We couldn’t find a panelist to make the case for Indigenous Ways of Knowing, so we turned to ChatGPT

A senior administrator claimed this was unethical, but we disagree. What do you think?

On Monday, October 28th, we hosted Frances Widdowson (video here) to discuss “What is ‘Indigenous Ways of Knowing’ and what is its place in a university?” Dr. Widdowson is internationally-renowned as a critic of university Indigenization and Indigenous Ways of Knowing (IWK). At Laurier HxA we adhere to “The HxA Way” to “foster more robust and constructive engagement across lines of difference.” We therefore placed a high priority on recruiting someone with an opposing view to constructively challenge Dr. Widdowson; we hoped the two panelists might discover common ground and clarify remaining points of disagreement.

To this end, we made several invitations to people (including senior leadership) whom we thought capable of defining IWK and articulating its benefits. Despite our best efforts, we were unable to find an adversarial conversation partner for Dr. Widdowson. Our commitment to challenging our speakers––and trying to represent the best of both sides of an issue––prompted us to use generative AI (GenAI) to create a challenging line of questioning from the perspective of an advocate for indigenization.

During a security review for our event, we noted that––because senior administrators had not responded to our requests for help finding a panelist––we planned to use GenAI to try to challenge Dr. Widdowson from the perspective of a VP of Indigenous Studies. 

In the only response we received from senior administration, and without first seeking our explanation, a senior administrator suggested using a “GenAI tool to impersonate an Indigenous person removes any potential for real academic engagement with ideas” and implied that we were unaware of potential biases that such an approach could entail. 

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Both concerns were top of mind when building the methodology listed below. First, we used the lightest possible touch to minimize the impact of our personal biases. Second, we limited ourselves to a single interaction with ChatGPT where we generated a set of questions prior to the talk that could in no way be misconstrued as impersonation. Finally, ChatGPT was provided with a transcript of a YouTube clip from a talk at Martin Luther University College titled “Decolonizing Laurier” given by our Associate Vice President, Darren Thomas, a well known scholar in this area. Limiting ChatGPT input only to this relevant source material helps exclude background knowledge of Indigenization that is likely to contain unknown biases.

Our methodological workflow proceeded as follows:

1. We provided details of the event to ChatGPT

2. We provided transcripts of two YouTube videos: one featuring Dr. Thomas on the subject of Decolonizing Laurier and a second by Dr. Widdowson arguing that Indigenization Destroys Academic Freedom.

3. We asked ChatGPT for summaries of both lectures to ensure that ChatGPT could properly synthesize both perspectives.

4. We then asked ChatGPT, “Given the perspectives you have just described in these summaries, and the knowledge that the speaker will be very critical of indigenization and indigenous ways of knowing, please generate a new and very challenging line of questioning from the questioner to the speaker.”

The questions generated by ChatGPT 4 are below. In the comments please let us know your thoughts about this methodology and the generated questions. How would you improve these practices? Note that we think this is a very poor substitute for the richness of a heterodox conversation featuring constructive disagreement between two real conversation partners.

ChatGPT’s questions for Dr. Frances Widdowson:

1. On Academic Freedom vs. Prescribed Doctrine:

• You’ve argued that indigenization creates a "prescribed doctrine" that restricts academic freedom. However, universities have historically operated under frameworks that prioritize Western ways of knowing, which many Indigenous scholars argue have marginalized other forms of knowledge. How do you reconcile your concern for academic freedom with the need to challenge an entrenched Western epistemology that has excluded Indigenous perspectives for centuries?

• In what ways, if any, do you see universities being able to support Indigenous knowledge systems without what you view as a "prescribed doctrine"? Is there a way to ensure academic freedom while also affirming the legitimacy of Indigenous Ways of Knowing?

2. On Indigenous Ways of Knowing and Scientific Rigor:

• You have criticized Indigenous Ways of Knowing as lacking the rigor of traditional academic methods, particularly in scientific disciplines. Yet Indigenous knowledge has informed environmental stewardship, sustainable agriculture, and health practices for millennia. Can you explain how you determine what qualifies as "rigorous" knowledge, and why you believe Indigenous knowledge cannot meet that standard, particularly when it has demonstrably contributed to scientific understanding?

• How do you respond to the argument that Western science, too, has its own limitations and biases, especially in fields like environmental science and public health, where Indigenous knowledge systems have provided critical insights into sustainable practices? Should the university not embrace a plurality of knowledge systems to enrich its academic offerings?

3. On Inclusivity and Standards:

• You have expressed concerns that indigenization could result in lowering academic standards, such as by creating alternate tenure requirements or accepting oral traditions as legitimate sources of knowledge. How do you respond to the view that "lowering standards" is a misunderstanding of the unique cultural contexts from which Indigenous knowledge originates, and that accommodating these traditions could enrich the university experience for all students, not just Indigenous ones?

• Many argue that the failure to adapt academic standards to include Indigenous Ways of Knowing perpetuates systemic exclusion. Is maintaining the current "standards" more important than creating an inclusive environment where Indigenous students and scholars can thrive?

4. On Truth and Reconciliation:

• The Truth and Reconciliation Commission's (TRC) Calls to Action explicitly highlight the importance of indigenization and decolonization in educational institutions. How do you reconcile your resistance to indigenization with the TRC’s recognition that incorporating Indigenous knowledge systems is central to reconciliation?

• Given that reconciliation is about addressing historical wrongs and moving towards a more equitable future, do you think universities have a moral obligation to incorporate Indigenous knowledge in ways that go beyond mere inclusivity, but actively repair the harms caused by colonial educational systems?

5. On the Role of Universities as Treaty Partners:

• Indigenous leaders often argue that public universities, as institutions operating on unceded Indigenous lands, have treaty obligations to work in partnership with Indigenous communities. How do you respond to the claim that universities, in fulfilling these obligations, must incorporate Indigenous knowledge not only into Indigenous Studies but across all faculties?

• In your view, is there a way for universities to fulfill these treaty obligations without what you perceive as compromising academic freedom? How would you propose universities address their responsibilities to Indigenous communities while maintaining the academic integrity you advocate for?

6. On the Ethical Dimensions of Exclusion:

• By dismissing Indigenous Ways of Knowing as less valid or rigorous, how do you respond to the accusation that your position perpetuates the exclusion of Indigenous peoples and their knowledge from academic spaces, further marginalizing them?

• How do you see your role, as a critic of indigenization, in the larger context of ensuring that universities do not reinforce the colonial systems that have historically harmed Indigenous people? Is there a risk that your critique itself could silence Indigenous voices in academia?

7. On Equity and Power Dynamics:

• Indigenization and decolonization efforts are often seen as addressing power imbalances within universities by making them more inclusive for Indigenous students, faculty, and knowledge systems. How do you respond to the argument that your position effectively maintains these power imbalances by upholding Western epistemological dominance?

• If universities are supposed to serve all members of society, how do you justify prioritizing traditional Western academic standards over the inclusion of Indigenous knowledge, which could be seen as a way to level the playing field for Indigenous scholars and students?

8. On the Practical Integration of Indigenous Knowledge:

• You have voiced concerns about Indigenous Ways of Knowing being incorporated into university curricula, particularly in fields like science. However, many Indigenous communities have developed sustainable practices and healing traditions that could offer significant contributions to environmental science, medicine, and other disciplines. How do you propose universities engage with Indigenous knowledge systems in a way that is respectful and academically rigorous, without dismissing them as unscientific or irrelevant?

• What would be your alternative for ensuring that Indigenous students and scholars see their knowledge systems reflected and respected within university settings, particularly in disciplines outside the humanities?

9. On the Future of Higher Education:

• Universities are evolving to be more inclusive and to acknowledge the multiplicity of knowledge systems in the world. Do you think universities can remain relevant in a post-colonial world without indigenizing and decolonizing their structures and curricula? How do you see the future of higher education if the inclusion of Indigenous Ways of Knowing continues to be resisted by some scholars?

• If universities do not take active steps to include Indigenous perspectives and knowledge systems, how do you think this will impact reconciliation efforts and relationships between Indigenous communities and academic institutions?