A1. The Inquiry Process in Legal Studies
Specific Expectations
A1.1
formulate different types of questions to guide investigations into current and historical issues relating to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit governance and Indigenous law in Canada (e.g., factual questions: What is the current process for making laws to regulate economic activity in First Nations communities?; What are some key legal arguments that can be used to support and to refute the right to build an oil pipeline or mine on or near treaty lands or historic Métis communities, or in Inuit Nunangat? What are the main similarities and differences in the legislative bases for the political relationship between the federal government and First Nations, Métis, and Inuit in Canada?; causal questions: Why are issues associated with current First Nations treaty rights and Métis and Inuit rights most commonly dealt with through litigation rather than negotiation?)
A1.2
select and organize relevant evidence, data, and information on issues, events, and/or developments relating to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit governance and Indigenous law in Canada from a variety of primary and secondary sources, including Indigenous knowledge sources (e.g., primary sources: case law; legislation; treaties; testimony before commissions and tribunals; photographs; interviews with community members, legal experts, Métis Senators, knowledge keepers, and/or knowledge holders; secondary sources: newspaper articles, journal articles, textbooks, documentaries, most websites), ensuring that their sources reflect multiple perspectives
- Whose views or perspectives are reflected in this source? Whose views are absent or overlooked? What types of sources might reflect those other perspectives?
A1.3
assess the accuracy and credibility of sources relevant to their investigations (e.g., identify the lens through which the source reports information; compare the information in one source to that in other sources in order to assess its accuracy; compare how the evidence is constructed or presented in different sources; consider the influence of purpose, intended audience, bias, and values)
- For what explicit and/or implicit purpose does this source seem to have been created? How and why might that purpose affect the source’s reliability?
- What evidence does this source use to support its argument? Does this evidence clearly support the argument?
A1.4
interpret and analyse evidence, data, and information relevant to their investigations, using a variety of tools, strategies, and approaches appropriate for inquiry in legal studies (e.g., extract key arguments from sources and record them on graphic organizers to facilitate comparison; discuss ideas and information with their peers to help them clarify their understanding; assess the ethical implications of arguments or evidence)
- When you analyse these differing interpretations of this information, which is most convincing to you? Why?
- What are the ethical implications for Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities in Canada of the evidence and/or arguments presented in this source?
A1.5
use the concepts of legal thinking (i.e., legal significance, continuity and change, interrelationships, and legal perspective) when analysing, evaluating evidence about, and formulating conclusions and/or judgements regarding issues, events, and/or developments relating to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit governance and Indigenous law in Canada (e.g., apply the concept of legal significance to help them assess the impact of a court decision on First Nations, Métis, and/or Inuit individuals and communities; consider the concept of continuity and change when investigating approaches used by First Nations, Métis, and Inuit individuals and communities to assert the right to self-governance or sovereignty; apply the concept of interrelationships when analysing how social attitudes have affected policy relating to Indigenous peoples in Canada; consider the concept of legal perspective when assessing Aboriginal rights under the Constitution Act, 1982)
- How has the 1973 Supreme Court decision in Calder v. British Columbia affected subsequent land claims in the courts? How has the 2003 decision in R. v. Powley affected Métis rights? What concepts of legal thinking might you apply to help you assess the importance of these decisions? Do you think that these are landmark cases? What criteria should be met for a case to be considered a landmark?
A1.6
evaluate and synthesize their findings to formulate conclusions and/or make informed judgements or predictions about the issues, events, and/or developments they are investigating
- What were the most important factors that had a bearing on the 1997 decision in Delgamuukw v. British Columbia?
- Does what you have found about the positions of different parties on this current issue affecting First Nations, Métis, and/or Inuit communities enable you to predict how the issue will be addressed or resolved in the future? What arguments can you use to support your prediction?
A1.7
communicate their ideas, arguments, and conclusions using various formats and styles, as appropriate for the audience and purpose (e.g., a mock trial with a group of peers, using the Charter to challenge a law or practice that discriminates against First Nations, Métis, and/or Inuit in Canada; a classroom debate on the most effective methods for resolving a land-based dispute; a presentation for members of the school and local community on the legacy of the residential school system; a case study on the local governance structure in a First Nation community; a transcript of and report on an interview with an Indigenous person with expertise on a question of importance to a First Nation, Métis, or Inuit community; an essay on the evolution of the Indian Act; a petition to lobby for political change to address violence against Indigenous women and girls; a blog on court challenges of relevance to Indigenous rights; a documentary exploring income inequality between Indigenous people and non-Indigenous Canadians; a position paper on taxation as it relates to First Nations individuals and communities)
- What format is best suited to communicating your findings? In selecting this format, have you considered both the needs of your audience and the most effective and engaging way of presenting the information?
- How can you communicate your findings in ways that are sensitive to those who may have experienced marginalization and/or trauma?
A1.8
use accepted forms of documentation (e.g., footnotes or endnotes, author/date citations, reference lists, bibliographies, credits) to acknowledge all sources of information (e.g., legal references [i.e., case law, legislation], websites, blogs, books, journals, articles, oral evidence/interviews, archival sources)
A1.9
assess and use terminology appropriate to the audience and purpose when communicating the results of their investigations (e.g., vocabulary specific to their inquiry; appropriate terminology related to the names of Indigenous communities and to Indigenous protocols and practices)
- Why is it important to be aware of the significance of terminology and naming when conducting research and/or communicating the results of research on issues relating to First Nations, Métis, and/or Inuit communities?
- Why is the term ‘Indian’ still used in the Canadian legal system? When is its usage appropriate? In what context might you use the term ‘Aboriginal’? When might the term ‘Indigenous’ be more appropriate? When would it be better to use ‘First Nations, Métis, and Inuit’? Are there other words or names we should be using, and when is it appropriate to use them?