INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9561
www.rsisinternational.org
Divergent Histories: Narrative Asymmetry in French and English
History Curricula in Canada
Dr. Laurent Poliquin
Canadian Institute for Open Knowledge, Winnipeg, Canada
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.903SEDU0726
Received: 22 November 2025; Accepted: 01 December 2025; Published: 08 December 2025
ABSTRACT
What happens when students in the same country learn markedly different versions of its past? This article
examines divergent narratives in French- and English-language history curricula across six Canadian provinces
outside Québec. Drawing on a comparative analysis of Grades 7–11 curriculum documents and critical discourse
analysis of key expectations and rationales, it identifies persistent asymmetries in how francophone minority
histories are represented… or omitted. French-language curricula tend to foreground resistance, community
survival, and political agency, whereas English-language curricula frequently marginalise or dilute episodes such
as the Conquest (1759), Regulation 17, and the legacy of Louis Riel. These contrasts are not merely lexical; they
organise different distributions of agency, responsibility, and visibility, with significant consequences for how
students learn to imagine who belongs to the national “we”. To capture this structural imbalance, the article
develops the concept of narrative asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems and argues that such curricular
inequity undermines both bilingualism and civic pluralism. The discussion then explores the identity and
pedagogical implications of these asymmetries, showing how they shape francophone and anglophone students’
sense of recognition, legitimacy, and historical understanding. The article concludes by outlining avenues toward
narrative equity in history education through curriculum reform, teacher education, and historical-thinking
pedagogy, and suggests how this framework might be adapted to other multilingual societies grappling with
tensions between official narratives and marginalised histories.
Keywords: History education, Curriculum studies, Bilingualism in Canada, National identity, Francophone
minorities
INTRODUCTION
What happens when young people who share a country do not share a past? In officially bilingual Canada, history
education is supposed to be a meeting place for collective memory, civic identity, and mutual recognition. Yet
growing evidence suggests that francophone and anglophone students often leave secondary school with sharply
different, sometimes incompatible, understandings of what Canada has been and who counts within it
(Létourneau, 2014). This is not only a Canadian paradox. It echoes a broader question for multilingual
democracies: whose histories are carried by the curriculum, and whose are quietly set aside?
This article responds to that question by examining discrepancies between French- and English-language history
curricula in six Canadian provinces: Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, and New
Brunswick, where French-speaking communities live as minorities. We deliberately exclude Quebec, where
French is the majority language and the education system is shaped by a distinct national narrative. Our focus is
on settings where identity, belonging, and language rights are negotiated within officially bilingual but
structurally asymmetrical schooling systems. As researchers working in and with minority francophone contexts,
we are acutely aware that these asymmetries are not abstract. They are felt in classrooms, staff rooms, and
community debates. Our central research question is: to what extent do provincial curricula in both official
languages convey different historical narratives, and what are the implications for students’ identity formation
and intergroup understanding?
At stake are more than technical questions of scope and sequencing. While bilingualism is constitutionally
enshrined, its pedagogical enactment remains uneven. Ongoing debates on language rights, cultural recognition,
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9562
www.rsisinternational.org
and educational equity suggest that curriculum is one of the places where these tensions crystallise. Recent
studies have shown that French-language programmes often foreground key moments of resistance and struggle,
such as Règlement 17 in Ontario or the role of Louis Riel in Manitoba, whereas English-language curricula tend
to mute, relativise, or omit the same episodes (Brunet & Gani, 2023; Chouinard & Wallner, 2023). When young
people encounter conflicting stories about the same events, the result is a fractured civic narrative that
complicates efforts to build mutual respect within a shared polity. In a global context where polarised histories
fuel mistrust, this fragmentation should concern educators and policymakers far beyond Canada (Karn,
Llewellyn, & Clark, 2024; Tuck & Yang, 2012).
We treat official programmes of study as narrative frameworks that invite students to locate themselves in time,
space, and community, drawing on work in curriculum studies, political philosophy, and memory studies
(Létourneau, 2014; Ricoeur, 2000; Taylor, 1994; Thériault, 2007). Our comparative analysis makes two main
contributions. First, we introduce the concept of narrative asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems to
name the uneven representation and valuation of collective histories within state-mandated French- and English-
language curricula. Second, we offer, to our knowledge, the first systematic multi-province comparison of paired
French- and English-language history curricula (Grades 7–11) outside Québec, using a common analytic grid
that attends to vocabulary, representations of agency, and the presence or absence of francophone minority
narratives. Taken together, these contributions extend existing work on nation-building and curriculum
(Chouinard & Wallner, 2023) by shifting the focus from isolated systems to the relational dynamics of bilingual
education, and by centring francophone minorities as a critical lens for rethinking equity in Canadian history
education (Dallaire & Denis, 2005; Luoma, 2024). Building on recent studies of Canadian history curricula
(Brunet & Gani, 2023; Chouinard & Wallner, 2023), our contribution is both conceptual and empirical, with a
particular emphasis on a comparative, text-based analysis. Rather than asking only whether francophone
experiences “appear” in provincial documents, we follow two intertwined questions: what kinds of stories about
francophones are told in each language stream, and what work do these stories do in shaping how young people
learn to imagine who belongs, who decides, and who remembers? By placing side by side the French- and
English-language curricula of six provinces outside Québec, we treat bilingual schooling not simply as a
technical arrangement of programmes but as a shared narrative space in which recognition is unevenly
distributed.
Throughout the article, we use the expression narrative asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems to name
this pattern, and we work towards a more hopeful counter-horizon that we call narrative equity. By narrative
equity we mean a condition in which different language communities have a fair chance to see their histories
named, contextualised, and debated within the common school. We do not claim to offer a grand theory of
memory or nationhood. What we offer instead is an empirically grounded, comparative map of how current
curricula pull francophone and anglophone students toward different understandings of Canada’s past, and an
invitation to think with teachers, policymakers, and communities about what a more equitable narrative
landscape might require.
Methodologically, the study employs a comparative qualitative design focused on provincial history and social
studies curricula for Grades 7 to 11 in both language streams. We analyse recent documents from six provinces,
examining key events, actors, and themes, as well as the lexical choices and narrative arcs that surround them,
within the broader context of reforms in history education and historical thinking (Seixas & Morton, 2013;
Duquette, Pageau, & Tremblay, 2023; Gibson, Peck, Miles, & Duquette, 2025). Four tables embedded in the
manuscript summarise, respectively, the corpus of curriculum documents and the comparative treatment of Louis
Riel, Regulation 17, and the Conquest, in order to enhance transparency and to facilitate dialogue with
researchers and policymakers in Canada and in other multilingual systems. The article proceeds in six sections:
the next section outlines the theoretical and empirical background that informs our analysis; Section 3 details
our methodological choices; Section 4 presents the comparative findings; Section 5 discusses the pedagogical
and identity implications of narrative asymmetry; and Section 6 synthesises the contributions of the study and
draws out lessons for the future of bilingual curriculum design in Canada and other multilingual societies.
THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND BACKGROUND
Understanding how historical narratives shape, affirm, or erase collective identities in bilingual societies requires
an approach that holds together political philosophy, curriculum studies, sociolinguistics, and memory studies.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9563
www.rsisinternational.org
In Canada, where language, territory, and national identity remain contested rather than settled, what appears as
“content” in the history classroom is also a series of choices about power, belonging, and legitimacy. Curriculum
is never a neutral space. It encodes decisions about which events, figures, and values are deemed essential for
forming the “good citizen” (Apple, 2004; Bouchard, 2017). In history education, this function is magnified:
curricula select and organise fragments of the past to tell a story about who “we” are, what “we” have endured,
and what “we” have a duty to remember. This narrative role resonates with Anderson’s (1983) notion of
“imagined communities”, in which nations emerge through shared media, commemorations, and statesponsored
narratives rather than any pre-given cultural essence.
In officially bilingual Canada, at least two partly overlapping imagined communities coexist within a single
constitutional project. English- and French-speaking populations often learn parallel, and sometimes
incompatible, histories, particularly in provinces where French is a minority language. Research on minority
francophone youth shows that they do not simply “add” English to a stable francophone identity, but live what
Dallaire and Denis (2005) call asymmetrical hybridities: blends of francophoneness and anglophoneness
structured by unequal power relations. Their work on events such as the Jeux de l’Acadie and Jeux
francoontariens suggests that francophone identities are reproduced as components of hybrid cultural and
linguistic identities in which English remains dominant. This insight underpins our use of narrative asymmetry
to describe how French- and English-language curricula can offer structurally unbalanced accounts of the past,
even when they refer to similar events.
Ricoeur’s (2000) work on memory, history, and forgetting provides a second pillar of our framework. For
Ricoeur, historical writing is not a neutral chronicle but a work of emplotment: the weaving of coherent stories
out of fragmentary traces. Forgetting is not simply the absence of memory. It is built into every narrative, since
remembering some things means sidelining others. In school curricula, this dynamic appears both in explicit
content and in what is often called the hidden curriculum: silences, omissions, and implicit hierarchies that shape
students’ worldviews as powerfully as prescribed knowledge.
When a provincial programme presents certain episodes as foundational, for example Confederation or the
Charter, and treats others, such as Règlement 17 or the Manitoba Schools Question, as marginal or optional, it
performs an act of narrative selection that is also an act of political ordering. Lexical choices matter here.
Vocabulary such as “educational reform” instead of “assimilation,” or “shift of power” instead of “conquest,”
softens conflict and folds minority experiences into a story of gradual reconciliation (Luoma, 2024; Tuck &
Yang, 2012).
These silences are not only curricular but ontological. Taylor’s (1994) theory of recognition insists that identities
emerge dialogically, in relation to how others acknowledge or misrecognise us. When official curricula fail to
give sustained space to the historical struggles and cultural production of linguistic minorities, this absence
becomes a form of symbolic violence, a denial of a group’s historical legitimacy. Taylor (1994) warns that
persistent misrecognition can generate fragmentation, alienation, and resentment, especially among young
people who are still building their civic and cultural selves.
In the Canadian context, Cardinal (2005) and Thériault (2007) argue that many francophone minorities function
as minority nations rather than simple ethnolinguistic groups. They seek not only cultural inclusion but
recognition as political agents with their own historical trajectories. This distinction is central to our interest in
how curricula allocate narrative space to francophone communities outside Québec.
At the same time, contemporary research on history education reminds us that students do not simply absorb
curricular narratives; they negotiate, reassemble, and sometimes contest them. Since the early 2000s, several
Canadian provinces have adopted “historical thinking” and inquiry-based models that foreground sourcing,
evidence use, and perspective-taking over memorisation of dates (Seixas & Morton, 2013; Lévesque, 2017). In
practice, this can mean working with primary documents, reconstructing events from multiple viewpoints, or
conducting local oral history projects. Empirical work suggests that many teachers use this flexibility to
foreground community resilience and connect historical events to students’ lived experiences, including
francophone minority histories (Duquette, Pageau, & Tremblay, 2023; Gibson, Peck, Miles, & Duquette, 2025).
As reported in a Francopresse investigation, for example, Manitoba educator Joël Ruest emphasises the need to
help students “find their place in the francophonie” by explicitly teaching the history of language-rights struggles
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9564
www.rsisinternational.org
in Western Canada (Dépelteau, 2025). Research on two-way bilingual education offers a useful parallel.
Hamman-Ortiz and Palmer (2023) argue that student identity work should not be treated as a secondary outcome
but as central to the goals of sociocultural competence and a “fourth goal” of sociopolitical consciousness,
following Freire. Their framework underscores that children in dual-language programmes actively make sense
of complex power dynamics in and beyond the classroom. We draw on this insight to think about how
francophone and anglophone youth in Canadian schools interpret the histories that curricula make available, or
keep off-stage.
However, these pedagogical possibilities unfold within a policy environment shaped by neoliberal and
neoconservative logics. Di Giovanni and Parker (2024), in their study of Ontario education reform, describe how
discourses of choice, accountability, and performance metrics frame education as a competitive market, while
moralising language appeals to anxieties about order, values, and national cohesion. Within such a “markets and
morals” configuration, curriculum expectations remain central instruments of governance: they underpin
assessment, guide resource allocation, and signal what knowledge is considered worthwhile. Comparative
research in other subjects reinforces this structural reading. In a mixed-methods study of numeracy curricula and
teacher education in Québec and Ontario, Vezina (2023) shows how differences in curricular organisation and
theoretical coherence correspond to divergent trajectories in student achievement. Her work, though focused on
mathematics, underscores two points crucial for our purposes: provincial curricula are deeply embedded in wider
policy logics, and cross-jurisdictional comparison can reveal patterns that remain invisible within a single
system.
Taken together, these strands help us frame a central tension in our investigation: the space between curricular
structure and pedagogical agency. Teachers in the provinces we examine do have interpretive room, and many
use it to broaden narratives, integrate Indigenous and minority perspectives, or connect official content to local
histories. Research on bilingual and dual-language education documents moments where students and teachers
subvert programme structures and reorient them toward more emancipatory aims (Hamman-Ortiz & Palmer,
2023). Yet when systemic silences are embedded in the curriculum itself, the burden of correction falls unevenly
on individual educators and communities. Without institutional support, explicit expectations, or suitable
materials, the histories of francophone minorities remain optional, vulnerable to omission, and dependent on
local will rather than shared responsibility.
In this article, we therefore bring together four strands. First, we treat curriculum as a narrative technology of
the nation, drawing on Anderson (1983) and Ricoeur (2000) to analyse how stories of the past are assembled and
what they leave unsaid. Second, we mobilise Taylor’s (1994) theory of recognition, along with Cardinal’s (2005)
and Thériault’s (2007) work on minority nations, to interpret curricular inclusion or exclusion as a matter of
justice rather than simple representation. Third, we build on research on asymmetrical hybridity in francophone
youth identities (Dallaire & Denis, 2005) and on identity negotiation in two-way bilingual education (Hamman-
Ortiz & Palmer, 2023) to highlight how curricular asymmetries are lived in students’ everyday meaning-making.
Finally, we situate provincial history curricula within a neoliberal policy environment that shapes both content
and reform rhetoric (Di Giovanni & Parker, 2024; Vezina, 2023). Together, these strands support our central
concept of narrative asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems and orient our comparative analysis of
French- and English-language history programmes in six Canadian provinces.
METHODOLOGY
Our primary data consist of provincial curriculum documents in history and social studies for Grades 7 to 11 in
six provinces outside Québec. For each province, we collected the most recent French- and Englishlanguage
programs available at the time of the study and treated them as parallel windows on how public schooling frames
the past for different language groups. We read these documents comparatively, attending to four recurring
questions: which francophone actors and communities are named; which events involving language conflict or
school rights are foregrounded or muted; how responsibility and agency are distributed across groups; and what
kinds of civic dispositions students are invited to adopt. This work combines a descriptive mapping of content
with a more interpretive discourse analysis focused on lexical choices, silences, and the narrative arcs constructed
around key episodes such as the Conquest, Louis Riel, Regulation 17, and constitutional reform.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9565
www.rsisinternational.org
The study adopts a comparative, qualitative research design to identify and interpret divergences between
French- and English-language curricula in officially bilingual but structurally asymmetrical schooling systems.
The six provinces—Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, and New Brunswick—were
selected on the basis of two criteria: (a) the presence of an officially recognised francophone minority population;
and (b) the availability of both French- and English-language curriculum documents, making within-province
comparison possible. Québec is intentionally excluded because its status as a francophone-majority province,
with a distinct curricular logic and national narrative, would introduce a different kind of asymmetry and risk
obscuring the dynamics of minority francophone schooling that are central to this study.
Although this study engages exclusively with official curriculum documents, this focus is deliberate rather than
incidental. Our aim is to analyse the narrative architecture of state-sanctioned history education: the policy
frameworks that define what counts as legitimate content, how events are sequenced, and which collectivities
are named as historical agents. In doing so, we follow curriculum studies and critical discourse research that treat
official programs as a privileged window onto nation-building projects and the distribution of symbolic
recognition in schools (Apple, 2004; Brunet & Gani, 2023; Chouinard & Wallner, 2023). The findings therefore
speak primarily to the constraints and possibilities embedded in these texts, rather than to the full range of
classroom practices that teachers and students may enact in response to them.
Within each province, the corpus includes the most recent iterations of the relevant history or social studies
curricula available at the time of data collection. All documents were published after 2010 and, in most cases,
after the 2015–2018 reform cycle that foregrounded competencies, inquiry-based learning, and more inclusive
language in history education (Seixas & Morton, 2013; Lévesque, 2017). Curriculum documents were
downloaded and archived between August and November 2025; readers should therefore interpret the findings
in light of ongoing revisions that may not yet be fully implemented in classrooms. This temporal framing matters:
it allows us to ask whether, in an era of explicit commitments to diversity and reconciliation, francophone
minority histories are integrated into or sidelined from official narratives. The analysis focuses on programme
rationales, core learning expectations, and content strands that address Canadian history, colonial and
postcolonial developments, Indigenous perspectives, immigration, and provincial histories. Particular attention
is given to both explicit references to francophone communities and implicit narrative framings of linguistic and
cultural diversity.
To make sense of these documents as narrative and political artefacts, the study combines thematic content
analysis with critical discourse analysis (CDA). Thematic content analysis is used first, to establish a systematic
overview of francophone presence or absence in each curriculum. The analysis began with an exploratory reading
of all documents, during which recurring references to francophone actors, language rights, and schooling were
noted. Based on this initial pass, a provisional coding grid was developed, including categories such as: (a)
whether francophone communities outside Québec are mentioned; (b) which events involving francophone
actors are included; (c) the roles assigned to francophone figures (for example, victims, rebels, intermediaries,
founders, builders); and (d) whether institutional struggles for language rights and school governance are
addressed explicitly. These categories were then applied systematically across the corpus, with analytic memos
used to record emerging patterns, ambiguities, and links to the theoretical framework. Table 1 provides an
overview of the curriculum documents analysed in this study, by province, level, language, and year of
publication.
Table 1. List of Official Curriculum Documents Analyzed
Province
Language
Title
Year
Ontario
English
The Ontario Curriculum: Canadian and World Studies, Grades 9–10
2018
Ontario
French
Le curriculum de l’Ontario : Études canadiennes et mondiales, 9e et 10e
année
2018
Manitoba
English
Social Studies Curriculum Framework: Grade 11 – History of Canada
2019
Manitoba
French
Cadre de l’apprentissage – Sciences humaines : 11e année – Histoire du
Canada
2019
Saskatchewan
English
Social Studies 30: Canadian Studies Curriculum Guide
2012
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9566
www.rsisinternational.org
Saskatchewan
French
Études canadiennes 30 : Guide pédagogique
2012
Alberta
English
Social Studies 10–20–30 Program of Studies
2021
Alberta
French
Programme d’études : Études sociales 10–20–30
2021
British Columbia
English
BC Social Studies 9–11 Curriculum Overview
2018
British Columbia
French
Aperçu du curriculum : Sciences humaines 9 à 11
2018
New Brunswick
English
Canadian History 122 Curriculum
2019
New Brunswick
French
Histoire du Canada 122 : Programme d’études
2019
Building on Fairclough (1995) and van Dijk (1998), CDA is then employed to examine lexical choices,
grammatical structures, and recurring discursive patterns in the curriculum texts. Here the focus shifts from
whether francophones are present to how they are positioned through language. We analyse, for example, how
Louis Riel is labelled (“rebel”, “resistor”, “father of Manitoba”), how the Conquest of 1759 is characterised
(“power shift”, “transfer of sovereignty”, “military occupation”), and whether francophone communities are
portrayed as contributors to national development, obstacles to unity, or regional exceptions. These micro-level
choices are treated as markers of deeper narrative logics: they signal which groups are granted agency, which
conflicts are softened or depoliticised, and which trajectories are cast as central or peripheral. In this sense, CDA
allows us to connect apparently technical wording to broader questions of recognition, legitimacy, and national
belonging (Apple, 2004; Taylor, 1994; Thériault, 2007).
Initial coding and recoding were conducted by the first author. To enhance consistency, the coding grid was
refined iteratively. After the initial pass across all documents, a subset of curricula from two provinces was
recoded several weeks later and the results compared. Discrepancies were used to clarify category boundaries,
adjust illustrative examples, and ensure that codes were applied in a conceptually coherent manner, rather than
to calculate a formal reliability coefficient. Throughout this process, memo-writing and repeated returns to the
theoretical framework supported reflexivity and helped reduce idiosyncratic readings. The summary tables in the
findings section illustrate how these categories were operationalised for key events and actors across provinces.
This study acknowledges several limitations, which are important to contextualise the scope and claims of our
analysis. First, while curriculum documents represent the official policy framework, they do not fully determine
classroom practice. Teachers retain significant autonomy in how they interpret, sequence, and deepen prescribed
content, and students actively reconstruct meaning in ways that cannot be inferred from policy texts alone. We
do not analyse textbooks, classroom observations, or assessment materials, nor do we systematically interview
teachers in each jurisdiction. As a result, our findings should be read as identifying the state-sanctioned narrative
template that frames history education, rather than offering a comprehensive account of how historical narratives
are enacted in everyday classrooms.
Second, the study adopts a qualitative, interpretive approach to thematic content analysis and CDA. Coding was
carried out iteratively by the first author, with codes and categories refined through repeated close readings,
memo-writing, and returns to the theoretical framework (Fairclough, 1995; van Dijk, 1998). We did not calculate
inter-coder reliability or engage a second independent coder. In a discourse-analytic design of this kind, the
primary aim is interpretive coherence rather than statistical agreement, but we recognise that additional forms of
validation, such as multiple coders, peer debriefing, or member checking with educators, would further
strengthen the analysis. To compensate in part, we have made the coding grid and corpus as transparent as
possible by describing our categories in detail in the methodology section and by including comparative tables
of formulations and terminology in the findings section, so that readers can see how our interpretations are
grounded in the curriculum texts themselves.
Third, recent pedagogical reforms and teacher-led initiatives mean that curriculum is best understood as one
layer in a broader curriculum ecosystem that also includes resource selection, local projects, and community
partnerships (Dallaire & Denis, 2005; Hamman-Ortiz & Palmer, 2023; Seixas & Morton, 2013). Some teachers
may actively compensate for curricular silences by drawing on local archives, oral histories, or community
knowledge, particularly in francophone minority settings. Our document-based design cannot capture this
compensatory work, but the patterns of omission and asymmetry identified here signal the institutional baseline
from which such practices must depart.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9567
www.rsisinternational.org
Finally, the comparative scope of six provinces entails a degree of abstraction. Each province has its own
curricular style, learning outcomes framework, and political context. Even within a single jurisdiction, French-
and English-language programs may be structured differently, not only in terms of content, but also in how
competencies and themes are integrated.
We have mitigated this complexity by focusing on a limited set of recurring events and actors, by including
detailed comparative tables and excerpts in the findings section, and by grounding our interpretations in direct
textual evidence. Nevertheless, the analysis necessarily simplifies some contextual nuances, and we encourage
researchers to build on this work through province-specific case studies, textbook analyses, and classroom-based
inquiries.
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF CURRICULUM CONTENT
This section presents the results of a comparative analysis of French- and English-language history curricula in
Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, British Columbia, and New Brunswick. We organise the findings
into four dimensions: (1) terminology and dominant narrative framing; (2) representation of key historical events
and actors; (3) visibility of francophone minorities outside Québec; and (4) the comparative treatment of
francophone and Indigenous narratives. Across all four, a consistent pattern emerges: English curricula tend to
offer neutralised, multicultural narratives that minimise language conflict, whereas French curricula foreground
struggle, resistance, and institutional marginalisation. The following subsections summarise these patterns, with
comparative tables highlighting provincial variation.
Terminology and dominant narrative framing
Key finding. Across all six provinces, the lexical and discursive framing of major historical events differs
systematically between French- and English-language curricula. English versions tend to employ abstract,
bureaucratic, or euphemistic wording that softens conflict and obscures power asymmetries, while French
versions make more frequent use of terms associated with conquest, domination, resistance, and collective rights.
These contrasts are not incidental stylistic choices; they signal deeper narrative logics about who is portrayed as
a legitimate historical agent and how linguistic minorities are positioned within the Canadian project (Apple,
2004; Fairclough, 1995; van Dijk, 1998).
A first illustration concerns the British Conquest of New France (1759–1763), a turning point that reconfigured
political authority and laid the groundwork for the minoritisation of French-speaking populations. In several
English curricula (notably in British Columbia and Ontario), the event is referred to as a “transfer of power,”
“shift in colonial rule,” or “change in governance,” terms that foreground institutional continuity rather than
dispossession. By contrast, French versions speak of “la Conquête,” “la perte de la Nouvelle-France,” or “la
domination britannique,” explicitly naming loss and subordination. As summarised in Table 2, this lexical
divergence recurs across provinces, even when the underlying content headings are otherwise aligned.
Table 2. Representation of The Conquest in Secondary History Curricula (Grades 7–11)
Language
Curricular Reference to The
Conquest
Lexical
Framing / Role
Assigned
Presence of Francophone
Historical Perspective
French
The Conquest of 1759 is presented
as a major turning point leading to
British domination and the loss of
rights for French Canadians.
Conquest,
subjugation,
loss of
sovereignty
Yes – marked critical
contextualization
English
Students explore the transition of
New France to British control in
1763.
Transfer of
power, colonial
transition
No – French-speaking
perspective absent
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9568
www.rsisinternational.org
—
—
—
—
French
Mention of the Conquest in the
context of political and social
transformations in the 18th century.
Regime change,
cultural loss
Yes – mentioned in a
measured but present
manner
English
Students examine the British
acquisition of New France.
Acquisition,
peaceful
transition
Partial – little French
Canadian perspective
French
Brief mention of the Conquest in a
unit on colonization and empires.
Imperial
conflict, loss of
autonomy
Yes – but not in depth
English
The shift of power from France to
Britain is presented as part of
colonial rivalry.
Imperial
conflict, shift of
power
No – French-speaking
perspective absent
The Red River and North-West uprisings led by Louis Riel (1869–1870, 1885) offer a second example. English
curricula in Alberta and Saskatchewan frequently label these events as “rebellions” that “threatened national
unity,” whereas French curricula are more likely to employ terms such as “résistance,” “mouvement de défense,”
or “affirmation de droits collectifs,” foregrounding Métis and francophone claims to land, culture, and political
recognition. In Manitoba’s French programme, Riel is described as “fondateur de la province et défenseur des
droits des minorités,” while the English curriculum focuses on “the controversy surrounding his trial and
execution for treason.” These lexical choices assign agency and moral authority differently, framing Riel either
as a destabilising figure or as a legitimate representative of a marginalised people.
Finally, Lord Durham’s Report on the Affairs of British North America (1839) is often presented in English
curricula as “a foundational document for reform” or a step toward responsible government. French versions,
while acknowledging its role in institutional change, devote greater attention to Durham’s infamous
characterisation of French Canadians as “a people without history and without culture” (Durham, 1839/2006, p.
xx). In most English-language texts, this passage is either downplayed or omitted. Here again, quotation and
omission practices reassign moral depth: one language stream presents Durham primarily as an architect of
progress, the other as a source of symbolic violence and delegitimation. Together, these examples show how
terminology functions as a key mechanism of narrative asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems.
Key historical events and actors
Key finding. When we track specific events and actors across provinces, we observe systematic asymmetries in
both inclusion and interpretation. Four moments are particularly revealing: the Conquest (1759–1763), the Red
River and North-West conflicts, Regulation 17 in Ontario, and the 1980–1982 constitutional crisis. French
curricula tend to frame these as turning points in the struggle for francophone and Métis rights, while English
curricula either omit them, treat them briefly, or interpret them primarily through national unity and institutional
reform.
The Conquest (1759–1763). In French-language curricula in Ontario and New Brunswick, the Conquest is
consistently presented as a rupture in which “la Nouvelle-France est perdue” and francophones are subjected to
“la domination britannique.” Learning expectations invite students to analyse the consequences for language
rights, religion, and institutional control. In English curricula, when the Conquest appears at all outside
Québecfocused units, it is often described in terms of “a shift in imperial power” or “outcomes of the Seven
Years’ War,” with little attention to long-term linguistic and cultural effects on francophone communities. This
framing encourages students to view the event as a geopolitical adjustment rather than the beginning of a durable
asymmetry in status and recognition.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9569
www.rsisinternational.org
Louis Riel and Métis resistance. Riel is the most visible francophone-associated figure across the six provinces,
yet his portrayal remains highly contingent on language stream. In Manitoba’s French curriculum, he is explicitly
named “fondateur du Manitoba” and “leader métis visionnaire,” and students are asked to assess his contribution
to minority rights and provincial institutions. Saskatchewan’s French documents emphasise Métis land claims
and collective rights in 1885. By contrast, English curricula frequently stress “the rebellion” and the federal
government’s response, foregrounding law and order and national consolidation. The francophone dimension of
Riel’s identity, and his efforts to protect French-language schooling in the West, are rarely highlighted in English
programmes (see Brunet & Gani, 2023). As summarised in Table 3, Louis Riel appears across the six provinces
in all French-language curricula but with very uneven treatment in the English-language stream.
Table 3. Representation of Louis Riel in Secondary History Curricula (Grades 7–11)
Province
Language
Curricular Reference to Louis
Riel
Lexical Framing
/ Role Assigned
Presence of
Métis/Francophone
Perspective
Manitoba
French
Louis Riel is presented as the
founder of Manitoba and a defender
of the rights of the Métis and
Francophones.
Founder, rights
advocate,
community hero
Yes – central role, strong
community vision
Manitoba
English
Students examine the Red River
Rebellion and the role of Riel in the
formation of Manitoba.
Rebel,
controversial
figure
Partial – little reference to
the French-speaking
world
Saskatchewan
French
The program addresses the
Northwest Resistance and
highlights the defense of Métis
territorial and cultural rights.
Resistant,
spokesperson for a
people
Yes – critical and
contextualized
perspective
Saskatchewan
English
North-West Rebellion and Riel’s
trial and execution are studied in the
context of national expansion.
Rebellion, law and
order discourse
No – lack of Francophone
or Métis perspective
Alberta
French
Riel is studied in the context of the
conflicts between the Métis and the
Canadian government. His political
role is recognized.
Political leader,
controversial but
analyzed figure
Yes—but sometimes
simplified
Alberta
English
Students learn about the North-West
Rebellion and Riel’s resistance to
the Canadian government.
Rebel, resistance
framed as a threat
to unity
No – focus on the federal
government
Regulation 17 (Ontario). Regulation 17, adopted in 1912, restricted French-language instruction in Ontario
schools and became a focal point for Franco-Ontarian mobilisation. In the French curriculum, it is treated as a
pivotal episode in the history of linguistic rights: students are asked to examine its impact on community
cohesion, access to education, and identity, as well as the resistance strategies it provoked. In the parallel English
curriculum, Regulation 17 is absent as a named topic. Language policy issues are sometimes addressed under
general themes such as “educational reform” or “Canadian social policy,” but without explicit attention to
Franco-Ontarian struggles. As Table 4 shows, this omission contributes to a representation of Ontario’s past as
linguistically homogeneous and politically stable, obscuring the contentious history of French schooling.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9570
www.rsisinternational.org
Table 4. Representation of Regulation 17 in Secondary History Curricula (Grades 7–11)
Province
Language
Curricular Reference to
Regulation 17
Lexical Framing /
Role Assigned
Presence of Franco-
Ontarian Perspective
Ontario
French
Regulation 17 is presented as a key
moment in the struggle of Franco-
Ontarians to preserve their
language and education.
Linguistic
oppression, identity
struggle, community
resistance
Yes – central to regional
identity building
Ontario
English
No mention of Regulation 17 in the
curriculum documents reviewed.
Absent
No – no reference to the
Franco-Ontarian context
Manitoba
French
Contextual reference to Regulation
17 as an example of linguistic
repression in relation to
educational rights in minority
communities.
Linguistic repression,
a historical
comparison
Yes – in connection with
other Francophone
struggles
Manitoba
English
No reference to Regulation 17 in
the context of language rights or
education.
Absent
No – invisibility of
French-Canadian
struggles
New
Brunswick
French
Indirect reference to Regulation 17
in the context of language rights in
Canada, without detailed
elaboration.
Peripheral mention,
without in-depth
analysis
Partial – present but not
central
New
Brunswick
English
Possible indirect reference within
broader language rights
discussions, but no explicit
mention of Regulation 17.
Generalized rights
discourse, lacks
specificity
Partial – Francophonie
addressed without
specific reference to
Ontario
Constitutional crises and the “Night of the Long Knives.” The patriation of the Constitution (1982) and the
so-called “Night of the Long Knives” (the November 1981 meeting where all premiers except Québec’s reached
agreement with the federal government) are treated unevenly. In New Brunswick, both French and English
curricula address the 1980–1982 constitutional negotiations, but with different emphases: the French version
frames the 1981 meeting as a moment of exclusion and betrayal from a francophone perspective, whereas the
English version refers more generically to “negotiations that led to Canadian autonomy.” In other provinces,
constitutional reform is often discussed without reference to Québec’s non-signature or to its implications for
francophones outside Québec. Once again, narrative asymmetry appears not only in which events are selected,
but in how they are morally and affectively framed.
Visibility of francophone minorities outside Québec
Key finding. Perhaps the most consistent pattern across the corpus is the reduction of the francophone presence
to Québec in English-language curricula, contrasted with a more place-specific, but uneven, recognition of
francophone minorities in French-language curricula. English programmes in Alberta, British Columbia, and
Saskatchewan seldom mention francophone communities outside Québec beyond brief references to “French
settlers” or “Québécois nationalism,” whereas French programmes name concrete communities, institutions, and
struggles in their own provinces. Table 4 maps this contrast in visibility.
In English curricula, “francophones” most often appear as Québécois actors during constitutional crises, as early
colonists, or as one element within a broad narrative of “two founding peoples and multicultural immigration.”
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9571
www.rsisinternational.org
The longstanding presence of francophone communities in the Prairies, British Columbia, or Atlantic Canada is
rarely presented as a continuous historical thread. As a result, anglophone students can complete their schooling
with little awareness that francophone schools, parishes, newspapers, and associations have existed for over a
century in their own province (Chouinard & Wallner, 2023).
French-language curricula, by contrast, more frequently anchor their narratives in local and regional histories.
Ontario and Manitoba highlight the creation of francophone school boards, the role of communities such as
Saint-Boniface, and specific campaigns for language rights. New Brunswick gives sustained attention to Acadian
history and institutions, presenting them as constitutive of the province’s identity. These narratives do not simply
“add culture”; they position francophone minorities as historical agents whose struggles and contributions help
define the province itself (Thériault, 2007).
Even within French programming, however, the depth of treatment varies. British Columbia’s French
curriculum, for example, briefly mentions francophone communities, but offers limited detail on places such as
Maillardville or Victoria, despite their documented historical presence. The variation suggests that political
orientation, demographic weight, and provincial identity discourses shape how fully francophone minorities are
woven into official narratives. In this sense, visibility is not an all-or-nothing variable but a gradient, influenced
by both institutional recognition and local memory work.
Francophone and Indigenous narratives: A comparative perspective
Key finding. Since the publication of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s Calls to Action, most
provincial curricula have significantly expanded the presence of Indigenous histories and perspectives (Truth
and Reconciliation Commission of Canada, 2015). In both French and English programmes, residential schools,
treaties, and reconciliation now figure prominently. By contrast, the treatment of francophone minorities—
especially outside Québec—has not undergone a comparable shift. In several provinces, Indigenous content is
now mandatory, while francophone minority histories remain optional, marginal, or absent in English-language
curricula. This divergence raises important questions about hierarchies of recognition within curriculum policy
(Tuck & Yang, 2012; Karn, Llewellyn, & Clark, 2024).
Across the six provinces, we observe a clear trend toward structured, competency-based expectations around
Indigenous content: students are required to “analyse the impact of residential schools,” “examine treaty
relationships,” or “consider contemporary issues related to reconciliation.” These expectations are typically
similar in French and English programmes, reflecting legal obligations and a broader societal consensus on the
need to address colonial injustice. By contrast, expectations related to francophone minorities outside Québec,
when present, are more often framed as examples or extension topics, left to teacher discretion or local choice.
Across the six provinces, our comparative overview shows that Indigenous content is thus systematically more
central than francophone minority content in the required canon of Canadian history.
Importantly, this is not an argument against the curricular centrality of Indigenous histories, which are necessary
and long overdue. Rather, it suggests that the politics of decolonisation and reconciliation can coexist with a
blind spot toward other forms of minoritisation and structural inequality. In New Brunswick, the only officially
bilingual province, both Indigenous and francophone narratives are integrated across subject areas, yet
francophone history is still more fragmented and less robustly structured than Indigenous content. In British
Columbia and Alberta, the disparity is sharper: Indigenous perspectives are built into mandatory competencies,
while francophone experiences are often relegated to sidebars, optional units, or teacher initiative.
Taken together, these findings reveal a complex pattern. On the one hand, curricula are evolving toward more
inclusive and critical accounts of Canada’s colonial past, especially with respect to Indigenous peoples. On the
other hand, francophone minority histories continue to occupy a precarious position, especially in
Englishlanguage curricula, where they are vulnerable to omission. In a bilingual federation that presents itself as
founded on two official languages, this imbalance poses particular problems for narrative equity. It suggests that
different histories of marginalisation are being incorporated into the curriculum at different speeds and depths,
with consequences for how students understand both the country’s plural heritage and their own place within it.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9572
www.rsisinternational.org
IDENTITY AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS
The curricular asymmetries observed in the previous section do not remain confined to policy documents. They
shape how students experience school, how they understand others, and how they position themselves within the
wider civic landscape. This section examines the pedagogical and identity-related implications of divergent
historical narratives in bilingual and minority settings, focusing on three axes: (1) civic and cultural identity
among francophone and anglophone students; (2) the role of teachers as mediators, resisters, or reproducers of
curricular narratives; and (3) the challenges and opportunities posed by historical thinking pedagogy in
linguistically diverse classrooms.
Curriculum is a tool of nation-building not only because of what it teaches, but because of whom it teaches
students to become. As Ricoeur (2000) and Taylor (1994) argue, narrative identity is shaped through acts of
memory, recognition, and interpretation. School curricula are primary sites where youth encounter official
versions of national history; whether these versions are inclusive or exclusionary profoundly affects students’
sense of legitimacy, belonging, and civic agency.
For francophone students in minority settings, the presence or absence of their community’s history signals more
than content. It indicates whether their story matters, their struggles are remembered, and their contributions
acknowledged as part of the national project. When francophone resistance, institutional battles, or cultural
milestones are included, as in most French-language programmes, students receive a narrative scaffold that
affirms their heritage and validates their linguistic identity. This fosters continuity between past experience and
imagined futures.
In contrast, anglophone students in the same provinces are often presented with a vision of Canadian history in
which francophones appear mainly as Québécois separatists, early colonists, or political adversaries.
Francophone communities outside Québec remain largely invisible. This omission reinforces the idea that
linguistic duality is a constitutional abstraction rather than a lived reality. Anglophone students may thus grow
up unaware of the presence, contributions, or struggles of their francophone peers, undermining intercultural
empathy and civic pluralism. When conflicts arise over language rights, school closures, or cultural funding,
they may lack the historical context to interpret these acts as legitimate democratic participation, a gap that
Chouinard and Wallner (2023) link to weak literacy around minority rights.
While curricula set official parameters, teachers play a crucial role in translating, adapting, or contesting these
parameters in classroom practice. Studies and practitioner accounts suggest that educators frequently grapple
with tensions between curricular constraints and their own pedagogical commitments, especially where official
documents fail to reflect students’ realities or histories (Duquette et al., 2023; Gibson et al., 2025). Some
francophone teachers in minority contexts describe themselves as “guardians of memory” or “narrative
bridgebuilders,” deliberately integrating community-specific content even when it is not required, for instance
by drawing on local archives, oral histories, or community organisations to make visible francophone and Métis
presence in provincial histories. Such initiatives amount to curricular activism: educators expand the historical
record to include marginalised voices.
In French immersion or anglophone schools, the picture is more constrained. Many teachers acknowledge a lack
of training or resources to represent francophone history adequately, and the curriculum’s silence on francophone
struggles can make it difficult to justify their inclusion within mandated outcomes (Brunet & Gani, 2023;
Chouinard & Wallner, 2023). Where events such as Règlement 17 or Franco-Ontarian mobilisation are absent
from English-language curricula, students are left with “no frame of reference” for understanding local
francophone attachment to language rights. Pedagogical agency is both enabled and limited by institutional
frameworks: where teachers enrich the historical narrative, they often do so on their own initiative, with uneven
support.
One small but telling example concerns public celebrations. June 24, la Saint-Jean-Baptiste, is both Québec’s
national holiday and a long-standing celebration of francophone identity across Canada. Yet, while provincial
curricula make room for other civic and cultural events as markers of multicultural expression, the Saint-
JeanBaptiste is largely absent from official expectations. This silence around a foundational francophone marker
of belonging quietly signals to students that some forms of diversity are publicly celebrated while others remain
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9573
www.rsisinternational.org
unnamed. Such omissions echo the deeper narrative marginalisation documented in this study and reinforce the
message that francophone presence outside Québec is, at best, secondary.
Moreover, in the absence of explicit curricular expectations, even well-intentioned educators may default to
dominant narratives, especially where textbooks, standardised assessments, and digital resources reinforce the
invisibility of francophone experiences. Systemic asymmetry in curricula is therefore not simply a matter of
content, but of institutional epistemology: which histories are considered worth teaching, and who is authorised
to decide.
The rise of historical thinking pedagogy has created new opportunities for more inclusive, critical, and student-
centred history education. As Seixas and Morton (2013) outline, this model encourages students to engage with
primary sources, evaluate competing interpretations, and construct evidence-based narratives. In practice,
however, the potential of historical thinking depends on implementation. Without institutional mandates,
curricular resources, or teacher education focused on francophone issues, these perspectives risk remaining
absent from classroom inquiry. Recent work in francophone and minority settings documents promising uses of
inquiry-based approaches to foreground community resilience and connect historical events to students’ lived
experiences (Duquette et al., 2023; Gibson et al., 2025; Lévesque, 2017). Such examples show how historical
thinking can be mobilised to deconstruct hegemonic narratives and build historical literacy across difference, but
they also underline that this requires intentional choices about which questions are asked and which sources are
brought into the classroom.
Yet these innovations remain contingent on teacher initiative, institutional support, and curricular alignment.
Where curricula are silent or ambiguous, teachers may hesitate to explore contentious topics. Where learning
outcomes emphasise political unity or abstract civic values, localised minority histories may be perceived as
tangential. Historical thinking’s emphasis on “multiple perspectives” can either support narrative inclusion or
allow the status quo to persist if equity is not an explicit goal.
The identity and pedagogical implications of curricular asymmetry in Canadian history education are thus
profound and underacknowledged. While francophone curricula often provide students with tools for historical
affirmation and critical citizenship, English-language curricula frequently fail to reflect the lived realities,
struggles, and contributions of francophone communities outside Québec. This narrative imbalance distorts
national memory and hinders intercultural understanding, undermining the goals of bilingual education. Teachers
occupy a pivotal position in mediating these dynamics, but their agency is constrained by systemic factors.
Without explicit curricular guidance, sustained institutional support, and accessible resources, the inclusion of
francophone perspectives remains inconsistent and dependent on individual will. Historical thinking pedagogy
offers a promising avenue for transformation, but it must be anchored in curricular justice and supported by
coherent policy frameworks that recognise and affirm Canada’s bilingual and pluralistic heritage. In the
following section, we synthesise the article’s contributions and propose principles for a more equitable and
inclusive approach to history curriculum design in Canada’s bilingual education systems.
CONCLUSION
Across six Canadian provinces outside Québec, French and English history curricula do not simply tune a single
national story to different registers. They usher students into divergent narratives about who belongs, who has
agency, and whose struggles merit remembrance. In minority settings, French programmes often centre histories
of resistance, survival, and institutional marginalisation, offering francophone communities a name, a past, and
a horizon. English programmes, by contrast, more often neutralise conflict, absorb francophones into a generic
multicultural frame, or omit francophone minorities outside Québec altogether. These are not minor
discrepancies in wording or emphasis. Taken together, they constitute what we have called narrative asymmetry
in bilingual curriculum ecosystems: a systematic unevenness in how collective histories are selected, framed,
and valued within state sanctioned frameworks of knowledge.
In a country that constitutionally enshrines official bilingualism and increasingly commits itself to equity,
inclusion, and reconciliation, such asymmetry is more than a technical flaw. It undermines the promise that public
education can serve as a shared space of memory and recognition. Bilingualism in Canada is not only a matter
of service provision or legal rights; it is also a commitment to sustaining two linguistic imaginaries within a
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9574
www.rsisinternational.org
common political project (Cardinal, 2005; Thériault, 2007). Similarly, the Calls to Action of the Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada (2015) have pushed ministries and school systems to rework history
curricula so that Indigenous experiences and perspectives are no longer peripheral. Our findings suggest that
these important shifts have not yet been matched by a comparable effort to integrate francophone minority
histories into the core canon of Canadian history, particularly in English language curricula.
We use the term narrative equity to name the policy and pedagogical horizon that follows from this diagnosis.
Narrative equity does not mean that every community's history should occupy the same number of pages or hours
of instruction. Rather, it denotes a condition in which the foundational experiences of key collectivities
Indigenous peoples, francophone minorities, anglophone majorities, and other groups are presented as
structurally relevant to the national story, and not as optional, exotic, or episodic. In a bilingual federation,
narrative equity requires that francophone minorities outside Québec be treated not simply as regional cultural
groups, but as political and historical agents whose presence predates Confederation and whose struggles have
shaped institutions, laws, and public debates (Bouchard, 2017; Brunet & Gani, 2023; Chouinard & Wallner,
2023).
Several policy implications follow from this conceptualisation. First, curriculum revision processes in English
language streams should explicitly incorporate key episodes of francophone minoritisation and mobilisation,
such as Regulation 17 in Ontario, the Manitoba Schools Question, the role of Saint Boniface and Acadian
institutions, or post Charter struggles over school governance. These should appear as required learning
expectations rather than optional extensions. Doing so would acknowledge that the trajectory of Canadian
federalism and rights regimes cannot be understood without these episodes. Second, narrative equity requires
investment in teacher education in both streams. Initial and continuing training should provide history and social
studies teachers, whether anglophone, francophone, or immersion, with grounding in francophone minority
histories, the legal architecture of language rights, and the lived realities of bilingual communities. Without this
knowledge base, even revised curricula may be unevenly enacted, and teachers may hesitate to address topics
they perceive as unfamiliar or politically sensitive.
Third, ministries and school divisions can support narrative equity by developing accessible bilingual resource
banks that bring together archival documents, oral histories, local case studies, and didactic materials focused on
francophone minorities, often in dialogue with Indigenous histories and other minoritised experiences. Projects
that invite students to explore the intersection of francophone and Indigenous histories in specific places, such
as the Prairies or the Atlantic region, can foster a more relational understanding of colonialism, resistance, and
solidarity, while avoiding competitive or zero sum framings of recognition (Tuck & Yang, 2012). Fourth,
curriculum policy should encourage pedagogical spaces where students compare and critically examine multiple
narratives. Historical thinking frameworks already emphasise perspective taking, evidence use, and interpretive
plurality (Seixas & Morton, 2013). Building on these, teachers could be invited to design units in which students
juxtapose French and English accounts of events such as the Conquest, the Red River Resistance, constitutional
reform, or debates on language rights. These comparative exercises do not aim at imposing consensus, but at
equipping young people to recognise how the same past can be told differently from distinct positionalities, and
to deliberate about the implications of these differences for democratic life.
Finally, narrative equity has implications beyond Canada. Many multilingual democracies grapple with
competing histories within a single state, whether between Welsh and English in the United Kingdom, German
and French in Switzerland, or Flemish and francophone communities in Belgium. Our framework of narrative
asymmetry in bilingual curriculum ecosystems offers a transferable tool for analysing how curricular
architectures distribute legitimacy across linguistic and cultural groups, and for imagining reforms that make
room for plural, sometimes conflicting narratives without collapsing into fragmentation.
The stakes are high. History education is not simply a window onto the past; it is also a medium through which
societies negotiate who counts, whose grief is acknowledged, and whose aspirations are imagined as legitimate
(Ricoeur, 2000; Taylor, 1994). When one language stream learns a story of resilience and marginalisation and
the other a story of continuity and cohesion, young people may emerge from the same school system inhabiting
different moral landscapes. They will confront referendums, constitutional debates, and rights struggles with
unequal historical literacy about the communities most affected. In such a context, bilingualism risks becoming
a technical label rather than a lived practice of mutual recognition.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9575
www.rsisinternational.org
By bringing to light the structural narrative asymmetries embedded in current curricula, this study does not claim
to resolve the tensions of Canadian bilingualism. It does, however, suggest that curriculum is a crucial lever for
rebalancing recognition. If Canada is to take seriously its commitments to bilingualism, reconciliation, equity,
and inclusion, history education must be redesigned so that francophone minority histories are no longer
contingent on individual teacher initiative or local activism, but embedded in the shared educational contract.
Narrative equity is not a luxury for stable times; it is a condition for navigating future disagreements without
sliding into polarisation. Our hope is that the concepts and evidence offered here will inform ongoing debates on
curriculum reform and stimulate further research on how young people learn to live with, and learn from,
multiple histories.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The author wishes to thank the teachers, the Bureau de l’Éducation française du Manitoba, and community
partners who generously shared their time, expertise, and experience during the preliminary stages of this
research. Their insights into the everyday realities of history teaching in bilingual and minority settings helped
sharpen the questions and interpretations developed in this article. Warm thanks are also due to colleagues who
provided thoughtful comments on earlier versions of the manuscript. Any remaining errors or omissions are the
author’s sole responsibility.
REFERENCES
1. Alberta Learning. (n.d.). Social studies K–12: Program of studies. Alberta Learning.
2. Anderson, B. (1983). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso.
3. Apple, M. W. (2004). Ideology and curriculum (3rd ed.). RoutledgeFalmer.
4. Bouchard, G. (2017). Interculturalism: A view from Quebec (H. Scott & P. Brennan, Trans.). University
of Toronto Press.
5. Bouvier, F. (2008). Bilan du débat relatif au programme Histoire et éducation à la citoyenneté du
deuxième cycle de l’ordre d’enseignement secondaire qui a eu cours au Québec en 2006–2007. Québec,
Canada : Gouvernement du Québec, Commission de consultation sur les pratiques d’accommodement
reliées aux différences culturelles.
6. British Columbia Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Social studies 9 curriculum. British Columbia Ministry
of Education.
7. Brunet, M.-H., & Gani, R. (2023). Représentations divergentes dans les curriculums canadiens d’histoire:
La francophonie comme enjeu politique et éducatif. Revue canadienne de l’éducation, 46(1), 54–78.
8. Cardinal, L. (2005). The limits of bilingualism in Canada. Canadian Journal of Political Science, 38(2),
263–282. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0008423905040060
9. Chouinard, S., & Wallner, J., (2023). Nation-building and curriculum in Canada. In Education,
curriculum and nation-building, 149–172, Routledge.
10. Dallaire, C., & Denis, C. (2005). Asymmetrical hybridities: Youths at Francophone Games in Canada.
Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie, 30(2), 143–168.
11. Demers, S. (2017). Pourquoi enseigner l’histoire? Pourquoi l’apprendre? Un regard critique sur les visées
du nouveau programme d’histoire du Québec et du Canada au secondaire. In M.-A. Éthier, V. Boutonnet,
S. Demers, & D. Lefrançois (Eds.), Quel sens pour l’histoire? Analyses critiques du nouveau programme
d’histoire du Québec et du Canada (pp. 81–93). Saint-Joseph-du-Lac, Canada : M Éditeur.
12. Dépelteau, M. (2025, June 23). Les jeunes anglophones et francophones n’apprennent pas la même
histoire. Francopresse. https://francopresse.ca/education/2025/06/23/les-jeunes-anglophones-
etfrancophones-napprennent-pas-la-meme-histoire/
13. Di Giovanni, A., & Parker, L. (2024). It is a choice? Examining neoliberal influences in three Ontario
education reforms. Critical Education, 15(2), 52–74. https://doi.org/10.14288/ce.v15i2.186892
14. Duquette, C., Pageau, L., & Tremblay, M.-L. (2023). The Truth and Reconciliation Commission of
Canada Calls to Action in initial history education: Where do we stand? Journal of the Canadian
Association for Curriculum Studies, 20(1), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.25071/1916-4467.40757
15. Duquette, C., Monney, N., & Fontaine, S. (2020). Québec’s History of Québec and Canada ministerial
examination: A tool to promote historical thinking or a hurdle to hinder its inclusion? In C. W. Berg & T.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9576
www.rsisinternational.org
M. Christou (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of history and social studies education (pp. 323–354). New
York, NY : Palgrave Macmillan.
16. Durham, J. G. (1839/2006). Lord Durham’s report: Text abridged by Gerald M. Craig (G. M. Craig, Ed.).
McGill-Queen’s University Press.
17. Éthier, M.-A., Boutonnet, V., Demers, S., & Lefrançois, D. (Eds.). (2017). Quel sens pour l’histoire?
Analyses critiques du nouveau programme d’histoire du Québec et du Canada. Saint-Joseph-du-Lac,
Canada : M Éditeur.
18. Éthier, M.-A., Lefrançois, D., & Demers, S. (2013). An analysis of historical agency in Quebec history
textbooks. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice, 8(2), 119–133.
19. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. Longman.
20. Gibson, L., Peck, C. L., Miles, J., & Duquette, C. (2025). Historical thinking: Trends, critiques, and future
directions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 65, 102088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2025.102088
21. Hamman-Ortiz, L., & Palmer, D. (2023). Identity and two-way bilingual education: Considering student
perspectives: Introduction to the special issue. International Journal of Bilingual Education and
Bilingualism, 26(1), 1–6.
22. Karn, S., Llewellyn, K. R., & Clark, P. (2024). Decolonizing History Curricula Across Canada:
Recommendations for (Re)design. Canadian Journal of Education Revue Canadienne De l’éducation,
47(4), 1090–1121 doi.org/10.53967/cje-rce.6583
23. Lefrançois, D., & Demers, S. (2011). The Quebec History and Citizenship Education Curriculum and the
Benchmarks of Historical Thinking (BHT): Convergence and divergence. Vancouver, Canada : Centre
for the Study of Historical Consciousness, University of British Columbia. Retrieved from
https://historicalthinking.ca/research
24. Létourneau, J. (2014). Je me souviens ? Le passé du Québec dans la conscience de sa jeunesse. Fides.
25. Lévesque, S. (2017). History as a “GPS”: On the uses of historical narrative for French Canadian
students’ life orientation and identity. London Review of Education, 15(2), 227–242.
https://doi.org/10.18546/LRE.15.2.07
26. Luoma, M. (2024). Public education, multinational citizenship, and territorial legitimacy: analyzing the
2004 and 2023 Ontario curricula on Indigenous peoples. Front. Polit. Sci. 6:1478530.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2024.1478530
27. Manitoba Education and Early Childhood Learning. (n.d.). Grade 9 social studies: Canada in the
contemporary world. Manitoba Education and Early Childhood Learning.
28. Ministère de l’Éducation et de l’Enseignement supérieur. (2017). Programme de formation de l’école
québécoise. Histoire du Québec et du Canada. Québec, Canada : Gouvernement du Québec.
29. Ministère de l’Éducation, du Loisir et du Sport. (2007). Programme de formation de l’école québécoise.
Histoire et éducation à la citoyenneté, deuxième cycle du secondaire. Québec, Canada : Gouvernement
du Québec.
30. New Brunswick Department of Education. (n.d.). Social studies 9: Canadian identity curriculum. New
Brunswick Department of Education.
31. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2018a). The Ontario curriculum: Social studies, Grades 1 to 6; History
and geography, Grades 7 and 8. Government of Ontario.
32. Ontario Ministry of Education. (2018b). The Ontario curriculum, Grades 9 and 10: Canadian and world
studies. Government of Ontario.
33. Ricœur, P. (2000). La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli. Éditions du Seuil.
34. Saskatchewan Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Social studies 9 curriculum. Saskatchewan Ministry of
Education.
35. Seixas, P., & Morton, T. (2013). The Big Six historical thinking concepts. Nelson Education.
36. Taylor, C. (1994). Multiculturalism: Examining the politics of recognition (A. Gutmann, Ed.). Princeton
University Press.
37. Thériault, J.-Y. (2007). Francophonies minoritaires au Canada : Nouveaux paradigmes sociopolitiques.
In L. Cardinal & M. Lapointe (Eds.), Une citoyenneté en mutation (pp. 33–48). Presses de l’Université
Laval.
38. Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. (2015). Honouring the truth, reconciling for the future:
Summary of the final report of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada. Truth and
Reconciliation Commission of Canada.
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS |Volume IX Issue XXVI November 2025 | Special Issue on Education
Page 9577
www.rsisinternational.org
39. Tuck, E., & Yang, K. W. (2012). Decolonization is not a metaphor. Decolonization: Indigeneity,
Education & Society, 1(1), 1–40.
40. van Dijk, T. A. (1998). Ideology: A multidisciplinary approach. Sage.
41. Vezina, A. C. (2023). A comparative analysis of Quebec and Ontario: How each province approached
elementary provincial numeracy curricula and corresponding Faculty of Education accredited teacher
education programs during the period of 2003–2018 (Doctoral dissertation, Ontario Institute for Studies
in Education, University of Toronto).