Background. Computing education remains largely grounded in Western epistemologies, while efforts to decolonize curricula are growing but often lack conceptual precision. For example, terms such as decolonization and indigenization are increasingly used, but their meanings and applications may vary widely. Objectives. This paper examines how terms related to decolonization and Indigenous perspectives are defined and used in research on post-secondary computing, especially regarding curricular redesign and the implementation strategies used to carry it out. Methods. We did a scoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute framework and followed the PRISMA-ScR guidelines in our reporting. We searched Google Scholar, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, and Scopus, finding 3,319 papers. After removing duplicates and carefully screening the studies, only 10 met our inclusion criteria. Findings. The review found that decolonial terminology is used inconsistently. This makes it challenging to distinguish meaningful curricular transformation in computing education. Across the selected studies, we identified three shared commitments: 1) rejecting the myth of technical neutrality, 2) rejecting tokenistic inclusion, and 3) re-centring epistemic authority through community co-creation. Implications. This paper attempts to shed light on gaps in decolonizing computing education, specifically the misalignment between decolonial discourse and educational interventions.