Culturally sustaining pedagogy in an outdoor environmental science education program to support high school students’ identities as Indigenous people and scientists

Abstract

This collaboration between the Nez Perce Tribe and the University of Idaho aimed to address the unique needs and perspectives required for Tribal Natural Resources Management (TNRM). TNRM involves the governance and caretaking of the land and waters, emphasizing the recognition of cultural significance, sovereignty, self-determination, and traditional knowledge systems. A workforce development program was created, focusing on Fisheries, Forestry, and Fire Management, while being grounded in Indigenous knowledge, Indigenous STEM identities, and culturally sustaining pedagogy. The philosophical foundations of the program emphasized the importance of integrating Indigenous knowledge and learning approaches alongside technical skills. By broadening the conceptions of “what counts” in science, students were encouraged to recognize the value of Indigenous knowledge and develop a sense of responsibility toward caring for the Land and waters. Data collected from the program revealed its success in helping students connect Indigenous ways of knowing to their understanding of STEM. Students found meaning in Indigenous knowledge as a means to perpetuate Nimiipuu lifeways, while also recognizing the utility of Western STEM. The involvement of Elders and Native professionals as teachers in the STEM curriculum highlighted the importance of intergenerational knowledge transmission. By combining Indigenous ways of knowing with technical skills, the program successfully laid the groundwork for students to become future leaders in Tribal Natural Resources Management, equipped with the necessary cultural, environmental, and scientific expertise to caretake Lands and waters effectively.

Keywords:

• Indigenous STEM identity
• STEM identity
• tribal natural resources management
• workforce development

Introduction

The governance and caretaking of the Land and waters in a Tribal Natural Resources Management (TNRM) context require unique skill sets. Land managers, for example, must recognize the cultural significance of places or species; a legal mosaic of treaty rights, lawsuits, and settlements; and the need to support the economic health of the Tribe as well as perpetuate a sensitive relationship with the Land. Further, as Tribes assert sovereignty and self-determination, traditional knowledges are positioned at the forefront of TNRM (Chief et al., 2016; Whyte, 2018; Whyte et al., 2016).

The Nimiipuu8 have been in relationship with the Land since time immemorial, in territory now known as parts of Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. Current Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) programs are responsible for caretaking the Land within the boundaries of the current-day reservation, spanning approximately 770,000 acres, and protecting treaty rights across ancestral homelands including usual and accustomed areas for hunting, fishing, and gathering. The work described here was a workforce development effort with high school students to perpetuate this relationship to the Land in TNRM jobs with Nez Perce Tribe (NPT) Fisheries, Forestry, and Fire Management programs.

Silas Whitman (Nimiipuu), elder, former chairman of the NPT, and course co-instructor has noted that Nimiipuu are under-represented in management roles within the Tribe’s natural resources programs, and has expressed a desire to see more Nimiipuu in leadership positions. Alicia Wheeler (Nimiipuu), second author, explains that Nimiipuu are needed in natural resources “to heal the Land. If we don’t have our own people that understand that and are in these positions, how are we going to bring someone in from the outside who doesn’t understand our connection to the Land?” Josiah Pinkham (Nimiipuu), coauthor describes the purpose of education for Nimiipuu as to perpetuate a sensitive relationship to the Land. He elaborates saying “as long as that example survives, there’s potential for people to live in Nimiipuu country. They’re the best example of how to relate to that landscape, because they know the nuances of everything that’s there better than anybody else. Nimiipuu should be included in everybody’s way of relating to that landscape and decision-making process: not just for Nimiipuu survival, but survival of everybody.”

Given this context, it is clear that a workforce development program must consider the socio-cultural-political context of the work. Preparing future leaders for TNRM requires an educational foundation not often available in standard natural resource programs. Educational environments for Native students, particularly in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics), have been dominated by Western epistemologies and axiologies, coloniality, and lack of recognition of Indigenous cosmologies (Cajete, 2000). A different orientation is required for students to navigate career paths to TNRM.

Purpose and learning goals

NPT Natural Resources and Fisheries have a history of developing and implementing novel techniques incorporating emerging technologies and traditional knowledge. Silas Whitman tells stories of combining traditional knowledge with modern technology in the creation of the Tribe’s fisheries program. In addition, films such as The Lost Fish (Monroe, 2013) and Covenant of The Salmon People (Anderson, 2022) have documented the Tribe’s innovation. In 2016, NPT and the University of Idaho (UI) collaborated to create a workforce development program to prepare Nimiipuu students for leadership positions in NPT Natural Resources programs. Components included a summer field course and school-based programs delivered over three years. This report focuses on the field course’s design, implementation, and evaluation. The course engaged Nimiipuu and non-Native students from high schools within the reservation boundary. While the focus was preparing Nimiipuu young people for careers in TNRM, program leaders felt it was a significant opportunity to have both Nimiipuu and non-Native learners together to build understanding and appreciation of Nimiipuu approaches and perspectives on caring for the Land.

The overarching goals for students were 1) to connect their cultural identities with their understanding of science and 2) to explore possible career pathways in TNRM with the Tribe. Related goals were 3) to develop expanded concepts of science that included traditional Nimiipuu ways of knowing and 4) to develop an understanding of the ways in which Western STEM might support Nimiipuu identity and values. STEM identity (Carlone & Johnson, 2007) provided an initial organizing theory for course design. Focusing on the recognition construct of STEM identity, instructors sought to help students recognize STEM in Elders’ traditional knowledge, and to critically examine the role Western STEM knowledge might play in sustaining the Land. The course evolved throughout three summers. One critical shift was non-Nimiipuu staff conceptions of the purpose of learning. Initial course design conceptualized supporting STEM identity as a means to increase students’ persistence in STEM and TNRM careers. Subsequent iterations focused on supporting Nimiipuu identities while re-conceptualizing STEM as a tool to perpetuate Nimiipuu lifeways, values, and responsibilities for a sensitive relationship to the Land. This shift came through conversations amongst the planning team, listening to the teachings of the Elders and NPT program staff.

Study population and setting

The summer field course took place on ancestral homelands of the Nimiipuu, in the West Central Mountains of Idaho, at a university field campus. A total of 111 students (Tables 1 and 2) participated over three summers: 78 (70%) Native students and 33 (30%) non-Native students who live on the present-day Nez Perce reservation or within the ancestral homelands of the Nimiipuu; 58 female, 53 male; and grades 9–12.

Table 1. Summary of participant numbers in field courses, by Native/Non-Native and Gender.

Year	Native	Non-Native	TOTAL
2017	28 (17 F, 11 M)	18 (9 F, 9 M)	46 (26 F, 20 M)
2018	35 (17 F, 18 M)	15 (6 F, 9 M)	50 (23 F, 27 M)
2019	15 (9 F, 6 M)		15 (9 F, 6 M)
TOTAL	78 (43 F, 35 M)	33 (15 F, 18 M)	111 (58 F, 53 M)

F = students identifying as female; M = students identifying as male.

Table 2. Summary of participant numbers in field courses by grade level completed.

Year / Grade level	9th	10th	11th	12th	TOTAL
2017	8	9	12	17	46
2018	8	9	10	23	50
2019	6	8		1	15
TOTAL	22	26	22	41	111

Under the current reservation boundary, the NPT has management authority over approximately 770,000 acres. However, treaty rights are reserved and exercised over a much larger area managed by a mix of US Federal and State agencies. Therefore, it was crucial to have Nimiipuu and non-Native students participate in building understanding of the importance of Nimiipuu ways of knowing for caretaking the Land with NPT or other agencies. Here, we focus on Nimiipuu students’ recognition of Indigenous STEM as part of a possible trajectory toward careers in TNRM.

Situating course goals through literature

Three central ideas shaped the course: TNRM as a distinct approach, Indigenous STEM identity, and culturally sustaining pedagogy.

Tribal natural resources management

TNRM is shaped by “distinct norms, beliefs, values, and traditions related to the environment and resource management” (Donoghue et al., 2010, p. 23). Thus, TNRM includes methods for honoring values held by communities in various contexts but also takes place within the socio-political and historical context of colonization of Indigenous lands. Though treaties reserve Indigenous rights to hunting, fishing, and gathering on ancestral homelands, Tribal individuals and entities are often challenged in exercising these rights (Cohn et al., 2019; Norman & Bakker, 2016). Due to land allotment, reservation delineation, and complex governance configurations, TNR managers often work across land ownership and governance boundaries to protect culturally significant resources.

TNRM work sustains both cultural values and autonomy of Tribal entities and ensures ecological integrity and sustained access to resources to benefit current and future generations. A growing body of literature recognizes the importance of traditional knowledge in TNRM. For example, integrating traditional knowledge in fuels management is found to improve adaptive management of forests (Wyncoop et al., 2019); and the incorporation of traditional knowledge in natural resources management “can encourage more integrative, ethical, and self-reinforcing restoration” (Long et al., 2020, p. 71). Ramos (2022) explored concepts of Yurok traditional knowledge and human-wildlife relationships, suggesting that this knowledge can contribute to more culturally sensitive wildlife research. Atlas et al. (2021) concluded that approaches to harvest and government that are grounded in Indigenous knowledge can promote selective fisheries, local leadership, and more equitable fishing opportunities for Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities. Significantly, Latulippe and Klenk (2020) argue that more than integrating Indigenous knowledge into decisions governed by non-Indigenous entities, there is a need for Indigenous governance and Indigenous-led management.

Indigenous STEM identity

Programs supporting TNRM workforce development must thus consider place, culturally-specific contexts, multiple knowledge systems and the ways that Indigenous participants are supported in asserting the rightful presence of Indigenous people and knowledges in decision-making. Moreover, programs must examine identity in students’ successful navigation of educational environments on their way to achieving TNRM careers. Researchers have long suggested that culture and identity play a key role in students’ navigation of STEM career pathways (Chang et al., 2014; Chemers et al., 2011; Herrera et al., 2012). Brickhouse (1994) recognized that, for example, whiteness and masculinity have shaped the culture of science. Bang and Medin (2010) explain that although science is often approached as a culturally neutral activity, it is a cultural practice that students learn to negotiate. STEM identity (Carlone & Johnson, 2007) includes the constructs of competence (having necessary skills), performance (being able to use those skills in meaningful ways), and recognition (being seen by oneself and others as a “STEM person”). Carlone and Johnson (2007) and subsequent scholars (e.g. Herrera et al., 2012) indicate that recognition (by self and others) is the construct most influential in students’ persistence in STEM careers. Integral to this identity is finding personal and cultural relevance in STEM settings, an understanding of the way that STEM can benefit the students’ community, and a sense of belonging (Rainey et al., 2018). Further, Indigenous students’ persistence in STEM increases in learning environments that include Indigenous epistemologies (Abrams et al., 2013; Alkholy et al., 2017; Bang & Medin, 2010; Brayboy & Castagno, 2008).

Brayboy and Castagno (2008) contend that education must cultivate a “'both/and’ approach rather than an ‘either/or’ approach” regarding the navigation of multiple ways of knowing (p. 734). These authors “trouble binaries between Western and Indigenous sciences and epistemologies,” (p. 734), arguing that the survival of Indigenous peoples has always been rooted in practices that overlap with practices recognized as science within Western contexts. However, because Indigenous science often happens outside of formally recognized science structures (e.g., laboratories), it has not been recognized as science within Western frameworks: “Indeed, many Indigenous peoples would argue that their laboratory is the world and that their survival rested on puzzling over observations and phenomena and coming to make sense of them in ways that allowed them to survive” (p. 732). The authors resist an essentialized “native science” common to all Indigenous peoples, noting instead that these ways of knowing are rooted in place, language, and culture, and are diverse. Specific to Nimiipuu ways of knowing, coauthor Pinkham has expressed a desire to make less of a distinction between Western knowledge and Indigenous knowledge “because sometimes those can overlap… if you sit and listen to an elder talk about stories having to do with salmon, there are facts about life being conveyed through those stories, but they are embedded in metaphors and similes, and represented by archetypes and symbols that help young people analyze and organize their value structures.”

Page-Reeves et al. (2017) asked a diverse group of Native STEM professionals to identify the foundations of their success in STEM, and a theme emerged: a “deep-seated sense of their identity as a Native person” (p.10). A broader Indigenous STEM identity may emphasize the perpetuation of Indigenous values, knowledge systems, sovereignty, and self-determination, recognizing that STEM has always been present in Indigenous lifeways and knowledge systems. The outputs of STEM work are seen as one of many ways of knowing that can support Tribal values, including knowledge that exists beyond the physical realm.

A significant strategy for the course was to engage three Nimiipuu Elders as co-instructors, an approach shown to increase Native students’ connection to and persistence in STEM (see, for example, Alkoly et al., 2015). To support the development of Indigenous STEM identities, Elders and NPT staff presented holistic knowledge rooted in oral tradition. It was grounded in the collective observations and experiences of people who connect to particular places and know the environment as integral to their community’s social and spiritual fabric (Barnhardt & Kawagley, 2005). It also acknowledged the responsibility of the learner to share knowledge and give back to the Land. Though aimed explicitly at increasing Native students’ sense of belonging and identity in STEM, these teachings were considered, by Elders and NPT Cultural Resources staff, as appropriate for non-Native participants.

Culturally sustaining and land education pedagogies

Given the focus on affirming students’ Indigenous STEM identities, the course embraced a culturally sustaining pedagogy, which “seeks to perpetuate and foster—to sustain—linguistic, literate, and cultural pluralism as part of the democratic project of schooling” (Paris, 2012, p. 93). Such pedagogies counter dominant educational contexts in which students’ cultural identities have been erased. More than simply inviting cultural plurality, a culturally sustaining pedagogy seeks to perpetuate the language and culture of a distinct population (Paris, 2012). Land education (Wildcat et al., 2014) is an example of a culturally sustaining pedagogy based on this premise:

If settler colonialism is fundamentally premised on dispossessing Indigenous peoples from their Land, one, if not the primary, impact on Indigenous education has been to impede the transmission of knowledge about the forms of governance, ethics, and philosophies that arise from relationships on the Land… [I]f we are serious about decolonizing education and educating people within frameworks of Indigenous intelligence, we must find ways of reinserting people into relationships with and on the Land as a mode of education (Wildcat et al., 2014, p. II).

Therefore, Land education pedagogy and educational self-determination as part of Tribal sovereignty (McCarty & Lee, 2014) provided important philosophical groundings for the course.

Implementation

Course curriculum was developed over one semester before implementation in Summer of 2017. A team of Elders, NPT Education, Fisheries and Cultural Resources staff, Bridge Idaho Upward Bound mentors and staff, and UI College of Natural Resources faculty and graduate students worked together to define program goals and outline topics. In summer of 2016, a “Designing a Curriculum” (DACUM) process identified skills necessary for entry-level work with NPT Fisheries, Forestry, and Fire Management (see Dixon et al., 2019). These skills and goals related to identity development and environmental science topics formed the basis of the course curriculum, delivered by Elders, NPT staff, and UI faculty and graduate students, within the context of the UI McCall Outdoor Science School (MOSS). In Years 1 and 3, this was a 5-day field course (Table 3). In Year 2, students completed a 10-day course and earned four dual-enrollment credits in Environmental Science 101 and 102 (Table 4). Learning activities were aligned to cultural pedagogy principles previously defined by the NPT Education Program through funding from the Office of Indian Education, Department of Education State Tribal Education Partnership (STEP) project. Tribal members, including Elders and students, were surveyed by the STEP project to compile community perspectives into principles for culturally-responsive classroom instruction shaped by how the Nimiipuu pass on cultural knowledge. The project team included members of the NPT Education Program who aligned the course to these principles. A course syllabus and curriculum documents are provided as supplemental materials. In Year 3, the course was again shortened to 5 days, in response to changes in partnering programs and the needs of the student participants.

Table 3. Five-day schedule 2017.

	Monday	Tuesday	Wednesday	Thursday	Friday
Field Day	Opening prayers Introductions Remote sensing	Elder teachingsFisheries stations (macros, water quality, snorkeling)	Elder teachingsForestry stations (maps, forestry, drone)	Elder teachings Research project	Elder teachings Presentations Final reflections
Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time
Evening	Elder teachings Journal reflections	Data analysis Journal reflections	Data analysis Journal reflections	Prepare presentations	Closing ceremony

Table 4. Ten-day schedule 2018.

Week 1	Monday	Tuesday	Wednesday	Thursday	Friday
Field Day	Opening prayers Seasonal round Sovereignty Climate change	Elder teachings Fisheries stations (macros, water quality)	Elder teachings Fisheries stations (snorkeling, tagging)	Elder teachings Gathering	Elder teachings Working with remote sensing data
Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time
Evening	Film	Film	BBQ and fireworks	Campfire	OFF
Week 2	Monday	Tuesday	Wednesday	Thursday	Friday
Field Day	Elder teachings Working with remote sensing data	Elder teachings Forestry (forestry, fire management, drone)	Elder teachings Research Project	Elder teachings Research Project	Elder teachings Presentations
Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time
Evening	Art with Elders	Art with Elders	Campfire	Campfire

Overview of learning activities

All learning activities took place on ancestral Nimiipuu homelands, which played an essential role in centering students’ Nimiipuu identity. Students worked in groups of 10-12, accompanied by a field instructor. Activities were facilitated by Elders, NPT staff, and UI faculty and graduate students. The course started with an opening song and prayer, and each day began with prayers and Elders’ teachings. Afterward, students participated in learning experiences in sovereignty and treaty rights, climate change, gathering, fisheries, forestry, fire management and remote sensing. Elders accompanied the students and regularly provided stories, examples, and integration of Nimipuutímt (Nimiipuu language). Students had free time to canoe or swim, nap, or visit with friends and Elders. Evening sessions (e.g. an art session led by one of the Elders or movie nights) reinforced learning from the field.

Elder teachings

In Nimiipuu culture, Elders are the first teachers. Elders spoke what was on their hearts to share. Within Nimiipuu culture, each listener is expected to hear what they need from the teaching, and teachings are place- and time-based. Elders shared how they had learned through first-hand observation of the Land, fish, plants, physical experiences, and spiritual experiences they shared with their Elders. Elders and members of the Tribe’s Cultural Resources Department shared traditional stories and place names. Elders shared about professional backgrounds (e.g., Chairman of the Tribe, directing Tribal fisheries and human resources, and serving as a health educator) and life experiences (traveling to pow-wow gatherings to dance competitively, gathering plants, fish, or game). Elders’ teachings were a significant part of curriculum. In addition to time with Elders each morning and discussions with Elders during the field day, youth could visit with Elders informally during down time. These moments were unstructured but part of the curriculum. Facilitators ensured Elders were given ample time to speak what was on their heart; designated program staff attended to Elders’ needs, and an honorarium was provided for their contributions.

Understanding the land through Nimipuutímt

Cultural Resources staff contributed discussions about Nimipuutímt and the relationship between language and the Land through place names. Staff also explained to students that Nimipuutímt is verb-based and has an embedded relationality: the relationship between observer and observed is reflected in the language. Staff shared Nimipuutímt for more-than-human relatives (plants, trees, fish) and the Nimiipuu seasonal round and words for seasons (which also convey relationships between the Land and its inhabitants). Staff explained how climate change is impacting seasons and therefore culturally significant roots and berries. A traditional gatherer explained how she watches the signs on the Land to know when it is time to gather. Participants explored science in the names of seasons, observations about the Land, and a traditional gatherer’s knowledge of the phenology of the landscape.

Students’ personal narratives

Students shared stories about themselves and explored forms of data not traditionally associated with Western science. The young women made a Nimiipuu ha’áyatom timíipn’it qéemu (Nez Perce women’s Memory String); in this activity, the young women put beads on a string, each bead representing, in chronological order, a significant life event. The young men made drawings in the style of ledger art. In both activities, students presented aspects of their history and identity. Through an activity debrief, staff helped students to recognize how data were conveyed through these cultural forms.

Sovereignty, treaty rights, contemporary issues

The curriculum included discussion of sovereignty, the historical context of treaties, and the contemporary issues faced by the NPT in protecting and enforcing Treaty rights, including watershed health, dams, and policy threats to protecting culturally significant tree and plant species (among many other things).

Climate change and the NPT

Climate change presents a current threat to well-being of all people, and Nimiipuu in particular. The Tribe has been proactive in mitigation and adaptation work. NPT Climate Change staff presented causes of climate change, impacts the NPT is anticipating and already seeing, and work that the Tribe is leading in restoration, mitigation, and adaptation. For example, the Tribe surveyed members to understand what activities they want to see the Tribe undertake to mitigate and adapt to climate change. As a result, the Tribe is actively restoring wetlands as part of its adaptation strategy. In addition, it recently launched a large solar project to produce enough energy to replace Columbia and Snake Rivers dams. Students learned that Tribal nations are leading experts in climate restoration and adaptation.

Cartography

A cartography activity led by UI faculty helped students orient themselves in the landscape and consider cultural bias in maps. For example, students were prompted to first map “where you are.” Then they explored a variety of maps from Indigenous communities from all over the world and through various timeframes. Finally, they drew a second map to critically consider how one’s culture provides a central orientation to place. Students were asked again to map “where you are” at the end of the session to assess how their central orientation may have, or have not, changed.

Forestry

Students worked with NPT Forestry staff to identify and measure culturally significant trees. Students listened to presentations about the role of the Forestry and Fire Management programs within the Tribe, heard stories about the career paths of individuals in these positions, and conducted hands-on work measuring the height and diameter at breast height (DBH) of various trees. Additionally, students learned about Tribally-led programs to pair restoration projects with biomass and biofuel production to sustain culturally significant forests, decrease local smoke and pollution impacts, displace fossil fuels with biofuels, and provide economic benefit to Tribes. Finally, students discussed how the NPT uses emerging science and technology to perpetuate their values and self-determination through these examples.

Fire Management

Staff members from NPT Fire Management provided opportunities to experience work on a Fire crew. For example, students ran up a steep hill to understand the physical conditioning needed. Students learned about the role of fire in the ecosystem. A key message was that historically, Nimiipuu and other Indigenous peoples have used fire to manage landscapes. However, federal policies dating back to the early twentieth Century have disrupted these practices. Fire Management staff members discussed Nimiipuu perspectives on bringing fire back onto the Land. Significantly, a Tribal member who is a recent college graduate facilitated this session. She spoke about her path through college and conveyed some of the challenges she faced and overcame in completing a degree in Natural Resources on her way to working in Fire Management.

Fisheries

During the fisheries sessions, students collected and analyzed macro-invertebrates to understand the quality of fish habitat and learned about restoration work the Tribe is conducting as part of mitigation for impacts of dams and, the effects of erosion and its effect on fish spawning. An elder told a story about how traditional knowledge about fish and fish habitat shaped the current Tribal fisheries program. Finally, students watched a film about NPT Fisheries’ efforts to reintroduce lamprey into the South Fork of the Salmon River.

Student products and assessment

Course assessment included evaluations of students’ professionalism (10% of the total grade) based on skills identified as necessary for entry-level work in Fisheries, Forestry, and Fire Management. Students also completed six journal reflections (60% of the total grade) and a final research project (30% of the total grade). Supplemental materials include daily professionalism rubric and journal prompts (included in the field journal). Below is a description of the final research project.

Student-led research projects

As a summative activity, student field groups designed and completed a field research project. Project requirements required a connection to elder knowledge and use of remote sensing data. Field groups brainstormed topics with the help of Elders and instructors. Instructors worked with students to design appropriate methods for data collection, oversaw student data collection, and supported students in data analysis. Groups investigated a variety of topics, including the impact of invasive species on culturally significant plants, quantifying streambank erosion and its effects on fish habitat, and exploring implications of a proposed reopening of a mine.

One project stood out for the way that it navigated knowledge systems. During field explorations, students learned about a culturally significant plant that is abundant in one of the field sites. An Elder commented on the abundance of the plant. Students also noted sheep grazing’s significant impact on the area. To investigate, students generated drone aerial imagery of the site and analyzed the imagery to determine grazed areas using a supervised classification process. They collected ground measurements of soil moisture and presence/absence of the plant in both the grazed and non-grazed areas. They found a statistically significant difference in soil moisture between the grazed and non-grazed sites and a statistically significant difference in the presence of the plant (with more present in the non-grazed site). Elder knowledge guided students’ formation of the question, background understanding of the issue, and identification of plants. Students quantified the impact of grazing using Western science tools and methods while framing the significance of the research through traditional knowledge. They presented their findings to a group of peers, Elders, and cultural resources staff from a local land management agency. Staff assessed student presentations using a rubric developed from the NPT Education Principles.

Evaluation

Evaluation design and strategy

In preparing students for careers in TNRM, we chose to focus on identity as a socio-cultural aspect of workforce development and education not consistently recognized in mainstream natural resources programs. A primary purpose of the course was to support Nimiipuu identities and TNRM career pathways with the NPT, and we have therefore chosen to focus on Native students in this report. To understand the meaning that students made of this course, students participated in several reflective and data-generating activities through the lens of Critical Indigenous Research Methodologies (Brayboy et al., 2012), grounding this work in relationship, respect, relevance, responsibility, and reciprocity (Kirkness & Barnhardt, 1991). Rather than doing research “on” students, program staff worked with students as research partners in mutual meaning-making activities that included reflections and conversations. The evaluation was first approved through the NPT research approval process, then by the UI Institutional Review Board. Staff explained to students that the process is meant as two-way learning (for staff and students); to improve the program, staff wanted to understand the meaning students make of STEM and if they connected Indigenous knowledge and STEM. Simpson writes that “individuals carry the responsibility for generating meaning within their own lives—they carry the responsibility for engaging their minds, bodies, and spirits in a practice of generating meaning” (2014, p. 11). Therefore, meaning making was an essential aspect of the program.

Based on course goals, our guiding evaluation questions were: How do students recognize Indigenous STEM after their experiences in the program? How and in what ways do they connect their cultural and scientific identities? We also wanted to know how students viewed course activities and how well the course met the program goals.

Data generation

Data were generated in several ways, including a student experience survey, a card sort activity, group reflective conversations, and written student journals. Students were asked for their assent to participate and to have their ideas recorded. In the case of minors, parents and guardians were asked to give consent at the time of student enrollment. Participants were aware that their ideas would be shared with others and that their names would not be used.

Student experience survey

An end-of-course student experience survey addressed the question, “what were the participants’ reactions to the activities?” All students were asked to complete a digital survey created using Qualtrics software accessed through a tablet computer. Students’ responses were anonymous. Likert-type scale questions asked students’ agreement with statements regarding satisfaction overall and with specific activities. Specific to the goals described in this paper, students were asked if they could see themselves doing the field activities in their careers in the future, if they agreed that there is a connection between cultural background and environmental science, and if the Elders’ stories contributed to their science understanding (Table 5).

Table 5. Five-day schedule 2019.

	Monday	Tuesday	Wednesday	Thursday	Friday
Classroom	Opening prayers	Elder teachingsScience communication	Elder teachingsScience Communication	Elder teachingsScience Communication	Elder teachingsProject work
Field Day	Introductions Sovereignty Maps	Forestry/Fire Management	Fisheries	Remote Sensing	Free time
Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time	Free time
Evening	Elder teachings Climate change	Art with Elders Journal reflections	Art with Elders Journal reflections	Hot springs	Presentations Closing ceremony

Card sort

A variation on a norms and values card sort interview (Carlone, 2012) helped the team understand the activities students associated with culture, science, or both. Students sorted activities into three pre-determined categories: 1) “made me feel scientific,” 2) “made me feel connected to my culture,” and 3) “made me feel that science and culture are connected.” The activity generated data to explore the recognition construct of science identity. In seeing how students place cards and explain the placement, staff gained insight into the activities that students recognize as belonging in science or scientific ways of being, cultural ways of being, and activities in which students recognized scientific and cultural ways of being coming together.

Graduate students and a mix of Native and non-Native educators who had worked with students facilitated the activity with the students in small groups of approximately 6—8 each. Students could place cards into more than one category and have differing views on sorting. If there was disagreement, students could put the cards into both (or all) categories. First, however, students were asked to discuss their reasoning. Conversations were recorded and transcribed.

Reflective conversations

Members of the instructor team (Native and non-Native) facilitated end-of-program conversations with students in groups of 8—10 in Years 1 and 2. In Year 3, a Nimiipuu and non-Nimiipuu educator led reflection conversations in pairs. These reflections were open-ended and conversational (Kovach, 2009). The guiding question: how and in what ways are you connecting science and culture (if at all)? Facilitators explained to students that this was part of a learning process for the facilitators as well—to understand how students connect their ideas of science with their cultural identities, and the activities that were helpful to students in exploring those ideas.

Student journals

Students completed a written journal as part of graded learning in the course. Journal prompts were co-designed by the program team; prompts included questions about treaties, water quality, fisheries, forestry, and fire ecology; for example: “How does the NPT perpetuate the health of the Land and its people through exercising Treaty Rights?.” Other prompts required students to reflect on their own identity, for example: “After course activities so far, how has your sense of responsibility changed? What role does science play in that?” and “After experiencing the last two weeks of Indigenous environmental science, what connections do you see between your personal, family and community values and science?.” Student journal entries were scanned and compiled into PDF documents.

Data analysis

Data were analyzed in several ways. Frequency tables were calculated for the Satisfaction Survey (Figure 1). Open-ended questions were coded for content and analyzed for frequency (Tables 6-8). Card sort data were compiled into a Venn diagram (Figure 3) that showed the ways that students sorted activities into the three categories. The lead author and two Native graduate students read through all participant journals and transcripts from the Card Sort and Reflective Conversations, making note of quotes that related to the research questions. These quotes were put into a table and grouped holistically by emerging themes (Clarke et al., 2015). Themes were presented back to participants, and discussed with members of the NPT Cultural Resources and Education programs for their feedback and help with further refining the themes. Themes were presented to the program team in weekly meetings. These conversations provided an opportunity to reflect on the meaning that students were making from their experiences and to refine the goals of the course (for example, the shift away from the goal of having students identify with STEM to a goal of students identifying as Nimiipuu who are able to use STEM in support of cultural values and lifeways).

Figure 1. Frequency table of student responses (Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Neutral, Agree or Strongly Agree) with survey statements.

Table 6. Coded responses to the question “What was your favorite part about the course”.

Code and Sub-code	2017 (n = 36)	2018 (n = 36)	2019 (n = 16)	Grand Total
Learning	20 (43%)	20 (45%)	6 (32%)	46 (42%)
Listening to Elders	4	7	3	14
Gaining New Knowledge	4	3		7
Hands-on Learning	2	3	2	7
Collecting Data and Doing a Project	3	1	1	5
Forestry Station	3			3
Integrating Science and Culture	1	2		3
Fisheries Station	2	2		4
Getting College Credit		1		1
Learning About Job Opportunities		1		1
Learning in Small Groups	1			1
Free time	18 (39%)	13 (30%)	11 (58%)	42 (39%)
Swimming	8	4	6	18
Free Time	6	8	2	16
Canoeing	4	1	3	8
People	6 (13%)	9 (20%)	1 (5%)	16 (15%)
Supportive Field Instructors	5	2		7
Meeting New People	1	5		6
Being With Friends		2	1	3
Place	2 (4%)	2 (5%)	1 (5%)	5 (5%)
Being Outside		1	1	2
Food	1	1		2
Being in McCall	1			1
Grand Total	46	44	19	109

Table 7. Coded answers to the open-ended question “What was your favorite field station?”.

Station / Subject	2017 (n = 36)	2018 (n = 36)	Grand Total
Forestry and Fire Management	19 (57%)	25 (73%)	44 (66%)
Drone	8	1	9
Fire Management	n/a	18	18
Mapping	2	2	4
Measuring trees	9	4	13
Fisheries	14 (42%)	8 (23%)	22 (33%)
Fish Tagging	n/a	5	7
Macroinvertebrates	3		3
Snorkeling	10		8
Water Quality Testing	1	3	4
Research Project	0 (0%)	1 (3%)	1 (1%)
Grand Total	33	34	67

Table 8. Coded responses to the open-ended question “What did you like least about the course?”.

Codes and Sub-codes	2017 (n = 36)	2018 (n = 36)	2019 (n = 16)	Grand Total
Structure	13 (48%)	11 (30%)	11 (73%)	35 (44%)
Classroom			4	4
Lack of free time	6			6
Long discussions	5	2	4	11
Not enough time on projects			2	2
Waking up early	2	9	1	12
Food	3 (11%)	16 (43%)	3 (20%)	22 (28%)
Food	3	16	3	22
Curriculum	7 (26%)	3 (11%)		10
Computer-based mapping	2			2
Fisheries	1			1
Not enough drones	1			1
School work	3	3		6
People	2 (7%)	4 (11%)	0 (0%)	6 (8%)
Disrespect from mentors		2		2
Disrespect of other students	2	2		4
Environment	2 (7%)	0 (0%)	1 (7%)	3 (4%)
Heat	2		1	3
Place	0 (0%)	3 (8%)	0 (0%)	3 (4%)
Cold showers		1		1
Not enough free time fun		2		2
Grand Total	27	37	15	79

Authenticity and trustworthiness of data

Multiple data sources allowed triangulating between journals, the card sort activity, and reflective conversations. Team members have had a prolonged engagement with the curriculum and ongoing relationships in the community. Findings were shared with a group of students who had participated in the course to ensure that interpretations reflected what students wanted to say. Findings were discussed amongst the program planning team (including the Elders) who had not been part of data generation to ensure that the interpretations made sense to those outside the analysis process. The project team, including Elders, presented results back to community in an event that was livestreamed on the Tribe’s Facebook page (due to COVID constraints).

Results

Student engagement and satisfaction

The anonymous satisfaction survey did not ask for demographic data, and therefore we cannot differentiate between Native and non-Native students’ responses. Results are presented for each of the three years of post-program data collection (2017—2019). Though the course differed in length, much of the same content and similar activities were conducted each year. Certain program elements, like Elder involvement, remained constant.

According to survey results (Figure 1), 89% of students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I learned new things at this course” in 2017, 87% in 2018 and 93% in 2019. Eighty-nine percent of students in 2017 and 87% of students in 2018 agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I learned new skills at the field stations.”

Seventy-two percent of students agreed or strongly agreed that the project that they completed could be useful to their community in 2017, with 76% agreeing or strongly agreeing in 2018. In 2017, 78% of students agreed or strongly agreed that Elders’ stories helped them to understand the science they were learning in both 2017 and 2018. In 2019, 88% of students agreed or strongly agreed with this statement.

Particularly relevant to the focus of the course, students consistently saw a connection between science and their culture, with 83% of students agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement “There is a connection between our culture and science” in 2017, 92% in 2018, and 88% in 2019.

Although students were satisfied that they learned a lot and benefited from the activities, students desired more free time (45% in 2017, 41% in 2018 and 63% in 2019), a theme that was consistent even with more free time (Year 2) and less structured programming (Year 3). Just over half of students in Year 1 (2017) agreed or strongly agreed with the statement “I want a job that includes doing science,” with only 38% in 2018 and 31% in 2019. However, 53% of students said that they would take more science courses because of this course in 2017, and this increased to 73% in 2018 and 67% in 2019. In 2017, 85% agreed that they learned about new careers or jobs that they had not considered before, with 76% in 2018 and 80% in 2019 (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Frequency table of student responses (Yes or No) to survey questions.

Favorite part of the course

Students were asked to name their favorite parts of the course in an open-ended question. The majority of the respondents (n = 79, 90%), named a singular aspect of the course, while 9 total respondents (10%) included more than one (up to four). Responses were coded into a total of four categories: “Learning,” “People,” “Free time,” and “Place” (Table 6), with a total of 19 sub-codes. Frequencies are presented as a percentage of the total number of items named. A grand total of 46 answers (42%) related to the code “Learning,” with the most frequent sub-code of “Listening to Elders” (n = 14, 30% of the subcode).

Forty-two answers (39%) related to Free Time. The most frequent subcode was “Swimming” (n = 18, 43% of the subcode). Sixteen answers (15%) related to People, including the most frequently named subcode item “supportive field instructors” (n = 7, 46% of the subcode). Five responses (5%) related to the place.

Favorite field learning activities

Students were also asked to name their favorite field learning activities (Table 7). Forestry and fire management were overwhelmingly the most liked learning activities in both 2017 and 2018, with 19 responses (57%) mentioning something to do with forestry or fire management in 2017 and 25 (73%) in 2018. In 2018, a young fire professional worked with the students and her lesson was most frequently mentioned as a favorite (18 mentions, 53% of all answers in 2018). Fisheries (including the snorkeling activity) was the second most frequently mentioned, with 14 mentions (42%) in 2017 and 8 (23%) in 2018. This question was not included in the survey in 2019.

Least favorite parts of the course

The last open-ended question asked students to name their least favorite part of the course (Table 8). Student responses were grouped into six codes (categories) with a total of 15 sub-codes. The code with most mentions in 2017 and 2019 is “Structure,” with a total of 13 mentions (48%) in 2017 and 11 mentions (73%) in 2019. Most frequently named sub-code in 2017 was “Lack of Free Time” (46% of the mentions in that code), with “Classroom Time” and “Long Discussions” tied for most mentioned (4 times each or 36% of the mentions in that category each) in 2019. In 2018 “Food” was the least liked part of the course, with 16 mentions (43% of all answers).

Card sort activity

Participants sorted activities differently, with many activities falling into more than one category (Figure 3). Out of fourteen total activities that participants were asked to categorize, five activities were sorted exclusively into the category “made me feel scientific.” These included conducting water quality tests, doing research, looking for macroinvertebrates, testing erosion models, and watching the drone fly. “Creating our own stories” was the one activity that was sorted exclusively into the “connected me to my culture” category. Making maps was the one activity that was sorted exclusively into the category “connected science and culture.” Five out of fourteen activities were sorted into both “made me feel scientific” and “connected science and culture.” They were making ledger art and memory strings, making spectral signature art, measuring trees, and snorkeling. Two activities were sorted into both the “connected science and culture” and “connected me to my culture” categories. They are “learning Nimiipuu place names” and “listening to elders.” “Making our own maps” was categorized into all three categories.

Figure 3. Compiled Card Sort data.

Student conversations and journal reflections

Results of card sort conversations, reflective conversations and journal reflections were analyzed holistically and coded thematically. Students’ constructions of connection between scientific and traditional knowledge ranged from not seeing a connection to making a somewhat superficial connection when the subject of science was something of cultural significance (e.g., fish or a particular place), to a more profound recognition of the science in traditional Nimiipuu ways of knowing and communicating (for example, seeing stories and art as a means of sharing long term observations of the Land). Students reported that they felt culture and science connected through activities like studying fish through snorkeling, learning about and measuring culturally significant trees, making maps, and listening to Elders’ stories about the Land. They also said that making ledger art and memory strings helped them connect science and culture by showing how those cultural practices embodied data. Youth expressed that these objects showed data collected over lifetimes, represented visually through beads and drawings.

Several themes emerged from the card sort activity and reflective conversations: 1) Elders as connectors between science and culture, 2) responsibilities for learning, 3) responsibilities to care for the Land and 4) benefits of Western science and Indigenous science working together to care for the Land. Many students also made connections between responsibility to the Land that reinforces the values, vitality, and cultural identity of the Tribe, leading to the protection of the Land so that future generations could also learn.

Theme 1: Elder knowledge as a connector between Western science and Indigenous knowledge

Students described how listening to Elders share stories helped them connect Nimiipuu knowledge with scientific knowledge, making a meaningful relationship between Nimiipuu ways to know and understand the Land and how they define STEM for themselves. They saw Elders as holding scientific knowledge, though they expressed that it may not be recognized as science:

Well, I guess connections I can make between like culture and science that I've learned throughout the camp here, I guess, a lot of it has to do with the Elders and the stories that they’ve told about … certain times when you have to go and, for example, pick berries and stuff like that. Like, that has to do a lot with science, the seasons and all of that and the way the Land works, the way the deer move, or, not the deer like the way game moves and stuff like that, they know where they go, and they know, and that has a lot to do with science because they’re observing their way of life, I guess you can say, but I thought that had a lot to do with the connection between culture and science. It’s just; basically, our way of life is surrounded by science, and it’s basically science without saying it’s science, I guess? (reflective conversation)

Similarly, another student described how this knowledge is passed between generations, and they had not considered it scientific knowledge until the course. The student said, “well, I think a lot of science comes from traditional knowledge from our Elders. You know they have knowledge passed down from their Elders and so on and so forth to us. You know that’s just what they know, and it’s basically science in a sense, you know” (student interview).

In the card sort activity, students explained that they connected science and culture through activities that were about culturally significant topics like trees and fish, or because of the place where the activity was happening (e.g. on culturally significant landscapes), in addition to seeing Indigenous ways of knowing such as long term observation of and learning from the Land as partly, though not wholly, a scientific process. Elders’ teachings helped students to recognize their cultural ways of knowing as being scientific ways of knowing. However, students also expressed that science is not expansive enough to explain all encompassed in this knowledge. For example, this knowledge comes with responsibilities, a concept not often recognized in Western science.

Theme 2: Responsibility to learn and to pass on knowledge

Students expressed that listening to Elders pushed them to be better listeners and students and reminded them of their responsibility to learn and pass on knowledge. For example, this student wrote:

I like to say I listen pretty well, but listening to the Elders really motivates me to pay attention more than usual. They have so much to say and a meaning behind everything they say. I just want to take their knowledge and use it and pass it on. That’s why I push myself to listen more (student journal).

Theme 3: Responsibility to care for the Land

Many students expressed their sense of responsibility to the Land as part of their learning experiences; some came with a sense of responsibility to the Land cultivated through family and community values. For example, one student wrote: “My family’s values are they feel they are the Land. They need to keep the Land free of sickness in order to live” (student journal).

They explained that listening to the Elders and natural resources professionals reinforced these values and that using tools helped them see how they might understand the health of the Land. They also expressed a sense of reciprocity with the Land. For example, one student wrote:

…going to dig roots helps the roots and soil; it also helps me personally. I feel good when I'm out digging. Also, whenever I go out to the mountains for camping, hunting, gathering, or fishing, I know that I'm supposed to leave that place in a better condition than when I arrived (student journal).

Theme 4: Western and Indigenous science can work together to care for the Land

Many students explained that technology and science helped them understand the Land and help people monitor its health. Students expressed that understanding the Land and current threats to its health helped with their sense of responsibility. One student explained that his sense of responsibility has not changed because he came in with a high sense of responsibility for taking care of the Land; however, he sees now that there is much work to be done:

Science and culture together is why my sense of responsibility for the Land is so high. I use scientific knowledge to help the communities’ cultural responsibilities. Most of my sense comes from the culture. My responsibility hasn’t changed. I have only come to realize what I need to help with (student journal).

In reflective conversations, two young people shared similar ideas saying “you use science to carry out your values,” and Nimiipuu can use “science and technology to protect our resources and for the future generations.”

Finally, this student’s reflection sums up the ways that students saw Nimiipuu knowledge and Western science working together toward an overall responsibility to the Land that would allow future generations to learn and thrive:

My whole life, my parents, aunties, uncles, and Elders have always told me the importance of my responsibility to carry on the things they’ve taught me. I know that I'm going to be carrying on these traditions that I've learned, and I'm going to teach young ones what was taught to me. Young people today aren’t aware of that responsibility we have. Our culture is depending on us to keep our traditions alive. We must have the will to learn and to take the time to learn these things. This younger generation plays the biggest role in all of this; our older people cannot stress this enough: it is so important that we learn the language, roots, berries, where or how to hunt and fish, etc. So later we can teach these things. Science plays another important role in this. We need young people in natural resources or cultural resources to protect our sacred foods or places. If these things are not protected or taken care of, then not only would they be gone, next generations would not be able to learn. That’s why we have camps like [this] available to young people. Since a young age, I've known my responsibility to learn and to keep these teachings alive. It depends on this younger generation to keep our ways alive, and going into sciences like fisheries, forestry, cultural resources, etc., also helps with that responsibility (student journal).

Discussion

The evaluation of the program included questions such as: How do students perceive Indigenous STEM after participating in the program? In what ways do students connect their cultural and scientific identities? The project aimed to introduce Native youth to careers in Tribal Natural Resources Management (TNRM) through a culturally sustaining curriculum based on Indigenous STEM. The curriculum aimed to expand students’ understanding of STEM to include traditional Nimiipuu ways of knowing. It also aimed to help students recognize how Western STEM can support Nimiipuu identity and lifeways. Identifying as a “STEM person” took a backseat to affirmations of Nimiipuu Indigenous identity, including language, connection to the Land, and storytelling.

Overall, the course successfully helped students establish a connection between their cultural identity, science, and careers in TNRM over three years. By the end of each year, participants showed a sophisticated understanding of how traditional knowledge incorporates scientific ways of knowing while supporting cultural values and lifeways. The findings indicate that students recognized the value of both Western and Indigenous knowledge in addressing community challenges. Students’ recognition of the connection between culture and science varied, ranging from perceiving a superficial connection to viewing cultural knowledge and practices as scientific ways of knowing. Many students embraced the concept of Indigenous STEM as a broader and more holistic way of knowing. Students recognized multiple sources of Indigenous knowledge, including Elders and direct experiences with the Land. In addition to Elders as a source of Indigenous science knowledge, students connected science and culture through course activities like making maps, snorkeling, and measuring trees. They emphasized the responsibility that comes with knowledge and the importance of Nimiipuu youth incorporating traditional knowledge into TNRM.

Evaluation results underscore the importance of having Elders and Nimiipuu Natural Resources staff as teachers and facilitators of the connection between cultural and STEM identities and support previous studies highlighting the significance of Elders as co-instructors in courses aimed at fostering Indigenous STEM identity (for example, Page-Reeves et al., 2017) The survey results indicated that learning from Elders was a favorite part of the course for students and they emphasized the importance of Elders in helping them connect their STEM and cultural identities. Additionally, students highly valued the activity facilitated by a young Nimiipuu fire professional. This could be attributed to the hands-on nature of the activity but given that many activities were hands-on, a defining feature of this activity seemed to be students’ ability to relate to the young professional.

Through interviews and journal reflections, students expressed how Nimiipuu ways of knowing and Western STEM can collaborate to sustain Nimiipuu lifeways. They understood that preserving Nimiipuu language, learning and culture are interconnected and mutually dependent with taking care of the Land. They recognized that knowledge entails responsibility for interacting with the Land. The students expressed a desire to embrace both Indigenous and Western STEM, aligning with the perspectives of Brayboy and Castagno (2008), and coauthor Pinkham, who advocate for a “both/and” perspective. Regardless of whether students perceived Indigenous and Western STEM as separate or intertwined, there was substantial evidence indicating that they viewed Indigenous knowledge as essential for the continuation of Indigenous futures, with Western STEM as a possible supportive tool.

Student feedback through course satisfaction surveys was used to make improvements each year. However, some structural elements of the course, such as long discussions, remained disliked. Given that this was a summer course for high school students, it is not surprising that some of the formal learning elements were less enjoyed than the free time and recreational elements of the program. The course faced challenges in integrating concepts about knowledge systems, learning, fisheries and forestry, and technical skills with remote sensing. While introducing various concepts, some topics were not explored in depth.

Many participants, including Native and non-Native students, Elders, Tribal employees, graduate students, university faculty, and staff, had primarily experienced Western education models in their formal schooling. Developing a learning experience based on Nimiipuu intelligence and pedagogy required participants and facilitators to adapt to unfamiliar learning forms in an academic setting. However, many Native students and staff had prior exposure to Nimiipuu pedagogy outside of formal education, which helped guide others.

Student engagement varied, and the educator team had different ways of measuring success. Some staff felt that students became bored during extended Elder-led sessions, while others recognized the students’ appreciation for the opportunity to listen to Elders. It was evident from the data that listening to Elders was crucial for student learning and was highly valued. Students also enjoyed hands-on and physical activities but did not enjoy long discussions. Future programs should aim to strike a balance between listening activities and more interactive tasks.

Students felt that the first year of the program was too rigidly structured, and both students and facilitators recognized the need for more downtime in the schedule. They understood that learning from the Land through observation and direct experience requires sufficient time. As a result, in the second year, we maintained the same content but spread it over two weeks instead of one. We also introduced a fire management lesson facilitated by a Nimiipuu fire management specialist, which received a highly positive response. However, the long travel times to field sites still made the schedule feel overly packed, and survey results indicated that students desired more free time. In the third year, we organized a five-day program with fewer structured activities, allowing for more time for Elders and students to interact. Despite these adjustments, survey responses indicated that students still desired more downtime and less structured learning. Although free time was not formally part of the learning curriculum, it was evident that it held great importance for students and should not be overlooked or limited. Providing opportunities for students to experience the Land and waters during their free time is likely to create valuable memories. Finding the right balance between “learning” and “free time” will be crucial for future iterations of the program.

In terms of career choices, the short-term impact of the course was not apparent, given that the participants were high school students. Although students learned and made connections with science, students did not show an overwhelming interest in pursuing a STEM career. Because these data were only collected after the course we cannot say if individuals’ desire for careers that include science changed over the course. The program, however, succeeded in encouraging students to take more science courses and exposing them to different career options. The long-term effects on career choices will likely become clear in the coming years.

Limitations

The findings of this work are specific to the people with whom, and the places and time in which, it was conducted. This course was rooted in teachings specific to this Land and teachings offered by Elders for this time and these places. Findings and approaches are not meant to be generalizable. However, we offer this example as a starting point for others to consider how these findings could inform their own people, place and time specific courses.

Implications

The findings indicate that students recognized the value of both Western and Indigenous knowledge in addressing community challenges. If students continue in STEM fields, they have the potential to integrate this holistic way of knowing into their practice. Furthermore, if students return to work for the Tribe in TNRM positions, they will bring an appreciation of Indigenous knowledge as central to this work.

In considering how to support STEM identities of Native students, it is important to consider that the priority may be identifying as a good member of their community rather than identifying as a scientist or STEM professional. Formal educational institutions should recognize that for these students, being a scientist or a good student may hold less value compared to being a responsible and active member of their community. Coauthor Pinkham highlights that the problem with adopting a scientist identity is that it often carries a cultural connotation focused on details, lab environments, and excluding spiritual knowledge. This narrow view of science excludes important aspects of understanding the world according to Nimiipuu perspectives. Academic institutions can foster a “both/and” approach to STEM identity, where students are able to approach STEM learning as part of a pathway toward being a good community member.

In order to support Native students’ orientations toward being a good member of their family and community and to work from Indigenous ways of knowing, faculty in STEM programs need to acknowledge, support, and create space for Indigenous knowledge as having a place in STEM, and integral to good relationship to the Land. Recognizing and affirming Indigenous ways of “doing science” should go beyond allowing individual students to conduct science in ways that align with their Indigenous identities. It requires creating programs and administrative structures that facilitate reciprocal relationships between Universities and Tribes, such as recognizing Elders and TNRM staff as official co-instructors of courses, working collaboratively with Tribes to establish priorities for the design of programs and courses, and hiring more Native faculty who can advise Indigenous students in their work.

Conclusion

The program successfully achieved many of its goals and also faced challenges. Weaving knowledge systems, learning approaches, and technical skills together proved complex, particularly when incorporating remote sensing. The program required participants and facilitators to embrace Nimiipuu pedagogy, which presented a shift from the predominantly Western education models they were accustomed to. Student feedback led to improvements in subsequent years, but certain structural aspects, such as long discussions, remained less favored. Striking a balance between listening activities and hands-on learning is crucial. While the program did not have an immediate impact on career choices, it played a role in encouraging students to pursue further science education and introduced them to various career possibilities.

The work constituted a cross-cultural collaboration in which UI faculty, NPT staff, and Elders co-created a program that allowed students to connect with STEM in ways that affirmed cultural identities and demonstrates a potential for expansion of “what counts” as STEM while exploring how STEM is just one tool an Indigenous TNRM manager might use to perpetuate a sensitive relationship to the Land. Evaluation data show that the program was successful in helping students to connect Indigenous ways of knowing to their understanding of STEM. Students found meaning in Indigenous knowledge as a way to perpetuate Nimiipuu lifeways, while also finding room for Western STEM as a useful tool. Data also support the importance of Elders and Native professionals as teachers in the STEM curriculum, the importance of unstructured time in the program, and the importance of active, hands-on learning.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to acknowledge that this work took place within the current reservation boundary and aboriginal territory of the Nimiipuu. We are grateful for the contributions of many people to this program, including the Elders Silas Whitman, Leroy Seth, and Lee Bourgeau, who generously contributed their time, teachings, and knowledge to the curriculum; staff at the NPT Fisheries, Forestry, and Education, Cultural Resources, and Fire Management programs; teachers and administrators at Lapwai High School; Bridge Idaho Upward Bound staff; and staff at the University of Idaho McCall Field Campus. The National Science Foundation funded this work under award #1513349. We wish to thank the editors and reviewers who provided several rounds of valuable critical feedback that improved the manuscript. Finally, we ask that if future authors wish to cite ideas shared in this paper that they will cite the knowledge holders who shared those ideas. For example, co-authors Alicia Wheeler and Josiah Pinkham, Elder Silas Whitman and the Nez Perce Tribe Education Program are all specifically referenced. Please cite these knowledge holders if referring to the knowledge they shared.

Disclosure statement

The authors report that there are no competing interests to declare.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Science Foundation of the United States under award #1513349.