ITK must share ideas on university plans
In the spirit of what a university is, Canada’s voice for Inuit owes it to people to be open about plans for Inuit Nunangat University
Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami president Natan Obed, seen at a December 2023 news conference in Iqaluit, called the creation of an Inuit Nunangat University a “priority” for ITK in 2021. The university idea, spearheaded by ITK, has been under discussion for more than a decade but in that time little concrete progress has been made. (File photo)
The hallowed halls of a university are traditionally places for the exchange of ideas, so why should an organization that won’t share its own ideas be entrusted with building one?
Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami has been in charge of creating what’s known as the Inuit Nunangat University for more than a decade, but there’s nothing to show for it.
What’s more, the national voice of Canada’s Inuit has been mostly silent on the topic.
In 2021, when the Mastercard Foundation chipped in $1.5 million, ITK president Natan Obed called the university a “priority.”
He acknowledged they were “still at the very beginning point of this conversation.”
Since then, no one has really said much about what point of the conversation they’re at.
There hasn’t been anything said publicly about the most basic facts regarding INU. Where will it be? When will it open? What subjects will be taught? Will it be centralized in one community, or will there be multiple campuses across Inuit Nunangat, similar to Nunavut Arctic College?
Without a budget or schedule, it’s fair to wonder how serious the plan is, or if it is just wishful thinking.
Newspapers operate apart from the ivory tower of academia. But they rely on the same spirit of academic freedom that university researchers, professors and students enjoy. Journalists have the right to ask whatever questions they want, whenever they want and, in the pursuit of knowledge, to follow their research wherever it leads them.
That’s one reason Nunatsiaq News has tried hard, especially for the past six months, to get an update on Inuit Nunangat University. The paper used the third anniversary of that 2021 announcement as an occasion to ask around about where things stand at INU.
That story didn’t get far because ITK turned down requests to do an interview — an exchange of ideas.
Inuit, specifically, and Canadians generally, deserve better.
It does seem there has been some behind-the-scenes movement, based on ITK’s job postings. Is that enough to describe as “progress?”
For example, ITK advertised in March for a consultant to create a public relations and fundraising plan for the university. (It’s a head-scratcher as to why a university that doesn’t exist, doesn’t have any faculty or any students needs someone to handle its image, but in 2024 it seems everyone has a communications consultant.)
And ITK is currently recruiting a university manager.
The last, clear public statement about when it will open came from Obed in 2021, when he said he hoped it would be ready in 2023 — more than a year ago.
He said that he hoped his own children — who were 12 and 13 at the time — might be able to attend Inuit Nunangat University. Those children would be well into high school by now with post-secondary plans on the horizon.
Why has it been so difficult for ITK to talk to a reporter about the progress on the university, which it identified as a “priority?”
In the spirit of academic freedom that’s the lifeblood of universities, ITK needs to be more forthcoming about Inuit Nunangat University.
This is just an editoral complainting ITK will not engage with your paper. While I share your enthusiasm for investigative journalism and trying to shed light on ITK’s activities, yet it’s crucial to acknowledge that NTI never gets a critical editorial written about it for giving you the silent treatment.
The billions invested by NTI should indeed translate into tangible advancements for the Inuit people. It’s disheartening to note that despite these substantial investments, the progress for Inuit communities appears to be lagging. This raises significant questions about the effectiveness.
It’s troubling to see that despite having significant royalties and resources, NTI appears to focus primarily on litigation and criticisms rather than taking proactive steps in addressing urgent community issues such as housing, infrastructure, food security, and education!
NTI has the financial means to lead substantial improvements in these critical areas within their communities, which makes their current priorities somewhat perplexing. But yet we do not see much reporting or journalism on this.
Investigative journalism can indeed serve as a powerful tool to hold organizations accountable, but it must uphold high standards of research, and unbiased reporting rather than resorting to sensationalism or selective targeting of municipalities, GN and ITK., but goes silent on the Regional Inuit Orgs and NTI.
Enhancing the quality of journalism at Nunatsiaq and research driven articles would not only attract more meaningful participation and interviews but also foster constructive dialogue and actions toward positive change. It also needs to be fair, sharing the successes and shortcomings of Nunavut and its organization objectively, to encourage transparency and responsible governance.
So let’s dispense with the click bait and get back to the Jim Bell higher standards of journalism.
ITK owes its constituents an account of its stated goal to create a university. There is such a thing called accountability. There is absolutely nothing wrong with demanding an explanation! Calling it sour grades on the part of Nunatsiaq News is uneducated.
I wouldn’t say it’s uneducated. I would call it pretentious twaddle, after that maybe a strawman, or red herring. Either way, the argument is meant to get us off topic.
This is the stuff of sophists. Arguably paid, but who knows, readers can be motivated enough on their own.
Paid? I hope not, this screams first year college to me.
Funny little dig, back to Jim Bell type, what was it again, standards of journalism?
Have you ever read Jim’s editorials? They were like this, unsparing of fools.
This is the first time I’ve read an editorial by Corey that genuinely reminded me of Jims writing. You know what I love it, and we need more of this.
Bravo 👏
Put the money into trade school , Nathan s pipe dream can wait.
Natan Obed, please learn and try and at least speak in Inuktitut for once.
IKR?
The GG is learning French to communicate with all Canadians.
How ’bout learn the language of the people you represent?🤘✌️
Americans ,ldo have a reputation for struggling with languages.
Good article. Nice to add the academic freedom view. An institution with the goal of sharing knowledge should be built on that, not on hiding knowledge.
It’s as if the Nunatsiaq News expects our organizational overlords to actually *do* stuff.
Anybody that takes Inuit leaders seriously needs a good thumb in the head.
Nunatsiaq can be clickbaity, but that’s a distraction from the point, and it’s a good one. Why is ITK avoiding an invitation to speak to the constituents it serves? Does it understand that ignoring them demonstrates contempt?
I’d like to hear their vision for a university too, not koans sprinkled in fairy dust.
Conversely, ITK has no plan, but that’s not the point. A university is an archetype, and a balm for the subconscious of a culture. It doesn’t need to exist to serve that end. Though I’m sure there is hope it one day does.
What am I missing here?
It appears the notion for such a university was stated without a feasibility study done, given the small and sparse population, especially for a campus-based university which would require some form of residence so that it does not impact local housing needs. Political leaders have a tendency to accept money for ideas in order to make an announcement.
Given the current struggles of universities across Canada, largely due to their overreliance on international students as a revenue source, it would be difficult to offer the marketplace a new learning institute with a physical campus in remote Canada unless it is a virtual one. If it is a virtual one, then it would be competing in the global market for students, meaning, the very students the new university would be targeting would have many more virtual options for mainstream courses and programs. Don’t get me wrong, if the main proposition for the new university is land, language and culture-based, then it a very niche (meaning small) market.
Overall, it is a lofty proposal, but it is really viable. It could have been just an announce-able idea, as the political class say, especially when money is involved or it may have been a premature announcement with no idea of its feasibility. If the consultant is worth his or her money, then the whole idea has to have the following four success factors: i) Governance and Leadership: A strong leadership team with a deep understanding of culture and education is essential, ii) Infrastructure and Facilities: Adequate facilities, technology, and resources to support student learning and well-being, iii) Curriculum Development: A curriculum that is culturally relevant, responsive to community needs, and aligned with national education standards, and iv) Financial Sustainability: A robust financial plan with diverse revenue streams to ensure the long-term viability of the university. Hiring a consultant to chase money and do PR without conducting a feasibility plan is a waste of everyone’s time and will lead to another collective disappointment.
If you want a detailed plan for a university in Nunavut, go to:
http://www.HowItHappened.ca
I want to study engineering at that university.
Try YouTube , its cheaper.
A note to the naysayers: creating an Inuit-led university not only can be done, it has been done. Ilisimatusarfik, the University of Greenland, likely had its detractors in the early days – but look at it today! Check their website. I think the lesson of Ilisimatusarfik is that you set out to gradually create an actual university with university-level standards. Trade schools and colleges are very important, but having a university is also very important. I hope that ITK takes all the time it needs to get it right.
The difference is, that is Greenland. This is Nunavut.
A country creating a national public university (not an ‘Inuit’ university) is very different from an impoverished territory trying to create one. Greenland had all of the very formidable educational resources of Denmark to call upon, and they did, liberally. It was a priority for the kingdom, and it shows. Nunavut shows little inclination to call upon southern expertise in this venture. The skillset does not exist in-territory in anything approaching adequate numbers. Where will the required foreign/southern expertise live during setup?
Nunavut struggles to maintain standards at NAC and in the K-12 system, would this mindset of mediocrity transfer over to any university?
Interestingly, a scan of Ilisimatusarfik’s website shows that ‘Internationalisation’ and ‘internationalisation at home’ are institutional priorities. Nothing special there, very standard statements among European universities.
I just can’t imagine such a statement of principles from a Nunavut university, particularly when NAC doesn’t even accept foreign students.
Absolutely, it will aspire to be a made in Nunavut university, made by Inuit for Inuit… this insular world can not fathom concepts like ‘internationalism’.
Made by Inuit for Inuit…but without any Inuit professors and only a few token Inuit employees and managers, like the rest of the system.
You have it all wrong.
All the professors will be Inuit.
They will not have to compete with non-Inuit for positions.
They will have tenure – a job for life.
That is why we need a university of our own.
Inuit do not compete with non-Inuit for any employment in government employment now, why would you think that it would start with a Nunavut university?
Inuit compete only with other Inuit.
ITK and Natan should not be trusted to do much worthwhile. (Note: ITK was different under different leaders in the past.) After all, look at what ITK and Natan did the the Edmonton Eskimos.
It would be far more effective and feasible (in Nunavut at least) to support NAC in gaining university accreditation, solidify and increase their existing partnerships with other universities, and gain independence from the GN rather than to reinvent the wheel.
Reading both the article and the comments here, I can tell that a lot of people are unaware of the work that is happening in the background between ITK, the four Inuit Nunangat Landclaims Orgs. (IRC, NTI, Makivvik, and Nunatsiavut Government), and Nunavut’s three RIAs (Kiv-IA, Kiv-IA, QIA).
The Inuit Nunangat University does not need a feasibility study, as the need for the university is coming out of Indigenous (Inuit, in this case) self-determination and self-government. Article 35 of the Constitution Act has been steadily expanding by the Supreme court of Canada, and with UNDRIP Act being the Federal Law of the land, an Inuit Nunangat University will be instrumental for Nunavut to realise Article 23 of the Nunavut Agreement and reach a representative workforce.
With analysis and understanding of what each level of Inuit representative organizations are doing, it’s not hard to figure out the direction that Inuit self-determination is going. And with devolution in Nunavut, NTI/GoC/GN, Inuit self-determination will take a central role in the process and outcomes.
If you want to really understand what is going on, talk to the people that work for the Inuit Orgs. that sit on working groups for the Inuit Nunangat University.
Did you read the editorial? Nobody knows what’s going on with this because the lead organization refuses to discuss it. You may think you have some inside information, but all you provided was some purported rationale based on the NLCA (Nunavut Inuit being just 1 of the groups this is supposed to benefit). ITK refuses to provide updates as to the current status as it appears there has been no progress.
There already was a feasibility study done, in 2016. And I quote,
“A major hurdle for a stand-alone Nunavut university would be reaching the required student enrolment set out by Universities Canada. It requires 500 full-time students enrolled in the year an institution applies for membership, plus 500 full-time students enrolled for the two previous years.
The phase one study found if a Nunavut university was to rely solely on students from the territory, and if there is no change in high school graduation and university participation rates over the next 10 years, it would not reach 500 full-time students until 2130.
If out-of-territory students are included, full-time enrolment would not reach 500 until 2070.
Also, the estimated capital and operating costs for a stand-alone university are astronomical.
The phase one study found the capital cost would be $91 million to $171 million, not including building faculty housing or student residences, and it would cost between $13.1 million and $16.6 million a year to operate a 500 full-time student university.
About half of that would come from student tuition and fees.
If it cost $16.6 million a year to run the university, it would need $5 million a year in revenue from tuition, according to the report. That translates into $16,600 in annual tuition and fees for each full-time student. The current average annual tuition for a Canadian university is $6,191.”
Philip Landon, Vice President Governance and Programs of Universities Canada, wrote a letter to Nunatsiaq News on April 20, 2017, titled “Universities Canada doesn’t do accreditation”, in that letter to the editor, Philip Landon dismissed this section of the feasibility study, as Universities Canada is an associative body and not an accreditation body.
Here’s that letter to the editor directly quoted for you —
«I wish to correct an error in your recent story “Politics, power, money real culprits behind nixing Arctic university” (March 27, 2017.) Universities Canada does not set “criteria for the foundation and operation of universities in the country,” as the story states.
In Canada, degree-granting powers come from government. This means that individual provinces and territories decide which institutions can grant degrees and call themselves universities.
Universities Canada is not an accrediting agency, but rather a voluntary membership organization. The association represents 96 universities across Canada. »
Provinces and territories have accreditation authority. However, Indigenous modern treaty/land-claims organizations has the authority through the Supreme Court of Canada expanding Indigenous self-determination under Article 35 of the Constitution Act, as well as UNDRIP Act 2021 which includes Indigenous self-determination on education (including post-secondary education). This is how ITK (IRC, NTI, Makivvik, and Nunatsiavut Government), and Nunavut’s three RIAs (Kit-IA, Kiv-IA, QIA) are able to pursue this through self-determination.
Other Indigenous nations through-out Canada are pursuing their own post-secondary institutional accreditation through self-determination, why can’t Nunavut?…
Philip Landon, Vice President Governance and Programs for Universities Canada wrote a letter to the editor (Nunatsiaq News) in 2017, titled, “Universities Canada doesn’t do accreditation” In that letter he dismisses the comment in the feasibility study “A major hurdle for a stand-alone Nunavut university would be reaching the required student enrollment set out by Universities Canada. It requires 500 full-time students enrolled in the year an institution applies for membership, plus 500 full-time students enrolled for the two previous years…” Universities Canada is an associative body not an accreditation body.
Provinces and territories have the power to create accredited institutes like universities and colleges. And with the expansion of Indigenous self-determination under section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982, and UNDRIP Act 2021, Indigenous representative treaty organizations (like NTI and the RIAs) also have the power to create accreditation. All of this comes out of Indigenous self-determination, and if other Indigenous nations are creating their own accredited institutes, why can’t Inuit Nunangat?
Because following the path you suggest would lead to another 4th tier institution whose piece of paper isn’t worth much more than any of the ‘shopping mall’ universities – like NAC, but worse. Exterior quality assurance mechanisms are a must.
“Reading both the article and the comments here, I can tell that a lot of people are unaware of the work that is happening in the background”
Yea… that’s why this editorial was written, because no one is sharing what’s going on…. How did you not get that?
Oh, you didn’t read it, okay I see
Maybe they should focus on improving the high school graduation rate before they even talk about university.
84% of Canadians graduate on-time. In Nunavut, it’s just 38%. That’s a dismal & inexcusably low percentage.
How does the GN ever hope to find skilled Nunavummiut or come anywhere close to its Inuit employment goals when the GN can’t even educate young people effectively?
I hope the three stakeholders are together in this: GN, NTI and ITK.