Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:02:02.085Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

the Tree of Life as a Research Methodology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 July 2015

Vivian M. Jiménez Estrada
Vivian M. Jiménez Estrada*
Affiliation:
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, 252 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 1V6, Canada
Get access

Abstract

This paper is grounded on the premise that research, as a colonising practice, needs constant reconceptualisation and rethinking. I propose a methodology based on some of the values, visions and stories from my own Maya Indigenous culture and knowledge in addition to other Indigenous cultures across the world. I argue that researchers need to constantly acknowledge and change the negative impacts of ignoring multiple ways of knowing by engaging in respectful methods of knowledge collection and production. This paper contributes to the work Indigenous scholars have done in the area of research methodologies and knowledge production. First, a general overview of the values and concepts embedded in the Ceiba or the “Tree of Life” is presented; then, a discussion of what respectful research practices entail follows; finally, it concludes with a reflection on how the Ceiba is a small example of how researchers can adapt their research methodology to the local context.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education , Volume 34 , 2005 , pp. 44 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, K., (2000). Recognition of being: Reconstructing native womanhood. Toronto: SecondStory Press.Google Scholar
Baber, Z., (1996). The Science of empire: Scientific knowledge, civilisation, and colonial rule in India. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Battiste, M. (Ed.) (2002). Reclaiming Indigenous voice and vision. Vancouver: University ofBritish Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Bishop, R. (1998). Freeing ourselves from neo-colonial domination in research: A Maori approach to creating knowledge. International Journal of Qualitative Education, 11(2), 199–219.Google Scholar
Cajete, G. (1994). Look to the mountain: An ecology of Indigenous education. Durango, CO: Kivaki Press.Google Scholar
Consejo Nacional de EducatiÓn Maya. (CNEM). (2004). Uxe’al Ub’antajik leMayab’ Tijonik: Marco FilosÓfico de la EducaciÓn Maya. Guatemala: Save the Children.Google Scholar
Cordero, C.. (1995). A working and evolving definition of culture Journal of Native Education, 21, 1–13.Google Scholar
Dei, G.J.S., Hall, B., & Rosenberg, D. (2000). Indigenous knowledges: An introduction In Dei, S., Hall, B. & Rosenberg, D. (Eds.), Indigenous knowledges in global contexts: Multiple readings ofour world, (pp.3–12. Toronto: Toronto University Press.Google Scholar
Ermine, W. (1995). Aboriginal epistemology. In Battiste, M.&Barman, J. (Eds.), First Nation education in Canada: Thecircle unfolds, (pp.101–112. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Graveline, F.J. (1998). Circle works. Circle works: Fernwood.Google Scholar
Hermes, M. (1998). Research methods as a situated response: Towards a First Nations’ methodology. QualitativeStudies in Education. 11(1), 155–168.Google Scholar
Jimènez, V. (2002). Deconstructing resistance: Indigenous knowledge, culture and the Zapatista struggle for Indigenous autonomy.Unpublished Master–s thesis, York University, Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
Menzies, C.R. (2001). Reflections on research with, for, and among Indigenous peoples. Canadian Journal of NativeEducation, 25(1), 19–36.Google Scholar
Montejo, V. (2005). Maya intellectual renaissance, Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Mosquera Saravia, M.T.; Gaspar Salvador, M.A. & Sucuquí Mejía, I. (2002). Reflections on research with, for, and among Indigenous peoples. Conociendo la sabiduríaAchí: Saludy Enfermedad en Rabinal. Guatemala: Institute de Estudios Interetnicos de la Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala.Google Scholar
Recinos, A. (Ed.). (1987). Fopol Vuh (20th ed.). Guatemala City: EDUCA.Google Scholar
Ren, A.; (2001). Maya archaeology and the political and cultural identity of contemporary Maya in Guatemala. Retrieved 16 November, 2004, from http://ethical.arts.ubc.ca/Avexnim.html.Google Scholar
Shahjahan, R.A. (forthcoming). Mapping the field of anti-colonial discourse to understand issues of Indigenous knowledge: Decolonising praxis. McGill Journal of Education.Google Scholar
Smith, L. (1999) Decolonising methodologies: Researchand Indigenous people. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Taurima, W., & Cash, J. (2000, December). Te Wananga: Developing a bicultural modelusing critical systems. Paper presented at the 35th annual conference of the Operational Research Society of New Zealand, Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. Retrieved 22 April, 2005, from http://www.esc.auckland.ac.nz/Organisations/ORSNZ/conf35/papers/TaurimaCash.pdf.Google Scholar
Tedlock, D. (1993). Breath on the mirror: Mythic voices and visions of the living Maya. San Franciso: Harper.Google Scholar
wa‘ Thiong’o, N. (1996). Decolonising the mind. London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
Warren, K. (1998). Indigenous movements and their critics: Pan-Maya activism in Guatemala. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Weber-Pillwax, C. (1999). Indigenous research methodology: Exploratory discussion of an elusive subject. Journal of Educational Thought, 33(1), 31–45.Google Scholar
Wilson, S. (2003). Progressing toward an Indigenous research paradigm. Canadian Journal of Native Education, 27(2), 161–178.Google Scholar