes the importance of relationality in Indigenous knowledge production. Rather than merely stating this as an orienting value, throughout the text the authors demonstrate the centrality of their relationships and responsibilities to each other, their research participants, their ancestors, and future generations. They also give thanks to the Indigenous education scholars who came before them, including Bryan McKinley Jones Brayboy (Lumbee), who offers a foreword to the book.

The editors frame three common threads that run throughout the text: Indigenous voice and identity in research; Native higher education students making their own pathways to success; and Indigenizing spaces in higher education. In this review, I emphasize two different but related recurrent themes: tradition and innovation; and responsibility and relationship. I conclude by considering how non-Indigenous readers like myself might honor the work of the book's editors and contributors by reflexively examining our own roles and responsibilities in relation to the necessary, difficult, and unsettling work of decolonizing higher education research.

Tradition and Innovation

According to an unnamed contributor, "the process of reclaiming Indigenous research in higher education [is] what emerges when higher education meets grandma" (as cited by Shotton   Minthorn, p. 208). Indeed, the wisdom of grandmothers, grandfathers, mothers, mothers-in-law, mentors, and other-than-human-kin are all cited as influences on the authors' work. Shotton and Minthorn also assert, "As we work to reclaim our spaces in higher education research through Indigenous Methodologies, we cannot be afraid to take our work in new directions" (p. 208). This means honoring ancestral knowledges while reframing them for the present; and taking from mainstream or "whitestream" (Grande, 2004) methodologies and theories what is useful, and leaving what is not. Rather than a commitment to any particular methodology or theory, this work is oriented by the imperative to serve one's kin and communities.

Theresa Jean Stewart (San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, Gabrieliño/Tongva) describes producing quantitative research in a way that "coincided [End Page E-9] with [her] worldview as a Native woman" (p. 89). Stewart both employs and problematizes the uses of whitestream datasets for studying leadership development among American Indian and Alaska Native students. David Sanders (Ogala Sioux Tribe) and Matthew Van Alstine Makomenaw (Grand Traverse Bay Band of Ottawa and Chippewa Indians) also take up quantitative methods to address the success and pathways of students who start at Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) and transfer to four-year schools. They emphasize the difficulty of gathering accurate data about Indigenous students from whitestream data sources, owing to the fact that this data often relies on self-reported identification of Indigeneity. The authors acknowledge that "Indian identification is a very important, contested, political ground" (p. 121), but nonetheless argue for the importance of verifying enrollment in, or other proof of descendance from, a state or federally recognized tribe in order to produce more relevant research.

Meanwhile, Amanda R. Tachine (Navajo) uses the metaphor of a Navajo story rug to describe her research and writing process. She also...