Vermont Abenaki Groups Launch Disputed Curriculum Amid Identity Controversy

Four Abenaki groups recognized by the state of Vermont have developed a new school curriculum focused on their history and culture, igniting fresh tensions in an ongoing dispute over Indigenous identity and recognition.

The curriculum, titled the “American Abenaki Curriculum,” was unveiled last month under the guidance of the Vermont Commission on Native American Affairs. It provides digital resources and discussion topics for students in grades 3-12, exploring how “the Abenaki people survived and adapted to their environment for thousands of years.”

This educational initiative, however, has drawn sharp criticism from the Odanak and Wolinak First Nations in Quebec, who claim they were deliberately excluded from the development process. These Canadian-based Abenaki nations have long contested the legitimacy of the Vermont-recognized groups, arguing that many members cannot claim authentic Indigenous ancestry.

“There is no such thing as ‘American Abenaki,’ as Abenaki identity and Ndakina — the ancestral homeland of the Abenaki people — predate colonial borders and cannot be redefined by modern administrative categories,” the Quebec-based nations stated in a joint press release. They characterized the curriculum as a “rewriting of history” that normalizes cultural appropriation.

The Vermont-recognized groups — the Elnu Abenaki, Nulhegan Abenaki, Koasek Band of the Koas Abenaki Nation, and the Abenaki Nation at Missisquoi — defended their approach, stating that the curriculum focuses specifically on their unique experiences as Vermonters.

Dan Coutu, chair of the state Native American Affairs commission, addressed the exclusion of the Quebec-based nations saying, “They have their voice free to speak up, as they have. And now, it’s our turn.” Some commissioners involved in developing the curriculum are themselves members of the Vermont-recognized groups.

The press conference announcing the curriculum became contentious when Denise Watso, an Odanak citizen who attended as an observer, criticized the materials as misleading and was subsequently escorted out by security after heated exchanges broke out.

The controversy is likely to spill into Vermont’s legislative session this month. Representative Troy Headrick (I-Burlington) plans to introduce legislation that would require consultation with and endorsement from the Odanak and Wolinak First Nations before any Indigenous curriculum could be used in Vermont schools.

“We’ve given these state-identified groups a foothold through the state recognition process,” Headrick said. “And they’re exploiting that foothold in a pretty significant way — taking control of the narrative in ways that completely erase any narrative provided by the Abenaki at Odanak and Wolinak.”

This dispute occurs against a backdrop of intensifying efforts by the Quebec-based nations to challenge Vermont’s tribal recognition decisions. In October, they published an extensive report examining approximately 15 generations of ancestry for several prominent members of Vermont’s recognized groups, including chiefs Don Stevens (Nulhegan), Brenda Gagne (Missisquoi), and Shirly Hook (Koasek).

The research, conducted by University of Ottawa associate professor Darryl Leroux, concluded that those studied were of almost entirely European descent. The Vermont group leaders responded by dismissing the findings as “junk science” full of “factual and interpretive errors.”

The Odanak and Wolinak governments have shared the report with every state legislator in Vermont and New Hampshire and launched a year-long television campaign on major Vermont stations arguing that the state-recognized tribes lack legitimate Indigenous connections.

“It is essential that everyone understand the reality of our identity,” said Jacques Watso, an Odanak First Nation tribal councilor. “We will continue this work with consistency and determination. The truth cannot be ignored.”

This conflict highlights broader tensions over Indigenous identity, recognition, and cultural sovereignty that continue to reverberate across New England, where state-level recognition processes often differ significantly from federal standards and those of established First Nations.