








































Emerging Perspectives 
ep.journalhosting.ucalgary.ca 

*Corresponding author - kori.czuy2@ucalgary.ca 

 

Circling the Square: Indigenizing the Dissertation 

Kori Czuy*, Dr Melitta Hogarth 

University of Calgary, University of Southern Queensland 
 

Through tradition and standardization, the structure of the dissertation 
template has [boxed in] a colonial standard whilst ╔ cornering ╝ ways 
of knowing that cannot be expressed within these limits. But within 
these ╔ corners ╝ ideas huddle desperately together, preserving 
valuable embers of knowledge, conserving strength to ignite a fire to 
round these ╔ corners ╝ to closer resemble a circle, forcing dialogue 
between disparate world-views (Ermine, 2007). 

The Doctoral Forum at the Queensland University of 
Technology [QUT] in Australia brought together an Aboriginal 
doctoral candidate (at the time) from Australia and an Indigenous 
doctoral candidate from Canada. Discussion about the limitations of the 
standard dissertation format arose.  While researching in diverse 
disciplines, we found we shared experiences of constraint and a kind of 
tug-of-war to address the requirements of the institution while 
privileging our positionality and standpoint as Indigenous peoples; 
speaking back to the dominant voices of the coloniser.  We reflected on 
how the template acted to privilege Western institutional constructs and 
how dominant colonial structures suppress land-based methodologies, 
creativity, and holism.  

Through our critical dialogues, we recognised that to morph the 
square of standardization, we must nourish an openness towards 
multiple ways of knowing and doing through a delicate balance of 
decolonizing and Indigenizing (Pratt, Louis, Hanson & Ottmann, 
2018). This paper addresses how two graduate students are blurring the 
boundaries of the standardized dissertation structure. Through critical 
dialogue, the colonial structures that [box] us in, provide a means for 
the previously ╔ cornered ╝ and marginalized voices to be heard. 

 

Keywords: dissertation, Indigenous ways of knowing, Indigenizing the academy  
 

Czuy, K. & Hogarth, M. (2019). Circling the square: Indigenizing the dissertation. 
Emerging Perspectives, 3(1), 1-16. 
 
 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  2 

  

 

Melitta Hogarth’s vignette: 

I am an Australian Aboriginal woman.  I am a Kamilaroi woman. Kamilaroi Nation 
reaches from the now Hunter Valley of New South Wales, across the Liverpool Plains and 
stretching into southern Queensland including Dirranbandi, which is where my people are 
from.   I am also a trained teacher with 20 years’ experience as a classroom teacher and now, 
four years working within the tertiary1 education sector. I have recently completed my PhD 
(Hogarth, 2018). 

I was invited to present at the Doctoral Forum by Associate Professor Karen Dooley 
(Hogarth, 2017c).  Knowing that the audience were other doctoral students, all in varying 
stages of their candidature2, I wondered how I could contribute to their experience.  I 
reflected on my pathway into higher degree research and the things I wish I knew before I 
started. As an Aboriginal person, entering academia and the ‘ocean of research’3, I quickly 
found many barriers, and I felt restricted by the traditions held in high esteem within 
Whiteness, as well as the academy and its very structures.  [I was being boxed in]. The space 
privileged Western worldviews and my own approaches seemed marginalised. I was 
encouraged by others to ‘own’ my thesis and in turn, disrupt the thesis template. It was this 
notion of resisting the privileging of Western ways that I spoke about at the Doctoral 
Forum.  One participant, Kori Czuy, found time to share with me her experiences in the 
research realm. We found a shared experience as Indigenous peoples in Western systems and 
thus begins our paper. 

 
Kori Czuy’s vignette: 

I am Cree Métis Polish, born in the Peace Country of Treaty 8, with blood roots to Prairie Echo, 
Alberta, North Battleford, Saskatchewan, and Red River, Manitoba. My spirit has been revitalized in 
the Rocky Mountains of Treaty 7, where I grew up. I have been working in education in various 
capacities over the past decade around the globe but was inspired to do my Master’s (at the Institute 
of Education in London, England) after working with Orang Asli children in central Malaysia. I then 
felt the need to reconnect with my own Indigenous roots and land by doing my PhD back in Canada.  

 
 
 

                                                      

1 In Australia, post-secondary education is referred to as tertiary education  

2 In Australia, candidacy is referred to as candidature  

3 Throughout my PhD and Master’s, I used the metaphor ‘research is an ocean’ and played on the idea of sailing on 
the ocean of research in narratives at the beginning of each chapter hence, the reference here to the ‘ocean of 

research’.  See, Hogarth, 2017a; 2018   



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  3 

  

I was selected as part of the University of Calgary’s (UofC) Doctoral group who travelled to 
Australia to embark on a transcultural journey. We met up with fellow doctoral students from QUT 
and Beijing Normal University and embarked on a week-long journey to learn from one another, 
within formal and informal settings. There were a few questions I wanted to explore during the 
seminar, one in particular focused on the structure of the PhD, and whether other scholars shared 
similar sentiments of being restricted. Throughout my doctoral journey, these restrictive boundaries 
have negatively affected my research, making it difficult to do my work “in a good way”– through an 
Indigenous methodology within an ethical space. I was lucky to meet Melitta, a strong Aboriginal 
woman, who presented her doctoral journey and research to the Doctoral seminar group. We found 
that we shared many experiences throughout our doctoral journeys, mainly about navigating colonial, 
Western institutional standards. We walk together on a path towards truth and reconciliation, 
together with an ocean between us. 

 
Melitta:  Circling the square and finding our place within Western institutions has 

become important to me as I have navigated higher degree research because gaining that 
piece of paper and the title gives my voice agency (or at least, I hope so!).  I can then be seen 
as someone who is speaking from a position of knowing and speak back to the deficit 
discourses—a type of intellectual activism (Hill Collins, 2013). 

 
Kori: Circling the square for me is about truly understanding the privilege of being a doctoral 

candidate and using the accompanying opportunities in a good way; by respecting and honouring 
generations past to better support and open doors and pathways for those without such privilege, for 
the coming seven generations. 

 
...a pause for breath and to re-centre thought... 

  
Kori: Staying within standard academic publishing constraints in regard to this paper seemed 

to be contradictory to our dialogues about disrupting colonial standards. Melitta and I met through 
dialogue, we connected through shared experiences, and we wanted to continue by representing our 
voices authentically. We were inspired to use metalogue (Adams, Luitel, Afonso, & Taylor, 2008), as a 
way to retain our voices. This methodology embraces reflexivity by looking within ourselves and our 
own personal scholarship and experiences, and it projects outwardly and engages through dialogue 
and sharing ideas, all whilst retaining our individual journeys.  
 

The term metalogue was introduced first by Gregory Bateson in 1972, to preserve the 
voices of many authors, and retain perspectives that otherwise would be lost within the 
inauthentic third voice. Differences and voices are often swept then lost under a fictional third 
person carpet (Tobin & Roth, 2002), highlighting how this other voice is truly inauthentic by 
blanketing individual voices and silencing unique spirit. This third voice becomes the scientific 
voice, generalized and singular (Staller, 2007). Lincoln & Denzin (2003) stated the need to 
reshape traditional scientific discourse, to engage within a social justice perspective of writing 
and research by supporting and provoking good ongoing conversation that is about life, 
community, and the human purpose; of which includes a language and dialogue that may be 
non-traditional, non-technical, and narrative (in Staller, 2007). 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  4 

  

  
Kori: The loss of voice is common in Indigenous communities, along with the process of 

translating the leftover voices into a Eurocentric worldview, which, I believe, removes spirit and origin 
stories from land and community. I like how metalogue critically engages dialogue, not privileging any 
one voice, especially the perception of the "all powerful" scientific voice.  

 
Melitta: And that is it!  The properties of allowing each voice to be heard and to be 

equal in the conversation emulates the notion of storytelling; therefore, metalogue enables 
us to maintain our Indigeneity, to privilege our worldview lenses while not homogenising our 
experiences as the Indigenous experience.   From an Aboriginal Australian perspective, 
metalogue reminds me of yarning (Bessarab & Ng’andu, 2010), albeit given a more 
institutionally acceptable term of reference. As Bessarab and Ng’andu (2010) highlight, the 
sharing of knowledge through story is a shared Indigenous way of knowing, being and 
doing.  It is these shared tenets that we find connections and we can make meaning of our 
different experiences in tertiary education. Metalogue privileges each of our stories.   

 
Kori: Is yarning similar to a story-telling or talking/sharing circle? By allowing multiple stories 

and experiences to be shared and not manipulated into a common voice or idea. This reminds me of 
how Blackfoot Elder Eagle Speaker (personal communication [p.c.]) describes the sweetgrass braid, 
each strand supporting one another, stronger together than apart, with each strand moving and 
dancing with one another whilst retaining integrity. 

 
Melitta: Yes, exactly!  Not only does this illustrate the importance of the collective but 

also, the sharing of story as a means of learning, understanding and being. 
 

Metalogues also allow for dialogues between authors to be unfolded and cogenerated, then 
engaged and transformed (Staller, 2007; Roth & Tobin, 2004). This format allows the authors 
to engage deeply and simultaneously contribute actively (Adams et al., 2008).  

 
Kori: I see each dialogue as fractal, where each statement has the potential to engage a 

dialogue into an infinite vortex of scholarship and ideas, “produced, transformed, reproduced” (Roth 
& Tobin, 2004, p. 4), it is an ongoing conversation. But when does it stop? When the parameters of 
our editors say so? When a word limit is reached. The dialogue doesn’t finish, it can’t finish, but 
somehow it is forced to… Maybe those three dots should be used more, replacing the finality of a 
singular dot, with three dots to represent openness and continuity. The three dots represent a breath 
in (and with it ideas, energy, and spirit), instead of the finite statement of a period, to breathe out, 
letting out ideas, and with it, the breath of continued life.  

 
Melitta: The restrictions set within all parameters of writing and the institutional 

constructs and its rules are parameters, we, as Indigenous peoples, are constantly having to 
live and work within.  Disruption of these constructs can only be so far. We are bound by rules 
and yet, wherever disruption is possible; we must act. By using metalogue, we are actively 
resisting the dominant norm.  The fractal properties you talk about are our way of ensuring 
our knowledges and understandings of our experiences in the Western institution are shared. 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  5 

  

Perhaps, we will know the end of this component of our conversation when we naturally stop 
for breath.  Our conversation does not end, but our sharing with others does.  

Furthermore, we need to consider, how much do we share? What do we share?  We 
need to be aware of the fact that when we tell our stories, we are consciously and 
unconsciously deciding what is and is not said (Bessarab & Ng’andu, 2010).   

 
Kori: What is not said – to read between the lines, within the space where the known and 

unknown dance, the flux, ebb and flow...chaos. “Chaos and its offspring, creativity, are generative 
forces of the universe,” (Cajete, 2000, p. 17), creativity is birthed between the lines. 
 

To question the boundaries of the institution and academia, then questions of where and 
if there is a limited atmosphere of intellect and dialogue arise. Staller (2007) speaks of a need 
for a balance between safeguarding quality and fostering innovation and creativity. The 
boundaries have been built to safeguard the quality and rigor of the scientific and academic 
community, to uphold the high standards that have built the institutional foundation. Along with 
this balance, there must be critical engagement with the question about how and why the 
boundary was constructed in the first place. 

 
Melitta: Or moreover, how these boundaries and constructs are maintained?!  This 

question I pose because of my own work where the means in which institutional and societal 
constructs are maintained are evident in language; through the power not just of the coloniser 
but the power of maintaining the dominant ideologies (Hogarth, 2017c; 2018).  Indigenous 
ways of knowing, being and doing are positioned on the periphery (Herbert, 2012); the binary 
construct acts to make explicit the difference allowing the differing worldviews to position 
Indigenous knowledges; and therefore, the Indigenous experience, as inferior.  We must 
therefore “play the game” and work within both worlds. With this in mind, the use of 
metalogue as a methodological approach enables us to reposition Indigenous ways by 
bringing storytelling into the centre.  

 
Kori: Every time I question the [box] I hear, "just play the game". Immediately, that little 

colonial voice in my brain, created through years of Eurocentric education, tries to rationalize my 
actions. I hear, but I try not to listen. How am I embracing Indigenous ways of knowing by playing the 
game? Or supporting the next cohort of Indigenous scholars? Indigenous methodologies make space 
for voices outside of the colonial to thrive, gently nudging the dominant voices aside to critically 
engage with the Indigenous voices that have been marginalized. Mi’kmaq Elder Marshall talks about 
‘two-eyed seeing’, one eye representing Indigenous worldviews and the other Western worldviews, 
and the strength of each is used to support each other, resulting in equality (Hatcher, Bartlett, 
Marshall, A., & Marshall, M., 2009). But I feel like Indigenous ways of knowing first require equity to 
build equality, perhaps closing the Western eye to focus on the Indigenous perspective, building its 
strength, capacity, and understanding. Maybe "two-eyed" seeing is what we strive towards? 

 
 
 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  6 

  

Melitta:  Yes, and it is interesting that we need to constantly have these inner 
monologues.  Worrying about the Western and wanting to privilege the Indigenous self—we 
are being encouraged to enter the Western space, but then we are told, or at least, we feel 
that we must conform to the [box].   

 

Staller (2007) stated a main advantage of metalogue allows for increased transparency, 
where ideas develop actively, are revealed in time, but not hidden within the abstract confines 
of the “intellectual atmosphere” (p. 155).  

 
 Kori: The idea of grounding the abstract through transparency, for me, challenges the 

boundaries of written scientific and academic text. To reveal the process of knowledge creation 
through the dialogue and infinite nature of coming to know, allows for the humility of the process to 
be revealed. Through this humility we allow for the abstract to become grounded, to become human, 
and therefore to be brought into the “realm of the real world” (Staller, 2007, p. 155). Coming to know 
through an Indigenous worldview focuses on humility and coming to know through our mistakes by 
acknowledging them, not retreating, moving through them to become stronger. 
 
 Melitta: And so we are sharing our thought process, our ways of negotiating the square 
and the very things we must consider each time we enter this space.  We are constantly 
conflicted and the push-pull nexus that Torres Strait Islander academic, Nakata (2007a, 2007b) 
refers to when we are participating in the cultural interface becomes apparent.  We actively look 
through both a Western lens and an Indigenous lens; looking for ways to privilege our Indigeneity 
while revealing the taken for granted assumptions and hidden institutional constructs and bias 
located within the [box].   As a result, we are constantly trying to find our place and 
unfortunately, finding ourselves on the periphery (Herbert, 2012). Our ways of doing are seen as 
different and yet, it is just how we do it. Our ways of knowing being classed as unique and yet, 
here we are working towards completing a PhD within a Western institution where structures 
and regiment is rife.  What we find is we need to take ownership of our research and to do that, 
we disrupt the template; softening the edges of the [box].  

I remember when I first enrolled in the Master of Education (Research) (Hogarth, 2015).  It 
had taken me three whole years to actually convince myself that it was even possible (Hogarth, 
2017a).  I was an External (online) student as I was living over 700 kilometres from the university 
and I was lost from the beginning.  I had to complete two theory units that introduced 
quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Needless to say, the methodological approaches 
considered were very standard.  They did not reflect me and I failed to see how I was going to 
make this work. That was, until I began exploring and reading the work of mostly Australian 
Indigenous academics such as Martin Nakata (2007a), Aileen Moreton-Robinson (2013) and Lester 
Rigney (1999) but also, international Indigenous academics like Linda Tuhiwai-Smith (1999) and 
Marie Battiste (2000) and the approaches they used.  In their words, their experiences, their 
challenges and solutions; their stories —I could see myself. Their voices were strong; their 
convictions and intentions clear and here was I, wading in a very deep pool, treading water. I am 
glad that I took the longer road and completed the Master’s prior to taking on the PhD (Hogarth 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  7 

  

2015; 2018). It gave me space and time to find my place; my niche on the periphery, giving me the 
confidence to chip away at those ╔ corners ╝. 

 
Kori: My journey was similar, only discovering Indigenous methodologies in my PhD. I chose 

to not do land-based research4 in my Master’s, blaming my lack of funding. Smith (1999) would have 
said that I was questioning research that would have been done on instead of with. It was not my 
community, they were not my stories, I had only read written colonial perspectives in academic 
journals by white male professors who may very well have been doing research on, but I don’t want 
to speculate… This uneasiness I later understood through Indigenous ways of knowing as the 
uneasiness of my spirit, feeling the repression of colonization. 

 
Melitta:  So essentially, the question is why?  Why do we find the need to disrupt the 

template, to break down the sharp edges of the [box] and essentially, circle the [box]?  For 
me, the need is to find me. I am not the kind to actively participate in demonstrations or 
protests. Instead, I enjoy protesting in the institutional space.  It provides me opportunity to 
disrupt at the interface where Indigenous and non-Indigenous knowledges meet. By 
completing the Masters (Hogarth, 2015), I felt I was in a position of knowing.  I knew what the 
template asked, and I knew what the template denied me of.   It dictated the recipe, or what 
was necessary, but the method was up to me. The final presentation was up to me.  I was 
about to spend an extended length of time with these words —I needed it to be me. It was 
me. Surely, with this realisation, it had to reflect me. 

 
Kori: Yes! Creating and pushing the boundaries of dialogue and disrupting by questioning 

that what has been taken for granted as assumption, is also my protest. I am questioning 
"universal" mathematics by closing the eye receptive only to Eurocentric, colonial math, and 
understanding mathematics through relationships between humans, land, animals, spirit, and 
cosmos. I have created a framework (see Figure 1) that critically engages ethno(mathematics) by 
beginning with Indigenous worldviews instead of assuming colonial universality. This framework 
(represented as a cross-section of the sweetgrass braid), always begins in the East (rising sun), by 
understanding math through stories with/about land and community (the first strand); for example, 
stories about constellation positions foretelling seasons, hunting, or harvest. Weaving in the second 
strand engages a personal understanding and reflection to ground these knowings; for example, 
star stories from childhood memories, open to all histories, experiences, and cultures. The third 
strand of Eurocentric mathematics is then weaved in. Each strand has equal strength, but by 
critically engaging with the first two strands, like closing the Western eye, equity is better created. 
Without this critical focus on the marginalized perspective, especially with mathematics, translation 
into the Eurocentric worldview is automatic because this worldview is often taught as standard and 
"universal". 

  
                                                      

4 Here, land-based research meant learning with and from the land and the people of that land. Limited funding 
resources meant this Indigenous learning/research method would not be feasible for me. I later read Smith (1999), 

who stated that colonization transformed space, changing Indigenous space, or land, from living with, through 
respect and reciprocity, to defining land as a commodity, to be tamed and controlled.  



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  8 

  

 
Figure 1: The Critical Braid: Story-based approach to explore ethno(mathematics). 

Always beginning in the East, the rising sun, with the stories from the land. 

In the academy, these dialogues, questions, and frameworks are the demonstrations and 
protests. Softening the edges by acting on what we both know is valid without feeling the need to 
always "play the game" or translate into Eurocentric worldviews, but embrace dialogue together, 
through open minds and hearts.  

 
Melitta:  The scary part for me was that QUT specified that:  

• the thesis is well written having due consideration to relevant writing 
conventions and style guidelines; 

• that the spelling, grammar, punctuation and choice of language are of a 
high standard; 

• that the thesis is presented in English; 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  9 

  

• that all citations and the bibliography comply with relevant disciplinary 
conventions; and 

• that all typing errors are corrected (QUT, 2016, p. 3). 
 
The privileging of Standard English is not lost to me.  Regardless of your cultural backgrounds, 
your ways of knowing, being and doing—you must submit to Western institutional 
structures.  On the flip side, you are essentially being told—Western standards are the only 
way to achieve a PhD.  

I have internal monologues with self all the time.  I know that I suffer desperately with 
imposter syndrome and there is a need to continue fighting my brain demons (Hogarth, 
2017a).  So, the inner monologue went something like this: Deep breaths, Melitta. You know 
what needs to be done and you have the recipe.  You need to make this thesis yours! Stand 
strong and most importantly, be true to yourself. Remember, this is not just for you to get 
that floppy hat; it is for your family; the kids in your last teaching job and basically, every 
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander student in every school.    

 
Kori: The first time I disrupted the PhD [box] to play with the humanity lost in the dust of the 

╔ corners ╝, was when I created my first academic poster. I was excited to be given the opportunity 
to play with my thoughts in a way that was creative, innovative, expressive, and personal, to be able 
to work through and express my research outside of the traditional written paper format. Like you 
said, being true to myself.  

 
Melitta:  I am jealous of your courage to enter the space of an academic poster.  While 

my undergraduate degree was in Creative Arts, I have avoided the research poster arena 
because of the systemic understandings of what makes an academic poster.  I yearn to return 
to the paintbrushes and easel and yet, still have not find my way.  

 
Kori: I got out my bristol board, pencils, markers, (no paint this time) and turned on my artistic 

brain. The thought process around how to simplistically represent my work pictorially and holistically 
was intense and complex. I connected with my poster through piles of eraser dust, glue ridden fingers, 
rainbow knuckles, and intricate hand-drawn graphics. I was well into my creative process when that 
annoying colonial voice acted up again: maybe a little research on academic posters would be 
important. I remember the moment that search appeared, my heart dropped into my stomach, my 
spirit screamed… standardized format, abstract in top left ╔ corner ╝, followed by literature, 
methodology etc. I thought I had found a way to thrive within the ╔ corner ╝, but quickly the edges 
reminded me of where I was, and the rules I was to follow. I decided to dwell within my humility and 
ignorance towards these parameters, and continued the journey I embarked upon between myself, 
my research, and the poster.  

 
Melitta: I applaud your strength here to continue and maintain your position.  The 

conformity and structures of Western institutions and your farce of ignorance shows grace 
and yet, a means in which we are to disrupt the academy.  The kinesthetic qualities of running 
your fingers through glue, connecting with your research is a cathartic process. Those who do 
not dabble in the Arts would never understand this process.  But is it more than that? Is it part 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  10 

  

of us as Indigenous peoples? Historically, storytelling is not just through the oral tradition but 
was captured on the walls of many a dwelling (Bessarab & Ng’andu, 2010).  While it shouldn't 
matter, did you show the poster? Is it something you will do again? 

 
Kori: I will continue to disrupt the academic poster standards and confront the whispers 

around me about the unprofessional appearance and juvenile nature of my posters.  Because, yes, 
there is a connection between senses and Indigenous knowings, understandings as relationships 
created through these sensorial, observational, interactive moments. 

The validity of knowledge acquisition through all senses has been marginalized by the 
separation of sight, raised and praised as the sense of science and power (Classen, 1993; McLuhan, 
1962), reinforced by Descartes who stated that rational truth is only through the mind, without body 
(Descartes, Weissman & Bluhm, 1996). This marginalization has restricted ways of coming to know 
from multiple senses and even spirit. The knowledge I gained, and therefore can convey through the 
use of multiple senses when creating a non-traditional poster is deep, raw, and human, much different 
than slotting in copied and pasted information into a ready-made template. The template is cold, 
shiny, synthetic, without spirit, connections, or the rawness and humility of being human...isn’t 
research done by humans? 

 
 Melitta:  Well, we can only hope so but sometimes, the research fails to see the 
human.  Never is that more evident than the historical, anthropological, and scientific 
research upheld in the corpus about Indigenous peoples (see Smith, 1999). And I guess that is 
what I see as part of our role in disrupting the system—bringing Indigenous voices to the 
Indigenous experience: illustrating our humanity.  I seek to do this in my research—or at least, 
I hope that is what I do. I focus on language and policy discourses and I spoke earlier about 
my Master’s being a testing ground —it enabled me to work out the recipe of the thesis; the 
key ingredients necessary and also, identify the places in which the [box] could be stretched, 
the ╔ corners ╝ could be rounded and I could be me (Hogarth, 2015).    
 The ways I disrupted the thesis template were subtle and yet, explicit.  I began each 
chapter with a vignette; a type of internal monologue or sharing the process in which I 
interpreted the purpose of each chapter.  I used the analogy of research as an ocean 
throughout telling the story of self as the emu; my family’s totem, navigating the ocean of 
research (Hogarth, 2017a; 2018).  I shared the adventure as I sailed in my boat. The inclusion 
of self further exemplifies how much the thesis itself had been internalised; it had become an 
extension of me.  The story of the emu became a metaphor; I like metaphors.  
        Within my thesis, I also explored and developed a methodological approach, 
Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis, which I represented as a conceptual framework 
(Hogarth, 2017c; 2018).  The conceptual framework (see Figure 2) was a visual representation 
of the methodological approach but it was also a metaphor of self. It was a representation of 
my eye; a metaphorical representation of the lens in which I saw the world and the lens in 
which I analysed policy.  I included a preface to the thesis to ensure that the way in which I 
wanted the conceptual framework to be interpreted was made explicit.  

I included an extra layer to the audit trail of the data analysis by including insight to the 
thought processes as I worked through the data (Hogarth, 2018).  Vignettes as written text, 
reflective thought, and poetry—I even considered including a graphic novel snippet depicting 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  11 

  

self on the boat, but I got to that stage where it was time to move on.  I was over the thesis; 
there was so much more I wanted to explore, and it was time for me to stop. I felt it, my 
Supervisors felt it—it was time to let it go and take a breath… 

 

Figure 2: Indigenous Critical Discourse Analysis: a conceptual framework 
(Hogarth, 2017c, p. 25) 

 
Kori: Time, the colonial monster that has its claws in every moment, second, (rational) intent. 

Its elbow blocks my spirit, its voice interrupts my stories, it uproots, disengages, and segregates.  
The restrictive element of time was brought up several occasions throughout the 

“Decolonizing the Dissertation” sessions, put on by the SAGE (supporting Aboriginal graduate 
engagement) network at the UofC. This year SAGE has held several panel discussions focused on the 
hurdles, emotional labour, and misconceptions around doing graduate research at the academy as 
Indigenous students attempting to work within an Indigenous framework. We have had phenomenal 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  12 

  

turn-out at the sessions, from both Indigenous students and allies, and the need for these dialogues 
is clear, but now what? 

I was a part of a SAGE panel that focused on emotional labour, and one of the main concerns 
between the panelists was about “what to reveal?” Like you mentioned earlier Melitta, “how much 
do we share?” and “what do we share?” There are conversations that need to be had, a truth that 
needs to be told, but … in time. We cannot hurry to rush towards the embers from the dwindling fire 
of knowings, our (humanity’s) eagerness, lack of humility, or patience will only scare away the fire. 
This fire metaphor is from an Anishinaabe seven fires prophecy about seven prophets (represented as 
fires) visiting the people, from the creation of Turtle Island (the first prophet), to the fourth prophet 
who foretold about the encounter between the "light-skinned" people and the "red-skinned" people, 
and if they worked together in brotherhood through the recognition of and respect for different 
knowings, they would together become a great Nation (Benton-Banai, 1988). Unfortunately, greed, 
ego, and mind reigned over land, community, and spirit (Benton-Banai, 1988). But there is hope in the 
seventh fire, the rebirth of spirit and knowing held close by Knowledge Keepers. The embers of the 
seventh fire are delicate, easily smothered, easily scared away by the extinguishing methods of 
colonization. There is reciprocity to fire, it is a powerful gift that carries great responsibilities, it can 
create and nurture, but also destroy if not respected (Kimmerer, 2013). Reciprocity within learning 
and knowledge is often absent in Eurocentric knowledge, instead supports a one-way pathway 
towards [the teacher] filling an empty bucket [the student] with knowledge (Freire, 2005/1970). To 
allow for Indigenous ways of knowing to thrive within the Institution, maybe our first step is to 
understand the notion of reciprocity. If there is an understanding about how to best receive and 
understand knowings and therefore reciprocate these knowings in a good way, would this lead to a 
better understanding about the values of these knowings through the created responsibility held by 
the listener/receiver? Then… how would our original question of “how much do we share?” and “what 
do we share?” potentially be opened up?  

 
Melitta:  Again, I find myself jealous.  The number of Aboriginal and Torres Strait 

Islander PhD and Master’s students in Education at QUT was limited.  Culturally safe spaces 
where we could share our experiences, our challenges and so forth, being together and 
sharing space was limited.  A small cohort of us tried to find space but as we were all also 
working full time, the opportunity to come together did not always happen.  Instead, we 
tended to support each other through emails, texts and phone calls. Even then, the work life 
tended to take priority and distance and isolation tended to take over.   

 
Kori: I can’t agree more, it is an isolating process. But, the SAGE network is opening discussions 

with Indigenous students about navigating how to be a trailblazer, supporting mentorship (with each 
other and Elders), and creating safe space to share our experiences, hurdles, and triumphs.  

 
Melitta: Oh, most definitely—it is needed!  But I think what we are essentially 

highlighting here is that it needs to be led by Indigenous peoples and more importantly, by 
the students and supported by the Indigenous Units and the University as a whole.  The 
demands of the academy and the structures have become so restrictive, and in a world where 
technology is changing on a daily basis, the need to come together and share is paramount 
for our souls.  It is important for us to have access to key Indigenous mentors and Elders—to 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  13 

  

remind us of the fight for the privileges we have today they fought and to remind us for the 
need to continue the fight! 

 
Kori: "Paramount for our souls", I couldn’t have said it better. It is so easy to get lost amongst 

the speed that technology has forced onto our everyday. With the constant focus on the future, I feel 
like I am constantly tripping to keep up. When Indigenous students and Elders gather and light a 
ceremonial smudge, it allows us to reconnect with our spirits and the land, it cleanses us of the drive 
towards tomorrow, allowing the present and those around us to reconnect.  

 
Melitta:  As an educator, I am very much aware of the institutional structures prevalent 

within education as a whole.  Education becomes a means to create the ‘ideal citizen’ with its 
assimilatory properties; to [box] people into a whole and to progress neo-liberal ideologies 
(Morgan, et al., 2006).  This lens of individualism highlights the struggle for me—the 
institutional structures and how they essentially do not prepare you as an academic. A PhD is 
so personal that the isolating properties of the research process is so necessary and yet, the 
privilege of conducting research by yourself on any project after this is virtually impossible.  All 
research after this, I will need to work with others as part of a team. Add to that, the fact that 
Indigenous methodologies are placed on the periphery and yet, more and more in Australia, 
there is consistent call to increase the number of Indigenous higher degree research students 
(Universities Australia, 2017). If our ways of knowing, being and doing are not seen as valued 
within the University environment, how can we strive and succeed without breaking down 
these perceived structures?  Our motivations and stubbornness, the reason for entering this 
space need to be constantly nurtured and rejuvenated and finding space together is essential. 
And yet, we are constantly reminded and instructed to remain within the [box]—preferably 
more towards the centre but if we must disrupt, on the periphery (Herbert, 2012).   

 
Kori: I am not the best at staying in the [box], following the rules, or playing the game. So, it 

isn’t surprising that it wasn’t until the third year of my PhD that I checked the "formatting guidelines" 
(UofC, n.d.) for my dissertation, few I am sure I will follow. Anxiety grew as I read the rigid format, (a 
format many students wouldn’t question), 10-point black font, with a fourteen-point checklist on how 
to format a title page, and any artwork should be put in the appendices—defined as the place to put 
things that would normally clutter your thesis! This 2-D format lacks a connection to the human that 
created it, the community that supported its creation; it’s not a [box], it’s a 2-D square of confinement. 
There is hope as I scroll down to the section called ‘non-traditional thesis’, explained as a way to 
“[expand] the parameters, content, and purpose of the thesis...to reimagine graduate pathways and 
explore new ways of engaging in advanced scholarship,” (UofC, n.d.). This hope slowly deteriorates as 
the section on ‘challenges’ of doing a non-traditional thesis greatly outnumbers the ‘benefits and 
outcomes’. Besides the challenges of time, additional work (still requiring a submission that follows 
the publication mandates of the university), uncertainty, and a steep learning curve (UofC, n.d.), the 
benefits seem to connect research and the University with the community and industry, and support 
skills of innovation, collaboration, critical thinking, and interdisciplinarity. These benefits seem to 
provide a pathway of success for the student in working in a global world, beyond the University. Think 
about it, who is the traditional thesis for? Who reads it? How many are even published? And if they 
are, again, who reads them? The walls of the [box] that academia and the institution have built 
around them have blocked them off from community, with gatekeepers restricting access to those 



Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  14 

  

who can play well with those already thriving inside. There is little or no interplay between what is 
inside those walls with the outside, or what snuck in but is stuck in the ╔ corners ╝. Smith (1999) 
stated that these systems (or walls) are erected as a cultural force-field, to block out competing or 
oppositional discourses, ensuing the dominance of Western Eurocentric colonial interests. Indigenous 
knowings seem to be viewed as an opposition, fighting against scientific truths of the well-established 
knowledge systems that have been so successful in gaining power through profit. The non-traditional 
thesis and augmenting the ╔ corners ╝ and walls of the [box]/cube of the institution seem, in theory, 
to allow for connections between the University with community, and potentially with the land and 
spirit. In theory is great, but where is the praxis, support, implementation strategies? 

 
Melitta:  The parameters and structures set are definitely a deterrent and break down 

our individualism, our creativity, the very things that make us—us!  As I said previously, I 
already knew what the University wanted, the rules and regulations. The notion of a non-
traditional thesis is not even the list of the types of theses viable at QUT (QUT, 2016).  A thesis 
by monograph, a thesis by publication, and a thesis by creative works are the only options 
available. I suppose the thesis by creative works may be considered as a non-traditional thesis 
but the inclusion of an exegesis to support the creative work ensures that a traditional thesis 
component is included.  In that instance, as someone who did a Bachelor of Creative Arts, the 
need for words to validate the work seems assumptive and again, I find myself returning to 
the question—how much do we share? I have included poetry and vignettes within my thesis; 
drawing the analogy that research is like an ocean in which I am navigating, using metaphor 
to act as barrier and protect myself.  After all, we are still working within the structures.  

 
Kori: Metaphor as protection, to protect the embers—raw, delicate, human, with potential to 

ignite a community, a gathering of knowings, a togetherness that often a fire creates. But also, 
protection from destruction, ourselves, from our knowings, protection through strategic sharing. In 
time... 

 
Melitta:  This conversation could continue for ages but the restrictions and therefore, 

the [box], is calling for an end.  Limitations to the story once again illustrates the [box]. Our 
story has just begun; there is a lot of work still to be done in this space but at least we have 
started the conversation.  Perhaps now is the time to take a breath... 

 
References 

 
Adams, J., Luitel, B. C., Afonso, E., & Taylor, P. C. (2008). A cogenerative inquiry using 

postcolonial theory to envisage culturally inclusive science education. Cultural Studies of 
Science Education, 3(4), 999-1019. 

Aikenhead, G. S. (2017). School mathematics for reconciliation: A 21st Century economic, 
educational and ethical mathematics curriculum policy. University of Saskatchewan. 
https://www.usask.ca/education/documents/profiles/aikenhead/School-Mathematics-for-
Reconciliation-vB11.pdf.  

Archibald, J. Q’um Q’um Xiiem (2008). Indigenous storywork: Educating the heart, mind, body, 
and spirit. Vancouver, BC: UBC Press. 

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind. New York: Bantam Books. 

https://www.usask.ca/education/documents/profiles/aikenhead/School-Mathematics-for-Reconciliation-vB11.pdf
https://www.usask.ca/education/documents/profiles/aikenhead/School-Mathematics-for-Reconciliation-vB11.pdf


Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  15 

  

Battiste, M. A. (2000). Reclaiming indigenous voice and vision. Vancouver; Great Britain: UBC 
Press. 

Benton-Banai, E. (1988). The Mishomis book: The voice of the Ojibwe. Ann Arbor: Red School 
House Publishing. 

Bessarab, D., & Ng'andu, B. (2010). Yarning about yarning as a legitimate method in Indigenous 
research. Retrieved from 
http://www.isrn.qut.edu.au/pdf/ijcis/v3n1_2010/Final_Bessarab_Bridget_IJCIS.pdf. 

Cajete, G. (2000). Native science: Natural laws of interdependence. Santa Fe, N.M: Clear Light  
Pub. 

Classen, C. (1993). Worlds of sense: Exploring the senses in history and across cultures. London 
& New York: Routledge. 

D’Ambrosio, U. (2001). Ethnomathematics: Link between traditions and modernity. 
Rotterdam/Taipei: Sense Publishers. 

Descartes, R., Weissman, D., & Bluhm, W. T. (1996). Discourse on the method and meditations 
on first philosophy (Rethinking the Western tradition). Yale University Press. 

Eagle Speaker, C. (p.c.). Oral teachings. Treaty 7, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. 
Ermine, W. (2007). Ethical space of engagement, Indigenous Law Journal, 6(1), 193-203. 
Fairclough, N. (2015). Language and Power (3rd ed.). New York, London: Longman. 
Freire, P. (2005/1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum. 
Hatcher, A., Bartlett, C., Marshall, A., & Marshall, M. (2009). Two-eyed seeing in the classroom 

environment: Concepts, approaches, and challenges. Canadian Journal of Science, 
Mathematics and Technology Education, 9(3), 141-153. 

Herbert, J. (2012). "Ceaselessly circling the centre". History of Education Review, 41(2), 91-103. 
doi:10.1108/08198691311269484  

Hill Collins, P. (2013). On intellectual activism. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. 
Hogarth, M. (2015). A critical analysis of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Education 

Action Plan (Unpublished master’s thesis). Queensland University of Technology, Australia. 
Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89754 

Hogarth, M. (2017a). Die, Brain Demons, Die!: The internal monologue of an Aboriginal 
Researcher. In C. McMaster, C. Murphy, B. Whitburn & I. Mewburn (Eds.), Postgraduate 
study in Australia: Surviving and Succeeding (pp. 137-148). New York, USA.: Peter Lang 
Publishing, Inc. 

Hogarth, M. (2017b). Research: Indigenous - Can we really decolonise the institutional space?  
          Paper presented at the QUT-BNU-UC Doctoral Forum, Queensland University of 
         Technology, Kelvin Grove. 
Hogarth, M. (2017c). Speaking back to the deficit discourses: a theoretical and            

methodological approach.  Australian Educational Researcher, 44 (1), 24-34. 
Hogarth, M. (2018). Addressing the rights of Indigenous peoples in education: A critical analysis 

of Indigenous education policy (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Queensland University 
of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/118573/   

Kimmerer, R. W. (2013). Braiding sweetgrass: Indigenous wisdom, scientific knowledge, and the 
teachings of plants. Minneapolis, MN: Milkweed. 

Lincoln, Y. S., & Denzin, N. K. (2003). Turning points in qualitative research: Tying knots in a  
handkerchief. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. 

http://www.isrn.qut.edu.au/pdf/ijcis/v3n1_2010/Final_Bessarab_Bridget_IJCIS.pdf
https://eprints.qut.edu.au/89754
https://eprints.qut.edu.au/118573/


Czuy & Hogarth/ Emerging Perspectives (2019) 1-16  16 

  

Moreton-Robinson, A. (2013). Towards an Australian Indigenous women's standpoint theory: A 
methodological tool. Australian Feminist Studies, 28(78), 331-347. 
doi:10.1080/08164649.2013.876664 

Morgan, B., West, E. G., Nakata, M., Hall, K., Swisher, K., Ahenakew, F., Hughes, P., Ka’ai, T., 
& Blair, N. (2006). The Coolangatta Statement on Indigenous Peoples' rights in education. 
In P. Read, G. Meyers & B. Reece (Eds.), What good condition?: Reflections on an 
Australian Aboriginal Treaty 1986-2006 (pp. 229-236). Canberra: ANU Press. 

Nakata, M. (2007a). Disciplining the savages: Savaging the disciplines. Canberra: Aboriginal 
Studies Press. 

Nakata, M. (2007b). The cultural interface. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 36, 
7-14. 

McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg Galaxy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. 
Pratt, Y. P., Louis, D. W., Hanson, A. J., & Ottmann, J. (2018). Indigenous education and 

decolonization. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Available at: 
http://education.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-
9780190264093-e-240?print. doi: 10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.240 

Queensland University of Technology.  (2016). Requirements for presenting theses.  Retrieved 
from 
https://cms.qut.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/7249/requirements_for_presenting_thes
es.pdf  

Rigney, L. (1999). Internationalization of an Indigenous anticolonial cultural critique of research 
methodologies: A guide to Indigenist Research Methodology and its principles. Wicazo sa 
review, 14, 109-121. 

Roth, W. -M., & Tobin, K. (2002). At the elbow of another: Learning to teach by coteaching. New 
York: Peter Lang.  

Roth, W. -M., & Tobin, K. (2004). Co-generative dialoguing and metaloguing: Reflexivity of 
processes and genres. In Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social 
Research, 5(3). 

Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and Indigenous peoples. London & 
New York: Zed Books Ltd. 

Staller, K. (2007). Metalogue as methodology: Inquiries into conversations among authors, editors 
and referees. Qualitative Social Work, 6(2), 137-157. 

Universities Australia. (2017). Indigenous Strategy 2017-2020. Retrieved from 
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/Media-and-Events/media-releases/Universities-
unveil-indigenous-participation-targets#.Wd4KzK27qpo  

University of Calgary (UofC) (n.d.) Thesis formatting guidelines. Available at: 
https://grad.ucalgary.ca/files/grad/fgs-thesis-guidelines_nov2017.pdf  

http://education.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-240?print
http://education.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-240?print
https://cms.qut.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/7249/requirements_for_presenting_theses.pdf
https://cms.qut.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/7249/requirements_for_presenting_theses.pdf
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/Media-and-Events/media-releases/Universities-unveil-indigenous-participation-targets#.Wd4KzK27qpo
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/Media-and-Events/media-releases/Universities-unveil-indigenous-participation-targets#.Wd4KzK27qpo
https://grad.ucalgary.ca/files/grad/fgs-thesis-guidelines_nov2017.pdf

