The Sámi Pathfinders: Addressing the Knowledge Gap in Norwegian Mainstream Education

Abstract

For at least two decades, lack of knowledge about the Sámi in Norway has been recognised as a reason for the perpetuation of stereotypes and discriminatory acts and hate speech towards them. Education about the Sámi, their lifeways, culture and rights is posited as a means of closing this gap, with the intention of influencing the majority Norwegian society’s attitudes towards the Sámi. The relatively new Norwegian curriculum (LK20) reflects this understanding. It requires teachers at every level of the educational system to include Sámi perspectives and themes in all subjects. This paper looks at how Indigenous Education is included in mainstream schools in Norway. It asks, if Indigenous Education can provide a counterbalance to existing stereotypes and discrimination of the Sámi People, then what kind of knowledge is sufficient to this end? To explore this, I specifically consider the efforts of the Sámi Pathfinders—a group of young Sámi adults (18–25 years) who visit and provide lectures about Sámi history, language and culture for Norwegian high school pupils. Through semi-structured interviews with five Pathfinders, I explored what kind of Indigenous Education they provide, how the Pathfinders interpret their role in relation to combatting stereotypes and discrimination, and their perception of the impact they have. Through reflexive thematic analysis, this study confirmed that there is a lack of knowledge about the Sámi in mainstream education. It also shows that most teachers did not prepare their pupils for the Pathfinders’ visit. Although the Pathfinders’ visit arguably improved pupils’ and teachers’ knowledge about the Sámi, this research suggests that how and how often knowledge is presented matters. It also suggests that who presents knowledge is a factor. Indigenous knowledge that is coupled with contact that is sufficiently close, positive and frequent has greater potential in altering discriminatory tendencies towards the Sámi.

1. Introduction

I situate this paper within Indigenous Education that is not just for Indigenous People but aims to include non-Indigenous People. Indigenising mainstream education by negotiating majority national curricula and education policy documents with the ambition of transforming the national imaginary to be more inclusive is a challenging but necessary measure to ensure Indigenous futures (Olsen and Sollid 2022; Smith 2003). In Norway, Indigenous Education strives to increase the visibility of the Sámi, Norway’s Indigenous People, not only within the educational sector but society in general. It is considered a means of counteracting the impact assimilation policies, known as Norwegianisation, had and continue to have on the Sámi People. From the late 19th century to at least the middle of the 20th century, schools were the principal vehicle for the transmission and reproduction of Norwegian language, culture and ideology in an effort to homogenise and unify Norway’s inhabitants (Minde 2003). Fuelled by Social Darwinism and scientific racism, notions of civilisation and nationalism and a perceived need to defend the nations’ borders (Elenius and Tjelmeland 2015), Sámi pupils were prohibited from speaking Sámi in class or during breaks. In effect, the Sámi were “to discard their language, change their attitude with respect to their fundamental values and get rid of their whole Sami identity” (Minde 2003, p. 76). Consequently, this continual devaluation of Sámi language and culture resulted in the loss of Sami language, culture and place, and created shame in identifying as Sámi. It has also led to the degradation of knowledge about the Sámi as well as their position within Norwegian society.

In terms of Norwegian schools, Norwegiansation has meant the omission of Sámi history, language and culture from educational policies, curriculum and, consequently, teaching/learning. However, through Sámi survivance, actions have been taken to remedy this legacy of invisibility, such as the development of a Sámi curriculum for Sámi pupils since 1997 (Broderstad 2022). Over the past forty years, the historical policies and practices of Sámi invisibility within the Norwegian educational system have evolved in step with international Indigenous rights’ development, supported by policies of inclusion and multiculturalism, towards decolonisation and indigenisation (Olsen 2020; Olsen and Andreassen 2017; Andreassen and Olsen 2020).

This paper looks at how Indigenous Education is included in mainstream schools in Norway. Currently, Indigenous Education in Norway is enacted by: (1) the teaching of Sámi language, culture and methodology to Sámi pupils in Sámi schools using the Sámi language, if possible, (2) Sámi language learning for Sámi pupils in Norwegian schools (based on the number of Sámi pupils that desire it), and (3) “mainstreaming”. Mainstreaming broadens the notion of Indigenous Education to include the majority society. It means teaching majority-pupils about Sámi history, culture, lifeways and rights. Not only do pupils learn from and about Indigenous People but, according to Olsen and Andreassen (2017), they also need this knowledge. As Johnsen-Swart and Fønnebø (2023) explain: “an indigenous perspective is also about making room for central values to help make the majority society richer and inclusive of everyone” (p. 48). Significantly, mainstreaming requires active and conscious inclusion of Sami themes and perspectives in mainstream classrooms. This article investigates a supplementary form of Indigenous Education that does not neatly fit into the three examples provided above. Rather, it explores an educational initiative called the Sámi Pathfinders (Samiske veivisere in Norwegian and Sámi Ofelaččat in Northern Sámi).

The Sámi Pathfinders, hereafter referred to as the Pathfinders, are young Sámi adults (18–25 years) who provide knowledge about the Sámi and include Sámi themes and perspectives in their presentations in majority schools. The Pathfinders can be viewed as actors within the Sámi indigenisation of mainstream education. Somby and Olsen (2022) explain indigenisation as an active process that strives to change a system (in this instance, education), to improve conditions for Indigenous Peoples and communities. According to the Sámi Pathfinder website, the Pathfinders make “an enormous contribution to increasing knowledge about the Sámi for many young Norwegians—something which contributes to reducing prejudice and bullying”. Similarly, the Pathfinders interviewed aspired to positively influence Norwegian high school pupils’ and teachers’ attitudes towards the Sámi.

This paper asks, if Indigenous Education can provide a counterbalance to existing stereotypes and discrimination of the Sámi People, then is this achievable simply by increasing knowledge? If so, what kind of knowledge is required? And how best can it be received? Through semi-structured interviews with five Pathfinders, I explored what kind of Indigenous Education they provide, how the Pathfinders interpret their role in relation to combatting stereotypes and discrimination, and their perception of the impact they had. Through reflexive thematic analysis of their data, this study confirmed that there is a lack of knowledge about the Sámi in mainstream education. It also showed that most teachers did not prepare their pupils for the Pathfinders’ visit. Although the Pathfinders’ visit arguably improves pupils’ and teachers’ knowledge about the Sámi, this research suggested that how and how often knowledge is presented matters. It also suggested that who presents knowledge is a factor. Indigenous knowledge that is coupled with contact that is sufficiently close, positive and frequent has greater potential in altering discriminatory tendencies towards the Sámi.

1.1. The Sámi and the Sámi Pathfinders

The Sámi are the internationally and nationally recognised Indigenous People of north-western Europe. Their traditional homelands, known as Sápmi/Sábme/Saepmie or Samiland, stretch across the borders and northern reaches of Norway, Sweden, Finland and Russia. Of the four countries, Norway has the largest population of Sámis, approximately 55,000 (Eriksen 2018a). The Sámi community is made up of diverse groups, which reflect their geographical location, language, traditions and identities. For instance, along the coast are the Sea Sámis, in forest and mountain areas closer to the north-eastern Swedish border are the Marka Sámis (Hætta 2010), and in inner Sápmi are the Reindeer-herding Sámis (Sollid and Olsen 2019). There are also Urban Sámis who live in cities both inside and outside of Sápmi (Dankertsen et al. 2022). The Sámi are the majority in some municipalities in Sápmi, such as Kautokeino and Karasjok. Although this is not the case for all municipalities in Sápmi (Eriksen 2018b), the Sámi live in all municipalities throughout Norway (Somby and Olsen 2022). Despite there being nine living Sámi languages today, they are either considered to be threatened or endangered (Vangsnes 2022). There are three official languages that are taught in Norwegian schools as part of language revitalisation efforts. These are North, Lule and South Sámi.

The Sámi Pathfinders were established in 2004 to help redress the identified knowledge gap about the Sámi that existed in Norwegian schools and society at large (Solberg 2004). Twenty years later, this initiative continues. The initiative is managed by the Sámi University of Applied Sciences (SUAS) located in Guovdageaidnu/Kautokeino in Sápmi. Kautokeino is a majority-Sámi area where most of the population is Sámi, speaks Sámi, and where North Sámi is the main language in municipal services, schools and the health sector. Kautokeino is also home to other significant Sámi institutions, such as the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) Sámi radio and the Department of Education. Each year, SUAS engages a small group of young Sámi adults (18–25 years) to provide knowledge about Sámi society, culture and language (SK Report 2007).

Established in 1989, SUAS was the first university to offer tertiary education in a Sámi language. In partnership with the Norwegian government, who financially ensures the initiative’s continuation, the Pathfinders are employed for one academic year (September-June) to visit Norwegian high schools and hold lectures for pupils in majority schools. The lecture the Pathfinders offer is approximately 90 min and primarily suited for high school pupils and their teachers. These lectures include knowledge about Sámi history, language and culture and what it means to be a young Sámi today. The Sámi Pathfinders’ website assures applicants that through the Sámi Pathfinder initiative they will make “an enormous contribution to increasing knowledge about the Sámi for many young Norwegians—something which contributes to reducing prejudice and bullying” (SP Website 2020).

As of 2023, the Pathfinders had visited approximately 60 of the country’s 411 high schools (15%) (SP Website). The Pathfinders’ 90-min visit is framed as a supplement to existing learning about the Sámi in schools (Länsman 2014; SK Report 2007). Prior to commencing their school visits, SUAS provides the Pathfinders with a six-week intensive course at the start of the semester. This course covers Sámi literature, history and politics, Duodji,1 religion, reindeer-herding and cultural understanding. It also includes presentation skills and training on how to handle “difficult” or “uncomfortable” situations. Additionally, the Pathfinders are encouraged to include their personal stories. This is based on the understanding that pupils become more invested in the content if it has a personal aspect (emotion), rather than if they are listening to information (cognitive only) (SK Report 2007). The SK Report (2007), the only publicly available evaluation of the initiative, explains cognitive information as “dry facts” about Indigenous People, Sámi conditions, language, history and Sámi statistics. Examples of information with emotional content are joik,2 myths, rituals and modern Sámi music (SK Report 2007, p. 48). However, the SK Report notes that there can be no guarantee that the Pathfinders’ lecture will positively affect pupils’ attitudes towards the Sámi. Additionally, the report does not measure pupils’ attitudes towards the Sámi prior to or after the Pathfinders’ visit.

Undoubtedly, the Pathfinders provide a unique form of Indigenous Education because they not only offer knowledge about the Sámi but direct contact with the Sámi. The SK Report (2007) describes the encounter between the Sámi Pathfinders and Norwegian youth as a “meeting”. By holding lectures for Norwegian high school pupils (and their teachers), they engage in a communicative encounter with Norwegian youth that has the potential to be particularly effective in the transmission of knowledge. This interpersonal peer-to-peer communication is considered central to increasing the possibility of changes in majority pupils’ attitudes and assumptions about the Sámi (NIM 2022; SK Report 2007). Subsequently, the Pathfinders provide Indigenous Education that is potentially transformative. However, due to an absence of empirical data, it cannot be known if pupils’ attitudes and assumptions about the Sámi are positively altered after the Pathfinders’ visit.

1.2. Indigenous Education in Norway

Indigenous Education is about the politics of recognition and knowledge production (Nakata et al. 2012; Sollid and Olsen 2019). It is intimately tied to Indigenous self-determination and decolonisation (Somby and Olsen 2022). Globally, Indigenous Education is connected to decolonisation efforts (Kuokkanen 2000; Olsen 2016), which emphasise “ways of knowing, thinking and being that disrupt coloniality”(Silva et al. 2021, p. 389). Indigenous Education is also about improving the everyday lives of Indigenous People and communities and promoting and ensuring Indigenous futures. According to Sámi-Norwegian scholars, Johnsen-Swart and Fønnebø (2023), the Norwegian Curriculum (LK20) is part of Sámi decolonial efforts. Other Norwegian scholars recognise that the curriculum is a colonial text. They explain that despite Sami culture and history having an increased position in the curriculum, it is still secondary to the general guidelines that are provided and conceptual constructs employed (Holander and Høvik 2023). For instance, Haugen (2021) states that the Norwegian curricula have used the majority cultural context as a natural frame of reference. This is seen in LK20s Core Curriculum document, which gives prominence to human rights and Christian values (MER 2017). Recognition of Eurocentric overtones in other colonial contexts have also been identified (see Gaudry and Lorenz 2018). Consequently, Holander and Høvik (2023) clarifies that the indigenisation of the Norwegian curriculum is inevitably positioned within structural power relations. As a result, the Sámi, and Indigenous Peoples generally, are constantly in a relationship of negotiation and consultation with the State (Broderstad 2014, 2022).

Sámi decolonisation of education and research requires unveiling and reflecting on one’s own positionality in relation to Sámi themes and perspectives, as well as the information (knowledge) one is being provided with. Increasing knowledge is considered a way to counter ongoing discrimination towards the Sámi. Research that investigated discrimination across five counties in Northern Norway revealed that 20% of Sámis in the North experience discrimination (Hansen 2018). More recently, research concerning young Sámis’ mental health showed that three of four young Sámis have experienced discrimination (Hansen and Skaar 2021). The Norwegian Government and Sámi Parliament’s3 Action Plan Against Racism and Discrimination (2020–2024), which has now been extended until 2027, explains that ongoing discrimination results in “exclusion, lower social mobility and psychological problems” (Action Plan 2020, p.11). Mental health is considered of paramount importance for developing a strong Sámi identity. This is particularly the case for Sámi youth (Hansen and Skaar 2021). A strong Sámi identity is also seen to correlate with Sámi youth having a place in society (Hansen and Skaar 2021).

Currently, research that includes discussions about discrimination of the Sámi in the South of Norway (outside of Sápmi) occurs within a broader educational context, which explores racism as a phenomenon in mainstream schools (see Eriksen 2021). When research that focuses specifically on discrimination towards the Sámi in schools does occur (see Lile 2011), comparisons are made between schools in Sápmi and in Oslo, Eastern Norway. Possible reasons for these blindspots in research in education are the general perception that there are very few Sámi in the South, except for in Oslo, Norway’s capital, the difficulty in identifying the Sámi living in different parts of Norway because Norway does not register ethnicity in its census, and a lack of understanding of the differences between minorities (immigrants), national minorities and Indigenous Peoples. As will be shown in the subsequent section, current research mapping levels of knowledge about the Sámi in Norwegian society and schools is shown to be connected to the perpetuation of stereotypes, discrimination and hate speech.

1.3. Discrimination and Levels of Competency/Knowledge about the Sámi in Norwegian Schools

A recent study by the Norwegian Centre for Human Rights (NIM 2022) conducted research to identify and measure the majority population’s attitudes towards the Sámi and national minorities in Norway: the Kven/Norwegian Finns (people of Finnish descent in Northern Norway), Jews, Forrest Finns, Roma and Romani people/Taters. This report explains that (1) “stereotypes can influence peoples’ decisions and behaviours, often contributing to discrimination and hate speech”4 (NIM 2022, p. 59), and that (2) “low levels of contact between groups, lack of knowledge and stereotypical representations in the media can increase prejudices towards minorities, whereas measures that can promote knowledge, levels of contact and media representations can prevent or reduce prejudices” (p. 46). Surveys of 2654 participants, aged 18 years and over, showed that many participants did not have a great deal of knowledge about the Sámi or national minorities. The report highlighted the need for more knowledge about the Sámi and other national minorities in schools. In addition, the report emphasised that knowledge about Sámi history and culture can help reduce prejudices if it is taught in a manner that “actively challenges stereotypes” and incorporates historical and current injustices towards the group, including the group’s own perspectives about these events (NIM 2022, p. 46). In conclusion, NIM (2022) explained that measures that promote knowledge, levels of contact and positive media representations can create a positive change in prejudices, if the contact between groups is “sufficiently close, positive and frequent” (p. 46).

The general lack of knowledge identified by the NIM report about the Sámi has been acknowledged by other Norwegian scholars for several decades now: both in the Norwegian education system and among the majority population (Solberg 2004; Johnsen-Swart and Fønnebø 2023; Lile 2011). When it comes to knowledge about the Sámi, it is generally recognised by Norwegian scholars that there is greater knowledge in schools and mainstream society in the North of Norway as opposed to the South (Eriksen 2018a). Furthermore, research indicates that teachers and teacher-students acquire knowledge independently of their educational institutions, whether this is at the elementary (Lile 2011) or tertiary level (Følgegruppens femte rapport til Kunnskapsdepartementet 2015). Andreassen and Olsen (2020) stated that teacher education in Norway does not emphasise the importance of including Indigenous perspectives. Norwegian teachers’ overall lack of competency about the Sámi People means that they are reticent to raise this topic with their pupils (Eriksen 2018b). Furthermore, prior to LK20, Gjerpe (2021) showed that representation of the Sámi in textbooks is in a dichotomous relationship with majority Norwegian society, where the Sámi are “othered” and the majority society is seen as a communal “we”.

However, recently in Norway, there have been some dramatic changes that promote an inclusive approach to teaching about the Sámi in Norwegian schools. The first of these changes was the introduction of the Norwegian curriculum in 2020 (LK20; MER 2017), and the second was the publication of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report in 2023 (Sannhets-og forsoningskommisjonen [TRC] 2022–2023). These events will be discussed in turn in the following section.

1.4. Indigenising the Norwegian Curriculum

The Norwegian curriculum (LK20; MER 2017) obligates teachers to include Sámi themes and perspectives in every school subject. Also known as “mainstreaming”, the inclusion of Sámi themes and perspectives in majority schools is part of the efforts to indigenise education at all levels of the Norwegian education system—from kindergarten to university. The Norwegian curriculum (LK20) promotes learning about the history, culture, societal life and rights of the Sámi People (Somby 2023). Hence, LK20 has the potential to contribute to the decolonisation and indigenisation of the Norwegian educational system.

The second development, the Norwegian Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) report, investigated the treatment and impact of the Norwegianisation policy on the Sámi, the Kven (Norwegian Finns, an official national minority) and the Forrest Finns (also a national minority). Whilst the report officially documents the effects of Norwegianisation on the Sámi People, the TRC also highlights the pivotal role teachers played in the execution of these policies, supporting existing scholarship (e.g., Gjerpe 2021; Minde 2003). As a result, the Norwegian Union of Education (Utdanningsforbundet) apologised for the part teachers played in the implementation of Norwegianisation (Gosh 2023). Notably, the TRC also underscores the important contribution teachers can provide to reconciliation efforts. In particular, the commission emphasised the need for increased knowledge as fundamental to this endeavour. Hence, the TRC report provides further support for the indigenisation of the National curriculum (LK20). In combination, these documents underscore the legal, political and moral obligation teachers have to revisit the kind of knowledge or education they provide to pupils/students and reimagine it to include a Sámi perspective.

Inviting Sámi perspectives into Norwegian mainstream education is a way of reimagining the educational and the national communities (Anderson 1991). By promoting Sámi perspectives and knowledge(s) in the classroom, the Sámi are thus positioned as an integral part of a shared national history and national identity. Arguably, this can be seen as an attempt to redefine the nation as a space in which many ethnically defined communities live and interact (Stratton and Ang 1994) to help minimise discrimination. In Norwegian schools, this perspective shift requires a pedagogical approach that is “about, for and by” the Sámi (Figenschou et al. 2023, p.21). In other words, it requires teachers to be intentional in their efforts to include Sámi perspectives and research in their classrooms. The goal is to naturalise or normalise the Sámi as a part of Norwegian society. This involves, for instance, recognising that Sámi history is part of Norwegian history. A Sámi perspective means including narratives or texts about the Sámi People produced by Sámi People to avoid exotification and othering (Somby 2023). These narratives/texts should reflect perspectives that include not only Sámi history but, significantly, Sámi present and future. Through mainstreaming, Norwegian teachers and educational institutions are thus required to participate in the decolonisation and indigenisation of Norwegian education.

2. Results

2.1. The Complexity of Knowledge-Sharing

At least if people had a little knowledge about the Sámi,

it would make our everyday lives simpler.

(SP4)

My discussions with the five Pathfinders revealed that representation, identity and diversity are central concepts that the Pathfinders embody and employ to help counter discrimination and prejudice in Norwegian classrooms. For Indigenous Peoples globally, representation, identity and diversity are significant due to the majority society’s tendency to homogenise what it means to be an Indigenous person, overlooking the internal differences in each group. The Pathfinders subvert simplified or stereotypical understandings of what it means to be Sámi because this triplet of factors is intertwined with the kind of knowledge the Pathfinders provide in the classroom. Whilst these factors are unique to each Pathfinder, the following discussion will show that all the Pathfinders exhibited representation, identity and diversity as individuals, as a group (the Sámi Pathfinders/Sámi youth) and as an Indigenous collective (the Sámi People). The complexity of their representative roles is thus reflected in the type of knowledge they share with pupils and teachers.

The Pathfinders were clear that their role is part of a social mandate that firstly seeks to increase the visibility of the Sámi People and help normalise them within Norwegian society. Secondly, this social mandate includes addressing the lack of knowledge about the Sámi in Norwegian schools to help prevent the perpetuation of colonial stereotypes and exotification of the Sámi. According to SP4, “lack of knowledge leads to the exotification of the Sámi. Exotification makes people feel different about themselves so for instance, they may not want to wear their gákhti [Sámi traditional costume] or choose to learn Sámi at school”. Exotification of the Sámi can result in many Sámi refusing to identify as Sámi. In addition, the continuation of colonial stereotypes and ethnic discrimination due to generations of assimilation policies means that many Sámi refuse to talk about what happened to them during the period of Norwegianisation. This may result in rejecting the use of visible Sámi symbols, such as the gákti or the Sámi flag, and refusing to speak or learn the Sámi language (Dankertsen 2016). For many Sámi, shame has become associated with being Sámi (Berg-Nordlie 2021; Bjørklund 2016; Dankertsen 2016; Eriksen 2021). As a result, SP4 explained that the lack of knowledge about the Sámi in Norwegian society has “a domino effect that causes harm to the Sámi People”. Hence, the Pathfinders consider their role as “contributing to the Sámi cause” (SP2). By conducting lectures in Norwegian classrooms, the Pathfinders showcase the diversity within the Sámi community, thereby addressing stereotypical associations and misinformation about the Sámi.

The Pathfinders interviewed were aware of showcasing the diversity within the Sámi community. As SP1 elaborated: “And it is also yes, to show that we are different us too, that there exists not just one person who is Sámi or who are more Sámi than another or how a Sámi should look”. One way the Pathfinders present their regional differences is through clothing. This is explicitly shown in their PowerPoint presentations by a group photo, in which they are all dressed in their gákti/gaeptie/gáppte. The gákti is a traditional Sámi costume that symbolises Sámi identification and pride (Dankertsen 2016). Through their distinct colours, designs and woven elements, gáktis reflect the different geographical areas, heritage and individuality of the wearer. Another way the Pathfinders show their geographical differences was mentioned by SP3. SP3 explained that they became a Pathfinder because there “was a lack of representation from the city, where I myself have grown up and wanted to be an example of”. SP3 was raised and lives in a city outside of Sápmi. SP3 identifies as an “urban Sámi”. In Norway, internal migration from remote areas to cities is common (see Dankertsen 2016; Dankertsen et al. 2022; Selle et al. 2020). This is also the case in other Indigenous communities the world over (Langton 2019) Australia; (Tomiak and Patrick 2010) Canada). Typically, Indigenous People relocate to cities for socio-economic reasons. Interestingly, SP3 highlighted the need for greater representation of “urban Sámis” within the Pathfinder initiative itself.

Sámi diversity is not only expressed geographically but also linguistically by the Pathfinders. Two of the Pathfinders interviewed (SP1/SP4) came from Sámi-majority communities in which Sámi was their mother-tongue. The others (SP2/SP3/SP5) were from urban communities from the North and South of Norway where the Sámi are in the minority. Their mother-tongue, contrastingly, was Norwegian. The loss of language that has occurred in non-majority Sámi communities, such as Gáivoutna–Kåfjord–Kaivuono (a Sea Sámi community), is attributed to Norwegianisation and assimilation (Dankertsen 2016; Sollid and Olsen 2019). Language is a significant part of SP3′s self-identification as a Sámi. Despite having relatives in Kautokeino, a Sámi-majority community, SP3 felt it was “painful” not to have been taught Sámi and implied that their sense of belonging was impeded by “geography”. Whilst some scholars confirm that the Sámi language is one way of “performing Sáminess” (Dankertsen 2016), others, such as Bjørklund (2016), explain that in a Sámi context, there is an expectation that “to belong to the group one needs to have mastered several cultural competencies that are considered to make up the Sami ethnic profile” (p. 11). “Knowing the language” is, therefore, a necessary cultural competency that influences the reasons individuals identify as Sámi (Berg-Nordlie 2022).

In contrast, SP2 considered their lack of knowledge of Sámi language as a means of breaking normative understandings of Sáminess. They stated, I am “not a typical Pathfinder who is from Kautokeino and has Sámi as their mother tongue and has reindeer. I have a somewhat different background”. SP2′s statement alluded to another Sámi cultural competency, “living with and of nature” (Berg-Nordlie 2022). The perception that a “real Sámi” speaks Sámi and resides in rural settings prevails within the Sámi and Norwegian communities (Berg-Nordlie 2022). Hence, by becoming a Pathfinder, SP2 and SP3 were aware that their representation demonstrates different ways of being a Sámi, but also of being a Pathfinder. This suggests their desire to break down normative and stereotypical understandings of Sáminess that not only exist within the majority society, but also Sámi society.

2.2. The Complexity of Representation

The Pathfinders were profoundly aware that their representation extends beyond their individual roles as a young Sámi to include, for instance, the broader identity of Indigenous People. This was aptly expressed by SP5, who said: “one was an ambassador… a representative for an entire Indigenous People” (SP5). Moreover, SP5 explained that the first thing the Pathfinders say in their presentations is “‘we are an Indigenous People’”. The term Indigenous People is a unifying political signifier. Including this statement clarifies for the audience the Sámi’s status within Norwegian society, identifying with other Indigenous Peoples around the globe. It also suggests that the Pathfinders’ representative role is not only educative, but political. This is further supported by the Pathfinders’ annual attendance at the UN Permanent Forum for Indigenous Peoples in New York, which includes participating in the Global Youth Caucus (SP Website).

Attached to their multiple representative roles is a sense of responsibility in relation to the knowledge they provide and their understanding that they are representing the entire Sámi nation. SP3 explained that sharing knowledge with pupils and teachers is complicated: “You feel that you should know something about the Sámi situation, that is after all what you are presenting, but no one is an expert. You are not an expert after studying one year at SUAS, with a six-week intensive course” (SP3). SP3 elaborated further, saying: “Some people do believe that [the Pathfinders] know it all”. SP5 also expressed concern about the knowledge they present and represent. They explained that it can be “mentally draining when one is concerned about saying something wrong or conveying incorrect information. Concern and worry that one could hurt one’s own people” (SP5). Hence, the Pathfinders’ sense of responsibility attached to their Pathfinder role is amplified by the fact that they feel they are representing the entire Sámi nation and their awareness that their academic knowledge is limited. This can perhaps be interpreted as the burden of representation. SP5 described it in the following way: “Because you stand there in the classroom, and … maybe you are the first Sámi they have met who is also a Pathfinder […] one is more than just oneself”. This quote promotes an understanding that for the Pathfinders, the act of standing in a classroom talking to Norwegian pupils and teachers means that they supersede their individual identities and assume a range of other identities and roles.

The notion that the Pathfinders represent more than just themselves was also expressed by SP4. They alluded to the enormity of their representative role when they referred to themselves as “19–20-year-olds” who are “front people for youth and for everything Sámi”. This, SP4 reflected, is their “biggest task”. Similarly, SP2 claimed that: “when you become a Sámi Pathfinder, you become in a way a little superstar in Sápmi. Yes, overnight suddenly everyone knows who you are” (SP2). Here, both Pathfinders explained that they are public figures. But it also revealed their representative and symbolic function both within the Sámi community and when visiting Norwegian schools. In addition, the shared tasks (travelling, planning their presentations and studying, for example) and the intensity of their experiences in the classroom help develop a sense of group belonging, fellowship and support. Hence, representation, identity and diversity are performed in combination, reflecting differing scales of representation: locally/geographically (Sámi, urban Sámi, Sea Sámi, etc.), nationally (Sámi/Indigenous People), internationally (Sámi/Indigenous People), personally (oneself) and collectively (Sámi youth/Pathfinder). Following, the knowledge the Pathfinders provide in the classroom can be interpreted as reflecting these various scales.

2.3. Personalising Their Role

To be a Pathfinder has nothing to do with whether you can speak Sámi or not…

you have a story to tell no matter what.

(SP2)

The Pathfinders are encouraged to personalise their lectures, which has the potential to add depth and relevance to their discussions in the classroom. This can involve including their own or their family’s experiences. It can mean including areas or issues that are of particular interest. SP1, for instance, was interested in talking about green colonisation with pupils. They gave the example of windmill parks being built in traditional Sámi reindeer-herding areas. What was important to SP1 was “showing both sides” of a situation, with the intention of providing a balanced view of a topic. Personalising their presentations could also mean displaying individual skills, such as joiking or playing a musical instrument.

The Pathfinders interviewed provided varying levels of personal detail in their presentations. According to SP3, “some Pathfinders shared nothing personal” in their presentations, whereas SP3 thinks they shared a great deal. In their presentation, SP3 referred to their own Áhkku, grandmother, who was sent to a boarding school during the period of Norwegianisation. At the same time, SP5 felt that “there was an expectation that we all will tell (share) our own story”. Significantly, SP3 asked: “how much is one willing to share of oneself” in the presentation? This question is almost impossible to answer precisely because it is impossible for the Pathfinders to predict what kind of responses they are likely to encounter from pupils/teachers.

According to the SK Report (2007), the use of “stories” and youth language creates a peer-to-peer communicative encounter, which fosters dialogue and relatability with the pupils whilst affirming the Pathfinders’ credibility. The report also states that if pupils are “emotionally affected by the content/issue, [they] are more likely to be open to the information/message” (SK Report 2007, p. 47). However, the opposite, a lack of emotional investment in the content, results in less engagement in the information/message. Irrespective of whether this connection is established, there is no guarantee that pupils’ perceptions and attitudes towards the Sámi will be positively influenced by this encounter. Similarly, there is no way of knowing if this positive change will endure. Consequently, the Pathfinders must each strike a balance between what to include or exclude in the presentations. Specifically, this means to what extent they include personal and political representation in their lectures. They must also consider the potential impact disclosing their personal narratives will have not only on their audiences but, significantly, on themselves. Surprisingly, the SK Report does not raise the question of how the Pathfinders are mentally or emotionally impacted by the inclusion of their personal narratives or the complexity of their representative role.

2.4. Impediments to Knowledge-Sharing in the Classroom

The burden of representation discussed in the previous section is compounded by the findings in this section, which highlight the unpredictability of reactions from pupils and teachers during the Pathfinders’ visits. The unknowability of what form reactions will take in the classroom means that being a Pathfinder can be mentally and physically “difficult”. Moreover, if teachers fail to provide students with foundational knowledge about the Sámi prior to the Pathfinders’ visit, the likelihood of altering discriminatory tendencies towards the Sámi is diminished. This section will also disclose that based on NIM’s three criteria for altering discriminatory tendencies towards the Sámi—proximity, positivity and frequency—frequency of contact with a Sámi is probably the most problematic.

The Pathfinders believe that they bring a great deal of knowledge to the classroom. However, they experience that their ability to provide a depth of knowledge about the Sámi People is determined by the existing level of knowledge in the classroom. Pupils’ and teachers’ responses to their lectures, in particular the type of questions asked, indicated to the Pathfinders what they expressed as the presence and/or absence of knowledge. Additionally, lack of knowledge about the Sámi was shown to impact the way the Pathfinders experienced their classroom encounters, positively or negatively.

The Pathfinders could detect when the class was prepared by the types of questions they were asked: “pupils who were prepared in advance of the visit challenged us, not in a negative way but made us think. Think about how to respond” (SP2). SP2 further explained that “the whole presentation was elevated. This impacted our general impression of how the presentation went. It was more rewarding”. SP1 reinforced this with the following example: “we had just talked about extreme stereotypes and hate speech and so a pupil asked ‘what can we do to help prevent this? What can we do to make it better for Sámi who experience hate speech?’”. For SP1, this question indicated that the pupils had reflected and were considering alternative perspectives by wanting to do something positive/active to help make things better for the Sámi. Importantly, for SP1 this meant “that you could talk more about what it means to be Sámi today”. SP1 described this as a “lovely experience”.

The Pathfinders concurred that “more knowledge” leads to “more in-depth questions” (SP1). They also recognised that it is the teacher’s responsibility to prepare the pupils in advance of their visit. For them, pupil preparation means that the pupils are potentially more active and willing to engage in dialogue, thereby benefiting the Pathfinders as well as the pupils. SP1 elaborated saying that when teachers came to them and said “‘yes, we have gone through the website and prepared questions and pupils are really happy that you are here and happy for the visit’, so often it was a very good lecture and a good experience”. Just what this “good experience” might involve was clarified by SP2: “if we had really, really good connection with them, it then was easier for them to talk to us and we kind of became more engaged and gave more”. When pupils had greater knowledge, SP3 said, “they had in a way a feeling of accomplishment, [it was] easier to follow [the Pathfinders’ presentation], they become more motivated”. Prepared pupils allowed the Pathfinders to share further knowledge and showcase more of what being Sámi meant for them. It also allowed for two-way communication with pupils.

The SK Report (2007) highlights the importance of personal two-way communication between the Pathfinders and pupils. Some Pathfinders expressed that this peer-to-peer contact helped make the knowledge they present in the classroom “more believable/credible” and “more fun/entertaining” (SP1). Others considered that presenting and sharing knowledge from a youth perspective is “really priceless” (SP3). However, SP5 recalled “that twice teachers prepared pupils” for their visit. SP4 confirmed this, saying: “It was strikingly common, that the teacher had put on a Sámi film just before we arrived… and that’s it” (the films shown were Sámi Blood, The Pathfinder and/or Kautokeino Rebellion). SP2 described the use of films to prepare pupils as a “shortcut”. SP5 suggested that this is an inadequate form of preparation by stating: “that’s great but there are other things you can also do”. Despite teachers being informed in advance of the Pathfinders’ visit that it is a “supplement to ordinary teaching, not a replacement” (SP2; SP Website), the data showed that prepared classes were not the norm.

The lack of teacher preparation of pupils means that the Pathfinders must present “basic knowledge (SP1) or a “kindergarten level of knowledge” (SP4). For the Pathfinders, this means including “maps of Sápmi, explaining what an Indigenous People is” (SP1), what a lavvo5 (SP3) or joik is (SP5) and “starting from scratch all the time” (SP4). Lack of pupil preparation limits the knowledge the Pathfinders can include in their presentations. They are subsequently unable to “go deeper into how it is to be Sámi today … to show, for example, that we have many Sámi activists who are active on social media and … we have many Youtubers, we have Sámi podcasts. We have an enormous amount of quite simply cool things we could show” (SP1). SP4 agreed, saying: “I didn’t get a chance to kinda tell about what is fun with our history, or what is fun in our culture … because they need that foundation [of knowledge/information] in a way, before we can of course build on it”. Although the Pathfinders recognised the need for this level of content in their presentations, it also meant that they felt like they were repeating themselves. It also allowed for banal or impolite questions, such as: “How many reindeer do you have?”, which is the equivalent of asking “How much money do you have?” (SP1). Similarly, SP3 recalled: “I got so many questions: ‘Why do you speak søring [a generic term for ‘southerners’]?’ I tended to say, ‘everyone doesn’t live north of Trondheim’”. The pupils’ question about SP3′s accent/dialect reflects existing stereotypes about what it means to be Sámi, which could have been avoided if they were more prepared by their teachers.

Despite being aware of the knowledge gap about the Sami in Norwegian schools, the Pathfinders anticipated “that pupils would know a little bit more” (SP5). SP5 said: “Most people know who Rosa Parks is, but no one knows who Elsa Laula Renberg6 is. And both are very important civil rights activists/fighters. The only difference is that one is from the USA and the other is from Norway. So, why do we know more about the struggle for American civil rights than the civil rights’ battles that have occurred in Norway?”. Another telling example, provided by SP1 when they were discussing green colonisation, shows how questions or comments revealed a lack of knowledge about how the Sámi have been treated in the past. In this instance, “when discussing the Fossen case and the windmill park which has been built in a reindeer grazing area, a teacher said ‘yes, but it is very important for example… that we have green energy and you Sámi must also give something for the whole world don’t you think?’”. For SP1, this way of thinking is problematic and made them feel “very sad”. They explained that it shows that the teacher does not know the history of the Sámi, let alone “how much we have already lost”. Here, the Pathfinder is referring not only to the loss of their cultural and linguistic heritage, but also the loss of influence and access to traditional Sámi areas due to the unification of Norway and the policy of Norwegianisation. The introduction of national laws, for instance, impacted the way the Sámi are able to carry out traditional Sámi livelihoods, such as fishing (Kuokkanen 2020) or reindeer husbandry (Bjørklund 2004). SP1 further reflected: “if the teacher has so little information and knowledge about history… [what] other misunderstandings can that teacher have which they are passing on to pupils?”. Certainly, the teacher’s statement reveals their own poverty of knowledge and understanding of Sámi history. It also alerts us to how this misinformation is perpetuated in the classroom by what is taught about the Sámi and the approach teachers take when addressing the Sámi as a topic in their teaching. Hence, for SP1, it was not surprising that stereotypes and discrimination still exist, considering that some pupils’ education is based on these misconceptions.

2.5. The North–South Divide

In general, the Pathfinders perceived there to be a significant level of what they referred to as “ignorance” (SP5) in Norwegian schools. They differentiated between questions or remarks arising from a lack of knowledge and those that are based on some knowledge informed by existing stereotypes and discrimination. These distinctions in knowledge levels among pupils and teachers were often, though not always, tied to geographical regions. Despite some Pathfinders never having visited schools in the “South” of Norway, they collectively shared an understanding that questions in Southern Norway stem from ignorance, whereas those in Northern Norway are more likely based on stereotypes and discrimination. For instance, SP5 “noticed that [in] places which were very strongly Norwegianised, there we got perhaps questions which … stemmed perhaps from racism”. Examples of questions asked were: “You can of course drive over the border without paying toll? Do you drink a lot? Why are you all so short?” (SP5). According to SP5, these questions are based on stereotypes. They also indicate a racialised image of the Sámi influenced by biological racism and Norway’s assimilation policies (Norwegianisation; Lingaas 2021). For SP2, questions that are founded on prejudicial/stereotypical knowledge challenge one’s Sámi “identity and history” and are interpreted as a “personal attack”. For example, “Can you really call yourself Sámi? Do you speak Norwegian? You live in Norway, don’t you?” SP2 elaborated by saying that “it was mainly teachers who did not agree with our view of history. And this was mainly in Northern Norway”.

Tensions between the Norwegian and Sámi communities in the North of Norway are common knowledge in the region (Lingaas 2021). From the interview data, it was apparent that the Pathfinders were aware of these tensions regardless of whether they lived in the North or not. What also came to light was that SUAS was not only aware of these tensions but how they may play out in Norwegian classrooms. This was evident since several of the Pathfinders mentioned that either the coordinator or advisor from SUAS accompanied them when attending schools in Finnmark. SP3 clarified why this had been implemented: “there have been so many unfortunate, awful experiences in Finnmark”. There is, however, no mention of the advisor accompanying the Pathfinders during school visits in the SK Report (2007). Presumably, this measure was added after that date, due to a perceived need. However, this was not discussed during the interviews.

One could infer that the presence of a Sámi adult in the classroom provides the Pathfinder with academic and moral support. However, according to SP3, it does not prevent “difficulties” or “challenges” from occurring. SP3 recalled delivering a presentation alone in Finnmark because their partner was ill. Just as they were breaking for lunch, a teacher approached SP3 wanting to ask them a question privately because it was “a little bit discriminating”. SP3 spoke to the advisor in Sámi asking them not to leave. The advisor stayed. SP3 explained, “actually it wasn’t a question, it was a theory. He had based it on the fact that there is so much Sámi hate… that the Sámi are knocked around in Troms because their national costume, in particular, the men’s costume, is incredibly ugly and looks like a dress”. SP3 added that the teacher was “completely sincere”, that he “really believed this”. SP3 described that they felt “put out”, “completely shocked” and “speechless”. But then, SP3 started to explain “why the gákhti hangs down. That it is there to provide insulation…”. Consequently, SP3 summarised that “it was a really difficult day”.

Whilst there has already been a considerable amount of research investigating discrimination in northern Norway, until recently (for example, the NIM (2022) report), this had not extended to explorations of prejudices towards the Sámi in the South of Norway. Still, the Pathfinders recounted discriminatory experiences in the South, too. SP2 referred to a discriminatory experience that happened on Snap Chat rather than in the classroom. The Pathfinders are encouraged to use social media to connect with pupils and the wider public. Typically, they provide their social media details at the end of their presentations. In this instance, the Pathfinder received what SP2 described as a “tough” question from a high school pupil in Stavanger. The pupil asked: “I have a buddy who feels sexually attracted to reindeer? Does he have Sámi origins?” (SP2). SP2 explained that they did not respond and immediately blocked the user. They also informed SUAS and gave the pupil’s username to the school. Social media’s widespread reach amplifies racialised slurs and hate speech (United Nations 2021; Action Plan 2020; Lingaas 2021; Leitch and Pickering 2022). The Sámi People experience hate speech when sharing Sámi content on social media, bullying and offensive comments in schools and when using cultural symbols, such as the gákti, the Sámi flag or speaking Sámi (NIM 2022). By contrast, social media enables the Pathfinders to connect with Sámi pupils living in the South, allowing for positive encounters. SP2 explained how they always encouraged Sámi pupils to come and meet them: “we said hi and talked to them. Often, we talked Sámi… they really wanted to talk Sámi with us”.

The results presented in this section confirm that from the Pathfinders’ perspective, there is a lack of knowledge about the Sámi in mainstream education. Additionally, most teachers did not prepare their pupils for the Pathfinders’ visit or, when they did, preparation typically entailed showing a film. Lack of knowledge about the Sámi was shown to impact the way the Pathfinders experienced their classroom encounters, positively or negatively. The Pathfinders’ interpreted the types of questions pupils/teachers asked as indicators of whether knowledge about the Sámi was present or absent. As a rule, the types of questions/comments the Pathfinders received could be identified geographically. Typically, questions/comments in schools in Northern Norway were discriminatory in content, whereas in schools in the South they resulted from ignorance or an absence of knowledge. As a result of their diverse classroom encounters, the Pathfinders described alternating between feeling like they made a meaningful impact to feeling like they did not. For instance, SP5 described being able to “crush” stereotypes, whereas SP1 said that they don’t “emotionally impact the pupils. Don’t make any big change”. In the following quote, SP4 provides a reasonable explanation for why this may be the case:

We only have 90 min in a year. It isn’t enough… I have visited 120 schools and held over 150 h of lectures, so for me that is an enormous amount. But for those [pupils] who have been listening, it is 90 min in their whole life. And that is almost nothing.

Hence, the repetitive nature of the Pathfinders’ visits to Norwegian schools suggests that it is the Pathfinders who are most affected by sharing knowledge with pupils, rather than the pupils themselves.

3. Materials and Methods

Relationality or relationships is one of the governing principles of my research, which highlights the role and impact of the Sámi Pathfinders’ educational intervention in Norwegian high schools. Relationality is an important principle of carrying out indigenous or indigenist research (Moreton-Robinson 2017). It is also one of many concepts pertaining to Indigenous methodology, as are respect, relevance, responsibility, reciprocity and representation (Olsen 2016; Tsosie et al. 2022). As a reciprocal process, relationality helps establish parameters for the way a researcher works with others. It is a way of positioning oneself throughout one’s work and in relation to one’s work. Whilst this applies to all research, it is of particular importance as a non-indigenous researcher investigating Indigenous issues (Skille 2022).

Part of my “relational accountability” (Virtanen et al. 2021) as a researcher is to clearly show that my interactions with the Pathfinders are premised on collaboration; that is, research carried out with the Pathfinders. This approach is in response to historical research practices that objectified Indigenous Peoples—identified by research being done on or to Indigenous Peoples (Smith 2021). Furthermore, as a non-Indigenous and non-ethnic Norwegian researcher (outsider), one has limitations, particularly in terms of what one can know or experience. Non-Indigenous researchers must, therefore, be prepared to employ humility and respect when learning from others (Kuokkanen 2007). Acknowledging this is an ethical imperative and an important part of decolonising my work.

Decolonisation of one’s research also means humanising oneself and by extension the research process (Silva et al. 2021). Consequently, I did not see or refer to the Pathfinders as interview objects, instead they are seen and described as participants. This stance shows respect and recognises that the Pathfinders are the “knowledge-holders” (Porsanger 2004). The Pathfinders do not represent Sámi knowledge in its entirety. Yet, their lived experiences as a Pathfinder affords them access to specific knowledge (Olsen 2016), which I and other members of the Indigenous and non-Indigenous Norwegian society lack. Therefore, the Pathfinders’ knowledge, voices, perspectives and interests are the focus of my research (Olsen 2016). As a non-Indigenous person/researcher, this awareness has influenced my ethical stand, methodology and methods and is a response to the historical power imbalances between researcher and researched, and Indigenous and non-Indigenous (Smith 2021).

This qualitative study was based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with five Sámi Pathfinders (SP1–SP5) in September 2022, who had previously worked as Pathfinders during the period 2016–2022. Because of the geographical distances between myself and the Pathfinders, all the interviews were conducted online through MS Teams. This research was approved by the Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research (SIKT). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. The interview guide contained 13 open-ended questions, which provided the basis for our conversation. This guide explored their motivation for becoming a Pathfinder; a self-described account of their job and their experiences; self-assessment of their impact; exploration of perceived differences when visiting schools in Sámi-dominant/majority and non-dominant/minority areas; impressions of the preparedness of the teachers/pupils at the schools; feedback about the Sámi Pathfinder initiative’s role and structure; and, lastly, the impact of their experience on their identity.

In alignment with the principles of Indigenous methodology stated above, I chose reflexive thematic analysis (RTA) (Braun and Clarke 2019, 2022) as a qualitative method to answer the three following research questions:

• How do the Pathfinders perceive their role and experience their role?
• What kind of knowledge (emotional/cognitive) do they represent/present?
• How do they understand the way in which they address discrimination and existing stereotypical associations of the Sámi?

Whilst reflection is a part of all qualitative research (Skille 2022), RTA does not consider the researcher’s subjectivity an impediment to the interpretative process. Rather, it centres it, considering it an interpretative resource. However, as part of RTA, the researcher’s subjectivity needs to be examined when evaluating the data.

Since reflexivity is a criterion of qualitative analysis and Indigenous methodologies, as a non-Indigenous person, I considered this approach beneficial to help align with my ethical and decolonial objectives. RTA provided me with a technique to help me consider my own biases and limitations because it encourages “organic and recursive coding processes”, and the importance of deep reflection on, and engagement with, data” (Braun and Clarke 2019, p. 593). For instance, my analysis of the data was influenced by the knowledge that there had not been any prior research on the Sámi Pathfinders in Norwegian or English. My original intention was to focus on the discrimination experienced by the Pathfinders during their school visits. However, it became clear during the interviews that despite discrimination occurring during their visits, overall, the Pathfinders considered their year as a Pathfinder as positive. Furthermore, I was personally affected by the Pathfinders’ stories and wanted to ensure that I honoured the trust and information they had given me. As the first researcher to write about the Pathfinders, I felt a responsibility to ensure that the Pathfinders were not harmed by my research. This meant that I consciously did not direct any criticism towards the Pathfinders themselves, but rather to the overarching organisation/bodies responsible for the initiative. At the same time, it was important to not remove the Pathfinders’ sense of integrity or agency. Consequently, my revised focus was the impact the role had on them personally.

Whilst RTA involves six steps—(1) familiarising yourself with the dataset, (2) coding, (3) generating initial themes, (4) developing and reviewing themes, (5) refining, defining and naming themes, and (6) writing up)—the process of reviewing the data is organic and repetitive and required both explicit and interpretative analysis. Using this approach inductively with the Pathfinder data resulted in the following themes: (1) the complexity of knowledge sharing, (2) impediments to knowledge sharing in the classroom, and (3) the impact on the Pathfinders. In addition, Braun and Clarke (2019, 2022) explain that “the wider context of data shapes our interpretation of their meaning”. From an Indigenous perspective, context is extremely important to avoid essentialist and homogenous understandings of what it means to be Sámi. Furthermore, my positionality as a non-Indigenous researcher meant that I continually reflected on how I presented and represented the Pathfinders.

At the time of the study, the five Pathfinders interviewed comprised 7.5% of the total number of Pathfinders. A larger dataset may have provided the possibility of comparing similarities and differences in the data over time. However, since this study was part of a Master’s thesis, there was not sufficient time for such an expansive project. Additionally, I could have considered gender as a component of the data analysis given that over the past 20 years, most Pathfinders have been female. This was omitted, however, due to the introductory/generalised nature of the research.

4. Discussion

The Pathfinders were raised in an era where Sámi language and culture are associated with pride. Hansen and Skaar (2021) noted that a significant majority of Sámi youth take great pride in their Sámi culture and identity. It stands to reason then, that pride motivates the Pathfinders to apply for the position as a Pathfinder. While the Pathfinders interviewed represent diverse linguistical and geographical facets of contemporary Sámi identity, particularly a young Sámi identity, they also mirror broader challenges within the Sámi community concerning language loss and its implications for Sámi identity and belonging.

The Pathfinders showcase their personal, geographical and linguistic diversity in Norwegian schools to address discrimination and existing stereotypical associations of the Sámi. In Section 2, the Pathfinders were shown to redress stereotypical representations of the Sámi by representing the diversity and differences that exist within the Sámi community. This was evidenced by some Pathfinders coming from Sámi non-majority communities and others from Sami majority communities, and some from urban settings and others from rural. The statements provided by SP2 and SP3 showed that by becoming a Pathfinder, they hoped to challenge geographical and linguistic stereotypes about the Sámi in the classroom as well as within Sámi society. The SP Website provides varying degrees of detailed information about each Pathfinder since 2004. Based on this information, there have been 67 Pathfinders between 2004 to 2023. Of these, 70% of the Pathfinders have been female. Over half have been selected from Troms and Finnmark, Nordland and Trøndelag have had equal representation (13 and 14, respectively), and Oslo has had two (2). Overall, this means that Northern Norway has had the greatest representation, Eastern Norway has had minimal representation and Southern and Western Norway have had none. These figures do not allow for dual representation; that is, Pathfinders who identify with more than one city, county or region. Hence, SP2 and SP3’s indication that within the Sámi Pathfinder Initiative there is a “standard Pathfinder” is not unreasonable.

The idea of standardisation can evoke discomfort because in an Indigenous context, standardisation is often linked with notions of authenticity and essentialism. Certainly, SP3 expressed discomfort about the authenticity of their Sámi identity because they had not learnt Sámi as a child, and they lived in the city in the South of Norway. The difficulty expressed by SP3 in reconciling their urban and Sámi identities is common among urban Sámis (Dankertsen et al. 2022). Cultural markers, such as language and rurality in the Sámi community, are connected to identity and notions of belonging. But they are also influenced by perceptions of authenticity, which stem from colonial practices (Sissons 2005) that simplified and homogenised the Indigenous experience. This results in essentialised understandings of Sami identity connected to living on the land and traditional Sámi livelihoods (such as reindeer-herding, coastal and river fishing and gathering and hunting). It not only rejects the internal variation that exists within the Sámi community, but it does not acknowledge the importance of Indigenous urbanisation “for the survival of Indigenous identity, culture and community” (Dankertsen et al. 2022, p. 463).

The SK Report (2007) highlighted the importance of using emotions as a strategy to engage pupils. This strategy continues because the Pathfinders include their own or their family’s personal stories/histories in their classroom lectures. Arguably, 19–25-year-old Sámi youths are expected to actively use their emotions as a pedagogical tool. In this way, their representative role is no longer public or political, but rather, private. In their interviews, the Pathfinders expressed concern about this expectation, wondering “how much is one willing to share of oneself?” (SP3). In addition, the Pathfinders have no way of knowing how pupils and teachers will respond to this personalised knowledge.

The ethical implication of this requirement means that personalising their presentations is controversial. On the one hand, the inclusion of the Pathfinders’ personal narratives in their presentations can be seen as an effective means of connecting with and educating Norwegian youth. This was certainly the position the SK Report (2007) took. Through the distribution of knowledge, as opposed to confrontational encounters, the Pathfinders are foreseeably able to build positive encounters with pupils. On the other hand, this personal narrative can be viewed as placing the Pathfinder in a vulnerable position in a landscape where power, geography and social dynamics may result in uncomfortable classroom encounters, exposing them to discriminatory comments. Furthermore, when comparing the total number of contact-hours the Pathfinders have with Norwegian pupils and teachers to the number of contact hours pupils have with the Pathfinders in schools, the Pathfinders’ contact time with Norwegian pupils is far greater: 150 h versus 1.5 h, as estimated by SP4. So, what is the cumulative impact of these visits on the Pathfinders—emotionally, mentally and physically? This impact is also amplified by the Pathfinders’ heightened sense of responsibility attached to their representative role, notably that of representing the entire Sámi/Indigenous community. Despite the SK Report (2007) acknowledging the need to prepare the Pathfinders for challenging questions, it neither raises the question of how the Pathfinders are mentally or emotionally impacted by the inclusion of their personal narratives or the complexity of their representative role, nor does it suggest providing formal outlets for the Pathfinders to reflect on their experiences or receive psychological/emotional support. Similarly, SUAS does not provide these services either. In its place, the Pathfinders rely on each other, their families and friends.

The Pathfinders are actors within the Sámi indigenisation of mainstream education in Norway. They contribute to reconciliation efforts that seek to reinstate the loss and devaluation of Sámi knowledge caused by Norwegianisation (Olsen 2024). Through knowledge-sharing, the Pathfinders intentionally address current tensions between the Sámi and Norwegians. They actively challenge stereotypes, misinformation and hate speech by employing multi-layered and multi-dimensional articulation of their identities that provides knowledge that is both personal and political. They accomplish this by teaching about the history and culture of their people (past and present), framed within their status and rights as an Indigenous People, offering their own perspectives on these and other issues. By doing so, the Pathfinders encourage students to re-evaluate what they know about the Sámi and critically examine their own assumptions and biases. Importantly, by entering the classroom, the Pathfinders invite Norwegian youth to engage in peer-to-peer contact and discussions with a Sámi person. This “meeting” can prompt pupils to reflect on issues related to diversity, identity and discrimination. As a form of Indigenous Education that includes non-Indigenous People, the Pathfinders’ approach should contribute to reducing prejudices, thereby fostering transformation.

In sum, the Pathfinders provide a unique form of Indigenous Education that contributes to reducing the recognised knowledge gap that exists among Norwegian pupils and teachers. However, as SP5 reflected:

In an ideal world, the Sámi Pathfinder initiative should not have been necessary as the teachers really should be doing it. In my opinion, the initiative cannot exist forever, otherwise one has never managed to solve the actual problem.

In response to SP5’s statement, I raise the following unanswered questions: Whose responsibility is it to educate the majority society? How appropriate is it to place this burden on the shoulders of Sámi youth? How are we going to fill the identified knowledge-gap about the Sámi when a lack of teacher confidence and preparation, racist views and misunderstanding of curriculum are ongoing factors affecting the indigenisation of mainstream education? How are we going to fulfil the requirements of LK20 if higher educational institutions in Norway are not willing to move towards decolonisation? (Hansen 2022).

5. Conclusions

This study suggests that how and how often knowledge is presented matters. Merely presenting knowledge within an educational framework is insufficient to address issues such as discrimination and hate speech. Rather, as the Norwegian Human Rights Organisation report highlights, it matters how this knowledge is presented, and it is beneficial if knowledge is combined with direct contact with individuals from the Indigenous community, such as the Sámi Pathfinders. For optimal impact, this contact should be regular and positive.

Not only do the Pathfinders provide pupils and teachers with a great deal of knowledge about the Sámi, but they also anchor this knowledge in their personal stories and their multi-levelled representative expressions (individual, national, collective and international). Though controversial, the incorporation of the Pathfinders’ personal narratives into their presentations can be an effective method of engaging and educating Norwegian youth. Since the Pathfinders are similar in age to the Norwegian pupils, the knowledge the Pathfinders present may establish positive connections with pupils. However, whether these interactions are frequent and close enough to substantially influence pupils’ attitudes and prejudices in the long term is uncertain. Considering the present lack of empirical research examining pupils’ knowledge and attitudes towards the Sámi, before and after the Pathfinders’ visits, the Pathfinders’ ability to significantly change the attitudes of Norwegian pupils (and teachers) towards the Sámi is yet to be determined.