With the internationalization of education and mass immigration, classroom participation and speech, a colonial-Western educational phenomenon and necessity (Murray, 2018; Dénommé-Welch and Rowsell, 2017), has gained greater currency. However, the understandings afforded by scholars examining cultures of learning (Jin & Cortazzi, 2017) have allowed ‘silence’ not to be perceived from a deficit lens. Yet, to ‘fit’ into the Western notion of a good learner, silence in the classroom is viewed as less preferable than verbal participation.

Research and analysis done by scholars like Schultz (2009) and Zembylas & Michaelides (2004) acknowledge the value of silence in education and bring forward the need to consider silence as a form of embodied participation. Using a decolonial/more-than-human affective lens (Mignolo & Walsh, 2018; Zembylas, 2016), we argue that not only do we need to legitimize (non) oral, embodied participation in Western classrooms but also decentre the colonial-Western notion of speech as the privileged form of participation by bringing silence back from the periphery: rethinking talk and silence not as a dichotomy but as an entanglement and making silent participation visible through “respectful listening and reflective witnessing” (Barkaskas & Gladwin, 2021).

Accordingly, as we rethink participation and engagement through a more inclusive lens, it’s essential to broaden how these are evaluated in educational settings. By considering learners' deeply personal and intrinsic engagement experiences; including silence as a form of participation, we aim to showcase a more expansive approach to evaluation. In our presentation, we will share a rubric designed for graduate programs that fosters classroom socialization for professionals such as educators, counsellors, and social workers. While rooted in this context, we hope the rubric can be adapted to other educational settings and provide valuable insights for educators across diverse contexts.

Over the years, there have been significant processes developed and literature written on project management processes, on the successes and failures in project management, and on the implications of project management on accountability and transparency. These contributions have overwhelmingly originated from or are based on Western knowledge, cultures, and understandings. The field of project management in the ‘development’ sector has also experienced increasing pressure to professionalize. The calls to establish codified standards for this domain result from concerns regarding the inconsistent use of proper project management techniques and the lack of oversight in this regard. These coveted techniques are often informed by lessons learned from project management in the private sector and in the field of international ‘development’, and by theories of management that originate from the experiences of the Western world.

While these changes are undertaken in hopes of opening the space further for non-Western-based voices and of enhancing the integration of non-Western actors into project management processes, they do not necessarily contribute to the reassessment of the epistemology that underlays project management, the philosophy of project management, and the way ‘problems’ are understood. As such, this push to professionalize and advance the field conflicts with the arguments and the resulting initiatives to decolonize the ‘development’ sector and the practice of project management in this field. It also complicates the work that several donors and international actors are undertaking as they grapple with how and whether to decolonize their aid.

Using an innovative approach of integrating Critical Management Theory (CMT) with decolonial theories and methods, this research presents an innovative initial way forward that contributes to the reimagination of project management as a discipline in the field of ‘development’. It also provides viable recommendations that can be used by professionals and researchers for decolonizing project management in the present.

This paper critically examines the intersection of international development and cultural representation through the lens of the Canadian aporetic condition—a framework highlighting the contradictions and tensions in Canada’s colonial legacy, multicultural aspirations, and global development strategies. Using case studies from the National Film Board of Canada (NFBC), including Biidaaban: First Light and Bear 71, this analysis explores how storytelling and artistic initiatives provide alternative frameworks for understanding development challenges, specifically those tied to decolonization, environmental justice, and Indigenous sovereignty.

The paper positions Canada’s aporetic condition as a microcosm of global development challenges, reflecting broader struggles with historical injustice, power asymmetries, and environmental exploitation. It interrogates how art and cultural media can serve as tools for reimagining development beyond traditional economic and governance models, proposing instead a decolonized paradigm rooted in pluriversality and relational ethics.

This research identifies pathways for reframing togetherness, advancing solidarity, and generating sustainable, equitable futures. This work aligns with the CASID 2025 theme by proposing actionable solutions that honour diverse ways of knowing.