nēhiyawak Child Raising Practices and Lessons for Schools

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear Authors,

The article presents an important and culturally rich reflection on nēhiyawak child-raising practices and the implications for family engagement within schools. The use of personal narrative and storytelling provides a compelling, grounded perspective rooted in Indigenous knowledge systems.

However, several areas would benefit from revision and strengthening:

1. Theoretical Context: While there are relevant references and literature included, the contextualization of the topic with regard to current scholarly discourse could be expanded. Greater engagement with broader academic conversations about decolonizing education and Indigenous family-school relations internationally would add depth.

2. Research Design and Clarity: The article is framed more as an experiential, narrative inquiry than traditional empirical research, which is appropriate. However, the paper would benefit from a clearer methodological framing—stating explicitly the narrative or autoethnographic approach, including epistemological foundations and a justification of methods.

3. Language and Clarity: The English language is understandable but could be improved in terms of grammar, sentence structure, and flow. Occasional repetitions and long paragraphs affect readability. A professional copy-edit would significantly enhance clarity and expression.

4. Structure: The structure, while intentionally non-linear and reflective of Indigenous storytelling methods, can be supported with more explicit signposting or transitions for readers unfamiliar with these traditions. Consider clearer section headings or summaries.

5. Conclusion: The conclusion is emotionally powerful and culturally rich. It could be enhanced by linking more explicitly back to the original purpose and demonstrating how the personal narrative can inform concrete educational practices or policy.

Overall, this is a meaningful and valuable contribution that deserves publication following moderate revisions focused on clarity, structure, and methodological framing.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Dear Authors,

The English language is understandable but could be improved in terms of grammar, sentence structure, and flow. Occasional repetitions and long paragraphs affect readability. A professional copy-edit would significantly enhance clarity and expression.

Author Response

1. Theoretical Context: While there are relevant references and literature included, the contextualization of the topic with regard to current scholarly discourse could be expanded. Greater engagement with broader academic conversations about decolonizing education and Indigenous family-school relations internationally would add depth. Thank you for this suggestion, I am writing for a nehiyawak/Cree audience, or rather nehiyaw/Indigenous educators and scholars when speaking to decolonizing education, i am not sure how I could create a greater engagemnt with a broader academic conversation.This paper is a form of resistance and standing on its own in creating a path forward for other decolonizing approaches like this. There is not a lot of academic literature of this nature for other nehiyawak to drawn upon. 

2. Research Design and Clarity: The article is framed more as an experiential, narrative inquiry than traditional empirical research, which is appropriate. However, the paper would benefit from a clearer methodological framing—stating explicitly the narrative or autoethnographic approach, including epistemological foundations and a justification of methods. This paper is framed with in a nehiyaw/Cree paradigm which stands on its own, it is not written in a colonial methodological approach. 

3. Language and Clarity: The English language is understandable but could be improved in terms of grammar, sentence structure, and flow. Occasional repetitions and long paragraphs affect readability. A professional copy-edit would significantly enhance clarity and expression. "Repetition" is a nehiyaw/Cree way of being, it is a teaching tool, each time there is a repeat phrase something new can come up for the reader. It is intentionally cyclical.

4. 1. Structure: The structure, while intentionally non-linear and reflective of Indigenous storytelling methods, can be supported with more explicit signposting or transitions for readers unfamiliar with these traditions. Consider clearer section headings or summaries. This is a non-linear paper based on reflections, it is story for audiences to ponder on or think about how nehiyawak ways of teaching, doing and being are different from Euro-centric ways. It is not the same way. It is intentionally written the way it is.

5. 1. Conclusion: The conclusion is emotionally powerful and culturally rich. It could be enhanced by linking more explicitly back to the original purpose and demonstrating how the personal narrative can inform concrete educational practices or policy. This is a nehiyaw way of writing, reflecting and story-telling, this is the way my grandparents and elders teach and speak, it is up to the learner to take from the story as is. There is a lot to learn. 

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is a most welcome analysis and model that demonstrates clearly and succinctly the theoretical and practical approaches to educating children that have sustained and nurtured Indigenous communities over millennia until they disrupted by European colonisation. Its great value is the clear and simple explanation of the practical steps that can be taken to restore the care and nurturing inherent in the nēhiyawak child raising practices that eschew the dominating, dictatorial, humiliating and foreign approaches of European teaching practices. This is a very important contribution that will resonate strongly with Indigenous scholars and communities who will greatly appreciate its clarity and simplicity and the reaffirming examples and stories. It is also beautifully written in a way which non-Indigenous scholars will find informative, revealing and helpful. In my Māori language, ka nui ngā mihi mahana - warmest greetings and thanks.

Author Response

This is a most welcome analysis and model that demonstrates clearly and succinctly the theoretical and practical approaches to educating children that have sustained and nurtured Indigenous communities over millennia until they disrupted by European colonisation. Its great value is the clear and simple explanation of the practical steps that can be taken to restore the care and nurturing inherent in the nēhiyawak child raising practices that eschew the dominating, dictatorial, humiliating and foreign approaches of European teaching practices. This is a very important contribution that will resonate strongly with Indigenous scholars and communities who will greatly appreciate its clarity and simplicity and the reaffirming examples and stories. It is also beautifully written in a way which non-Indigenous scholars will find informative, revealing and helpful. In my Māori language, ka nui ngā mihi mahana - warmest greetings and thanks. Thank you for your kind words, I am so humbled and appreciative that you understand the unraveling of colonial education. These words resenate within my heart and spirit. 

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

A fascinating paper that teaches us how kinship practices, how Indigenous knowledges, and how familycentric practices can disrupt the issues we see in schools in and around education for non-white students. It brings together innovative research into Indigenous knowledge practices, kinship practices, and familycentric education. 

It could benefit from some work on reflexivity and self-reflection.

Author Response

A fascinating paper that teaches us how kinship practices, how Indigenous knowledges, and how familycentric practices can disrupt the issues we see in schools in and around education for non-white students. It brings together innovative research into Indigenous knowledge practices, kinship practices, and familycentric education. Thank you so much for recognizing this and I appreciation your insight. 

It could benefit from some work on reflexivity and self-reflection. I appreciate the suggestion, however I am going to leave as is, as this way of writing is intented for you the reader to think deeper about the way we do teach in education and the differences our children carry with them when entering school. Do we think about where do they come from and their cultural funds? 

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Dear author,

Your manuscript offers a compelling and deeply personal contribution to Indigenous scholarship and education, focusing on nēhiyaw (Cree) child-rearing practices and their implications for schooling. It is rooted in rich cultural knowledge, lived experience, and a clear commitment to intergenerational learning and decolonial thought.

Here are some suggestions to further strengthen your paper:

1. Clarify the methodological positioning
   While it is understood that this is an Indigenous, experiential, and story-based contribution, it would benefit the reader if the article explicitly stated the methodological paradigm (e.g., Indigenous methodology, storywork, narrative inquiry) early in the text. Referencing works by Kovach (2009), Wilson (2008), and Absolon (2011), which you already cite, can help frame the legitimacy and structure of your approach.

2. Tighten the narrative flow
   The storytelling format is appropriate and powerful; however, some passages are quite lengthy and may benefit from editing for clarity, especially for international readers less familiar with Cree worldviews. Subheadings that reflect thematic transitions (e.g., kinship, gratitude, educational practices, protocols) may help guide the reader.

3. Consider defining key concepts early
   Terms such as “miyo wīcēhtowin”, “nēhiyawēwin”, “pe kiyoketan”, or “ethical space” could be briefly explained when first mentioned. While culturally embedded terms must retain their integrity, brief contextual clarifications could help readers from diverse academic backgrounds.

4. Deepen the link to schooling practices
   While the contrast between nēhiyaw and schoolcentric approaches is well illustrated, consider offering more specific examples or recommendations on how schools and educators can respectfully integrate Cree principles and child-raising values into practice, without appropriating or misinterpreting them.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Dear Authors,

Some passages could benefit from a light language edit to improve sentence clarity, reduce repetition, and enhance flow—especially in transitions between personal narrative and broader cultural or pedagogical implications.  The English could also be improved to more clearly express the research.

Author Response

July 16, 2025

Re: Manuscript #3652510 entitled “nēhiyawak Child Raising Practices and Lessons for Schools”

To the Reviewers who took the time to share their knowledge and expertise.

Greetings, 

I am very thankful for the time you have taken to review my article. I really appreciate all the reviewers’ comments and have learned a lot through this process. Considering the comments of both reviewers, I am re-submitting my manuscript with changes, in alignment with the recommendation of the reviewers. I have edited the paper, to ensure spelling consistencies, thorough citations, and complete references. I also shortened many sentences and added sub-headings. I have added further writing about Indigneous research methodology and about Indigenous parent knowledge. You have asked me add more information and research about Indigenous parent knowledge, but this is new, there is very little that I can cite on this matter.

First, because the context of my paper is personal and local, I feel an international literature base is not relevant in this particular instance. Second, the theoretical/methodological approach, in my opinion, does not need to be broader because of my positionality as author. This manuscript will contribute to the literature in the field on Indigenous ways of knowing and being. My research method is steeped in nēhiyaw ways of being and doing. This is already a valid paradigm that stands on its own, and I think that the reviewer’s suggestions would take me into a more Eurocentric approach. My paper is about reclamation. It is a nēhiyaw method. I want to ensure that it stands in this way. Lastly, repetition is a teaching characteristic. We (as nēhiyawak People) hear the same stories over and over but each time there is going to be a new finding or a different teaching for the learner or reader; repetition is a learning tool in nēhiyaw worldview. Given all of this, I really appreciate the reviewers’ comments and I am certain that they will help me with my writing as I go forward with future publications. 

Thank you for honouring my work and my Indigenous approach. I feel seen and valued by your comments.

Best