Supporting Children’s Psychosocial Well-Being in Sámi ECECs

Contextualisation of Sámi education

As mentioned above, decolonisation and, we want to add, Indigenisation, are important concepts in Sámi education. Decolonisation is a critical and deconstructive approach, exploring how continuous colonial impact on Indigenous communities still influences Sámi education. Decolonisation of EEECs means resisting “psychological developmental paradigms of children and childhoods, individualism over collectively and ongoing oppressive structures that serve to segregate Black, Indigenous and racialised children, families and communities, rather than fostering dialogue, solidarity and allyship” (Abawi, 2022, p. 123). Indigenisation focuses on making and remaking Indigenous spaces, methods, and voices (Olsen & Sollid, 2022, p. 19).

The education of Sámi children has been assimilative, and many Sámi are unable to speak their language (Keskitalo, 2022, p. 38). Colonisation entails exclusion, discrimination, and prejudices based on ethnicity, culture, and beliefs (Ministry of Education and Research, 2018, pp. 49–50). Four factors affect Sámi education. It is: (1) tainted by colonisation; (2) practised in a liminal position or in interfaces; (3) practised in the field of multiculturalism, and (4) practised with limited self-determination (Keskitalo et al., 2012). There is a fine line between decolonisation and inner driven development (Balto, 2005). Sámi education needs to be Indigenised through an approach highlighting diversity, and, according to Olsen and Sollid (2022, p. 19), needs a local approach.

According to Osler and Lindquist (2018, p. 6), there is almost a total lack of concepts relating to race and racism among teachers, which undermines their ability to deal with cultural racism and structural diversity. “Race, identity and Indigeneity are often downplayed and unacknowledged” in ECECs “due to the hegemony of psychological-developmentalist norms that depict young children as too young or too innocent to notice race or racial injustices” (Abawi, 2022, p. 121). Young children “are aware of cultural and racial differences, and children have both negative and positive attitudes towards their own and other’s racial communities” (Abawi, 2022, p. 115). MacNevin and Berman (2016, p. 827) criticise “the shortcomings of the focus on physical materials as the primary strategy for addressing ‘race’ and other forms of difference in early childhood education,” claiming that children’s play episodes emphasise how play reproduces systems of power and oppression in a broader social context. All these factors (racism, colonisation, losing Indigenous language, losing Sámi identity and culture) will influence children’s well-being because they are possible risk factors in children’s lives.

According to Angel et al. (2022), it is challenging to offer all Sámi children education in the Sámi language and culture, and in the Sámi language that they are entitled to under the Kindergarten Act and the Education Act. The Office of the Auditor General (2019) has found that the lack “of Sámi teaching aids weakens the provision of education,” and that a shortage of Sámi teachers is a persistent problem.

Sámi upbringing

While Sámi upbringing is often said to be influenced by collectivistic values, it is also affected by such individualistic values as autonomy. Balto (2005) found that Sámi parents seem to prefer less restrictions and routines than their Norwegian counterparts. Non-confrontational approaches where children themselves are supposed to solve challenges resonates with Sámi traditions. Sámi upbringing includes indirect communication and approaches to channelling or guiding children through the social system, often through storytelling and practices implicit in the language. Traditionally, kinship has had a great controlling function in Sámi society.

The risk of presenting a “Sámi upbringing” is that there is more than one Sámi identity, upbringing, mother tongue, culture, and way of life. The Sámi people experience their Sámi identity differently (Hansen & Skaar, 2021, p. 9). A dynamic approach to Sámi culture acknowledges that it is changing, varies from context to context, and interacts with the surrounding environment: “Essentialized descriptions and a static view on culture ignore individual innovation and the dynamics of culture. A dynamic approach to culture promotes individual choices and holds that cultural norms and values are not static” (Dagsvold et al., 2020, p. 368).

Recent studies on Sámi upbringing by Hansen and Skaar (2022, pp. 93–95) found that Sámi youth were satisfied and resilient despite external stress. The young people related to the influence of two or more cultures and had to balance these influences effectively. Many of the young people had experienced ethnic discrimination, bullying, and hate speech during their life span. The Sámi youth wanted to have social and cultural communities and meeting places, a feeling of belonging and connection, and recognition for their Indigenous identity. They mourned the loss of language, cultural heritage, and knowledge under the Norwegianisation process. Many young people reported having a close relationship with nature, which contributed positively to their mental and physical health. The Sámi youth wanted bonds, security, and attachment to their own identity, mother tongue, and culture. They struggled with a lack of recognition of their Sámi identity and culture in society, especially if they grew up outside Sámi majority areas, where there was less support for Sámi language, identity, and culture.

Theoretical approach – the concept of well-being

Well-being can be understood in different ways. Genetics, personality, domestic life, ECECs, environment, and the country’s welfare policy and welfare system interplay to affect child­ren’s well-being. Two main classifications for well-being are: (1) the hedonic and (2) the eudaimonic dimensions. A hedonic perspective of well-being is “the search for pleasure and happiness, being related to the experience of satisfaction, that is, what makes life pleasurable, the presence of positive affections and the absence of negative affects” (Giuntoli & Vidotto, 2020; Silva et al., 2023). Eudaimonic well-being is based on a long-term emotional process, positive personal relationships, life purpose, autonomy, environmental domain, self-acceptance, and personal growth and self-realisation (Giuntoli & Vidotto, 2020; Silva et al., 2023; Karunamuni & Weerasekera, 2019). These views are closely related and influence each other.

Dodge et al. (2012) have synthesizesed the complex concept of well-being in the following definition: “Stable well-being is when individuals have the psychological, social and physical resources they need to meet a particular physiological, social and/or physical challenge.”

Despite the lack of a uniform theory for children’s well-being, there is general consensus that it is a multi-dimensional, holistic concept encompassing many aspects of children’s lives (Lewis, 2019). Fattore et al. (2009) present three overarching and interconnected dimensions that are particularly important for children’s well-being: (1) positive sense of self: experiences of positive recognition and feeling a sense of belonging. (2) Agency – control in everyday life: being able to exert influence on everyday occurrences. (3) Security and safety: emotional security and having warm, satisfying and trusting relationships with adults and peers that enable children to fully engage in life. People develop in complex environments where the determinants of psychosocial well-being are multivariate (Eiroa-Orosa, 2020). These relationships are affected by power imbalances due to gender, economic, ethnic, and ability inequalities. Therefore, it is important to learn more about what is considered to support children’s well-being in Sámi contexts.

Good relationships are important for children’s well-being and development in general, regardless of cultural background. Ness and Munkejord (2021, p. 1) have shown that Sámi informants connected well-being to: “a) well-being through connection to nature; b) well-being through connection to reindeer; c) well-being through connection to family.” They argued that research on the well-being of people with a Sámi background should consider the individual’s life story and what constitutes well-being for them. Some Sámi studies indicate that family, relatives, and godparents are seen as particularly important in the socialisation of Sámi children. It seems that these family relations are sometimes practised and given meaning in a slightly different way than in other Norwegian cultures (Nergaard, 2011; Nystad et al., 2016). At the same time, this cannot be understood as essentializing, i.e., as truths about all Sámi children. All children have varied relationships to family, relatives, and other close associates. Good relationships are important among children who, due to Indigenous status, may be at risk of experiencing discrimination and prejudice – or lack of coherence between the home’s upbringing and the language and pedagogy of educational institutions (cf. Bjerklund & Åmot, 2020; Hansen, 2011; Hansen & Skaar, 2021; NIM, 2018; Midtbøen & Lidén, 2015).

Ethical considerations

We have taken a culturally sensitive approach in dialogue with a Sámi advisory board during the process. This advisory board had members from Sámi ECECs and national pre-school authorities. We discussed our work with this group, as this study aims to carefully take into consideration historical and personal backgrounds that influence research linked to the subject of Sámi rights and culture. Only one of the two researchers in charge of this study is Sámi.

It has been crucial to bear in mind the historical fact that research and the school system have been part of the colonisation of the Sámi people. Together with most other Indigenous peoples, Norwegian Sámi share a history of forced cultural assimilation and a recent history of political mobilisation and revival. The colonisation and assimilation of the Sámi people culminated in the nation-building policies primarily based on monocultural norms, called Norwegianisation. Due to the assimilation policy and colonisation processes, the Sámi population has not been able to promote their own understandings of the institutions created in a Norwegian context. This includes those related to Sámi education, such as the ECECs, the focus of this study.

Because the Sámi population is small, and our selection is limited, we do not specify whether the informants are Northern-, Southern-, or Lule-Sámi, the exact location of the interviews and so on, to ensure the informants’ anonymity.

Counterbalancing consequences of Norwegianisation and assimilation

The assimilation and Norwegianisation process influences the Sámi language and culture in different ways, where one is the everyday and pedagogical use of the Sámi language (Johansen & Markusson, 2022). We found traces of this in our material. In the interviews the informants talked about the importance of the Sámi language for Sámi culture and identity, for establishing relations, expressing feelings, and building relationships. One informant stated that language was the most important factor for children’s identity construction: “It’s about the entire identity of these children. You have your complete identity, and how you feel further into your life. We know that many are depressed because they never learnt the language.”

The ECECs also worked to vitalize Sámi culture. One informant explained that the staff and parents cooperated on defining what was characteristic of the Sámi culture in their area. She said this was done with tremendous respect for the city she worked in.

Due to the Norwegianisation process and possibly also to decolonisation, the Sámi pedagogy has had less room and time to develop than the Norwegian pedagogy (Johansen & Markusson, 2022). As minorities, many of our informants experienced having less prepared pedagogical resources and theories/methods adapted to their Indigenous culture. The Sámi pedagogy was hence updated and modernised by the ECECs, where they used research in their practice:

An ECEC teacher had discovered that the local authority was not providing the services Sámi children were legally entitled to, and that parents had not applied for language aids. She said that no other Norwegian ECECs in the city, and not even herself in her formal practice, had safeguarded Sámi rights well enough before she started working in the Sámi ECEC, adding: “So it’s clear the work [of the Sámi ECEC] was so important then for an Indigenous population that has simply been Norwegianised for many years, it gave me enormous motivation” (Marja, urban ECEC).

The ECECs in our sample lacked books in the Sámi languages and staff with sufficient knowledge of the Sámi language and culture. It was quite common that our informants made teaching material themselves, another informant translated books about scary adventures and made an emotion poster. Because inhabitants of Sámi culture were perceived as not expressing their feelings openly, some informants tried to counterbalance this.

Even though some Sámi informants did not think it was normal to talk about feelings in the Sámi culture, one informant thought it was common to express care, comfort, and affection in more practical ways:

The ECECs in our study said they wanted to make the experience of belongingness to Sámi culture positive for the children. They treated them both as culture bearers and as individuals with their own personality and identity at the same time:

We asked the informants what the implications were when the children were in a minority position. One informant said: “I believe that our duty in kindergarten is to strengthen that sense of identity, to believe in yourself and acquire good attitudes and values” (Mathis, rural ECEC). This points out the different ways the ECECs highlighted Sámi culture in a positive way to support children’s well-being. One ECEC tried to support the coexistence of children’s multiple cultural identities by highlighting that the children were both Indigenous and a part of the majority population:

One ECEC used research on Sámi identity and health to plan their didactic work and adapt their pedagogy to Sámi culture (decolonising the education): “We also know from studies that using nature is an important part of what Sámi youths have said has strengthened their identity and their mental health. That’s also one of the reasons why we use nature as much as we can” (Elen, rural ECEC).

The city council was interested in the use of nature in the identity work in the ECEC. The ECEC staff had used a book about Sámi markers in their discussions:

This indicates that Sámi educators may have a need to counterbalance the consequences of historical assimilation and Norwegianisation by developing and adapting Sámi pedagogy to Sámi culture(s) and decolonising Sámi education. Counterbalancing might involve such things as speaking of feelings in the Sámi language and according to Sámi culture, having access to books and pedagogical material to support communication on feelings, and perhaps developing and modernising the way the Sámi talk about feelings.

Closeness to nature and positive personal relationships are part of eudaimonic well-being (Giuntoli & Vidotto, 2020; Karunamuni & Weerasekera, 2019; Silva et al., 2023). Our informants also mentioned the importance of addressing children’s mixed identities as Sami and Norwegian. In a study by Hansen and Skaar (2021), young people found it demanding to be an Indigenous person who was supposed to master both the minority and the majority cultures.

The lack of Sámi-speaking staff, teaching materials, and pedagogical theory and methods, as our informants mentioned, could be consequences of the Norwegianisation and colonisation of Sámi education (The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2023). This might directly and indirectly influence children’s well-being. Not having staff speaking your native language might influence the children’s opportunity to express feelings in their native language and having them understood. The Sámi informants in our study talked openly about feelings to the children. The lack of Sámi teaching aids to help when talking to children about feelings could be language-related, considering the “small” languages, Lule-Sámi, and Southern-Sámi, or related to a lack of Sámi teaching aids for ECECs in general. The assumption that the Sámi do not talk about feelings might be based on cultural essentialism (Dagsvold et al., 2020), and this is then challenged by what these staff members say.

Addressing the risk of discrimination and threats of racism

The informants talked about addressing the risk of experiencing discrimination and racism as an Indigenous child. One informant said it was lonely and less valued being Sámi in her environment:

One informant said learning about the Sámi culture in all Norwegian and Sámi ECECs was important to counteract stereotypes in the future, and hence to protect the mental health of Sámi children: “This is important, so they don’t have to deal with questions like: ‘Do you have a two-storey lavvo?’ or ‘How many reindeer do you have?’ Without you having anything to do with reindeer, or reindeer herding” (Laara, urban ECEC).

Creating pride in children was used as a strategy to counterbalance racism:

One informant experienced a dilemma in preparing children for ethnic harassment, as it could make them think less of themselves:

Hence pride was seen as a possible counterbalance to the risk of Sámi children being both individualised and victimised by structural discrimination and/or racism. One ECEC informant talked about being safe in one’s own identity: “I just applaud that the children […] do not leave here with prejudice and racism […] we are so safe, as adults and as children, in who we are and where we come from” (Juhán, urban ECEC).

Ethnic pride was also considered important for highlighting Sámi culture in a positive way:

The informant found that it was inevitable that the children would face racism. Living with such a pessimistic view on the children’s future is a possible psychosocial health risk for both them and the staff. The Sámi ECECs tried to counteract racism and discrimination by supporting Sámi children’s identity and by actively using elements in Sámi culture to support children’s psychosocial development. In choosing these positive elements, some ECECs use research on such issues as the meaning of nature for psychosocial well-being among the Sámi (Ness & Munkejord, 2021).

The ECEC staff in our study negotiate the risk of racism in children’s lives with the aim of supporting their resilience in facing racism. Even though the framework plan for Norwegian kindergartens also addresses the prevention of bullying, discrimination, and exclusion, the Sámi context is different. The Sámi ECEC staff can have good reason to expect that the children will be exposed to racism and discrimination. Research shows that the prevalence of bullying, racism, and discrimination is a far more widespread phenomenon in the everyday life of Indigenous people than in the majority population (Eriksen et al., 2018; Hansen & Skaar, 2021; The Truth and Reconciliation Commission, 2023). Hence such phenomena as racism have a different meaning in a Sámi Indigenous context and will have different and possibly stronger implications for children’s well-being. If ECEC staff find it hard to talk about racism, the children will be unprepared when they in fact are faced with it. If they do talk about it, the children might not understand it or may feel marginalised. Research shows that in general, some Norwegian teachers find it hard to discuss racism (Osler & Lindquist, 2018, p. 26). These findings are from a majority context, without having to deal with the additional minority and Indigenous history. Nonetheless, several of the ECECs in our study talked about racism.

In a majority context, feeling shame over one’s own ethnic identity might never be a relevant subject to reflect on. Pride in being Norwegian is rarely a concept in research nor in everyday speech. But ethnic pride is a well-known subject that is discussed in everyday speech and in minority research. The ECEC staff implicitly interpret that they must address the possibility of ethnic shame in their pedagogical approach. What is for the majority population a taken-for-granted privilege, is something a Sámi pedagogy must work on in everyday life in ECECs.

Highlighting Sámi culture in a positive way

The informants transformed old knowledge on upbringing into modern pedagogical practices when highlighting Sámi culture, doing this in a positive way to improve children’s psychosocial well-being. They also tried to connect their own upbringing, ancestors, and further generations:

Another way of supporting children’s psychosocial well-being was to support their parti­cipation in overarching activities the informant thought were used by adults in other Norwegian ECECs:

Participation in ordinary, everyday activities was seen as a crucial way of highlighting Sámi culture. Moreover, the existential pain and sorrow of life was perceived as something not to be hidden from the children because exposing them to life as it is supported their resiliency, according to one informant:

Using various experiences and everyday Sámi markers in free play to support both cultural background and language development was underlined as important: “For example, we use kofte and coffee bags. It’s like consumer products for us then, they get to play with them and have a close relationship to them” (Marja, urban ECEC).

These Sámi markers were used in addition to exposing the children to Sámi culture in practice and in communication (storytelling) in the everyday life of the ECECs. Our informants valued Sámi early-development traditions, but they also said that it was important to be aware of new knowledge, to internalise the best from one’s own traditions, and to use relevant trends in childhood perspectives and policies. The ECECs supported Sámi identity construction by giving the children Sámi markers for use in play, and at the same time giving them experiences from Sámi cultural practices and thinking that could inspire their play with the cultural markers. This is a way of providing children with objects used in a culture so that they can identify with them, spin fantasies around them, and/or project their own cultural experiences on to them. Letting children participate in creating a Sámi culture through their own expressions here and now was important. At the same time, “simply providing children with racially and culturally diverse material […] is not sufficient to nurture positive racial identity development or to challenge biased and stereotyped beliefs and prepare children to confront racism and other forms of oppression when they encounter it” (MacNevin & Berman, 2016, p. 827). The authors thus recommend self-reflection among the ECEC staff, observing children’s play, getting inside of it, fostering positive identification with race, and talking openly about racism and ethnicity, in addition to using objects all the children can identify with.

The Sámi ECECs in our sample focused on participation, claiming there is a Sámi tradition for being especially good at involving children. Where Western culture often focuses on individual participation, our Sámi informants often focused on collectivistic participation and relating it to cultural socialisation and learning their culture more than in mainstream Norwegian ECECs.