Indigenous Graduate and Professional Students Decolonizing, Reconciling, and Indigenizing Belongingness in Higher Education

This qualitative study centers the experience of three Indigenous graduate and professional students, alongside reflections from one of the study’s lead researchers.  The study argues that authentic belonging in higher education must be grounded in Indigenous ways of knowing, relationality, and cultural identity.

Introduction

This qualitative study seeks to decolonize the concept of belongingness as it relates to Indigenous graduate and professional degree students by drawing from the experiences of three Indigenous men in graduate and professional degree programs in the United States. The authors define decolonization as disrupting the white-centered, settler-colonial perspectives, practices, and systems that marginalize Indigenous ways of knowing, being, and belonging.  Although many critical and Indigenous-centered theories explore the importance of cultural, spiritual, familial, and communal relationships in education,  relatively few studies have examined how these relationships shape the experiences of Indigenous students in higher education, a population that remains underrepresented in higher education research.  Addressing this gap, the authors offer a reframed definition of belonging, grounded in Indigenous identity, community, and knowledge systems. Rather than viewing belonging as students’ assimilation into or conformity with academic institutions, the study argues that institutions should cultivate environments that recognize, honor, and support Indigenous cultural identities. 

The first author, Adam J. Alejandro is a descendent of the Chiricahua Apache and Mexican Indigenous Nations and also identifies as Chicano. At the time of the study, he was a doctoral student in the  Curriculum and Instruction program at Texas State University, and his autoethnography served as a primary data source for this study. Cartlon J. Fong, an Asian American scholar and  Assistant Professor of Curriculum and Instruction at Texas State University contributed equally to the article. The third author, Yvonne M. De La Rosa, is a descendant of the Purépecha Indigenous people from Monte San Nicolás, Guanajuato, Mexico and also identifies as Mexican American. At the time of this study,  De La Rosa was a doctoral student of Counseling, Leadership, Adult Education, and School Psychology program at Texas State University. 

Methods and Findings

This study examines the tension between Indigenous students’ senses of belonging and higher education institutions with white-centered, settler-colonial roots. The authors grounded their analysis in the framework of Peoplehood, which examines four interwoven dimensions: 

• shared history and understanding of Native people’s origins;
• sense of place and connection between land and identity;
• shared language that translates to ways of knowing and socialization; and
• the profound role of spirituality to Indigenous worldviews.

The study was conducted in two phases. The first phase involved a qualitative, collective case study focused on the experiences of three Indigenous graduate and professional students attending different universities in the US. The second phase drew on first author Adam Alejandro’s autoethnographic reflections on his experiences with colonialism within higher education as an Indigenous graduate student. His  autoethnographic poems,  drawing on journal entries, field notes, and memos from informal conversations before and after the formal interviews, accompanied each participant’s narrative. The researchers, particularly Alejandro, prioritized building rapport with participants, reflecting Indigenous research methodologies that emphasize relationality and reciprocity. 

The analysis was further informed by two critical frameworks. Critical Race Theory (CRT) was used to examine marginalized communities and the power dominant culture of higher institutions, while TribalCrit, an Indigenous-specific extension of CRT, provided a decolonizing lens for understanding Indigenous students’ experiences within those institutions. 

 A central finding was that all three participants navigated ongoing tensions between their Indigenous identities and the demands of Western academic institutions.   For example, one study participant described grading an exam in which a student reduced centuries of colonization to the claim that “De Soto learned never to trust an Indian.” Rather than accepting this framing, the study participant used his positionality as a teaching assistant to challenge the colonial narrative that blamed Indigenous peoples rather than examining the violence perpetrated by colonizers, promoting a more historically accurate understanding of colonization. This experience illustrates how Indigenous scholars can resist and correct dominant, often distorted, narratives within academic institutions rather than simply assimilating to or withdrawing from them. 

Ultimately, the authors argue that decolonizing Western educational institutions that reproduce the marginalization of Indigenous and racially minoritized students requires centering the lived experiences of those who navigate the intersection of competing systems of knowledge, Western and Indigenous. 

Conclusions

Indigenous graduate and professional students do not experience belonging by assimilating into Eurocentric institutions. Rather, belonging is  cultivated through relationships rooted in their cultural identities. Centering the narratives of three Indigenous men, this study calls on  institutions to embrace Indigenous perspectives on belonging through changes at three levels: 

• Interpersonal: Faculty and student affairs professionals should actively learn about the histories and identities of Indigenous graduate students to decolonize their own thinking and foster genuine allyship and trust rather than performative support. The authors illustrate this through a study participant’s sustained relationship with a vice dean who personally recognized his value.
• Instructional: Instructors should intentionally affirm and incorporate Indigenous narratives,  perspectives, and ways of knowing into classroom discussions, rather than privileging narrow, linear responses that some participants described encountering from unreceptive faculty.
• Institutional: Universities should   establish and sustain Indigenous cultural and academic centers on campus that provide essential spaces for language, ceremony, cultural practices, and community building. 

Finally, the authors also emphasize that understanding these theoretical implications is insufficient on its own.  They argue that theory must be translated into practice to advance meaningful social change and transform Eurocentric institutional structures.