Month: May 2011

Keeping the American Indian Education Truths Alive

Keeping the American Indian Education Truths Alive

Reading Time: 5 minutes

Since Osama bin Laden was killed nearly one month ago, many details about the mission have been unveiled. One particular story, which brings awareness to the “inappropriateness” of coding Osama bin Laden as “Geronimo,”[1] is a relevant and current reminder to the prevalence American Indians have as a thread of our nation.

In this way, it is important to be cognizant of American Indians, not only their revered historical figures from the past; but also their cultural traditions which struggle to be maintained and their hopes of responding to these ongoing issues today. In observing and aspiring to fully understand these issues from an education lens, it is important to not forget the past that has in part led to today’s state of American Indian education.

Currently, there are 565 federally recognized American Indian tribes and Alaska Natives. [2] While the Cherokee and Navajo nations contain the majority of American Indian citizens, the myriad other tribes hold their own distinct traditional and cultural markers.  American Indian adolescents “make up only 1% of the total youth population [but] they account for 2% of the total juvenile population being held in custody and 3% of juvenile status offenders in custody.” [3] In 2003, 15 percent of Native youths 16- to 24-years old had not completed high school or earned a G.E.D. credential. This rate was more than twice the rate for white youths (6 percent), four times that of Asian American/Pacific Islanders (AA/PI) (4 percent) and about the same as Black youths. Only Hispanic students dropped out at rates higher than AI/AN students.

American Indian students attend public schools, private schools, schools operated by the Bureau of Indian Education (BIE), and tribal schools.  In the 2005–06 school year, 644,000 public elementary and secondary school students, or about 1 percent of all public school students, were American Indian or Alaska Native.  Similarly, about 1 percent of all private school students were American Indian or Alaska Native. [4] About 8 percent of American Indian students attend schools funded by the BIE.

The BIE, despite accounting for serving only a small portion of American Indian students, carries strong cultural significance. The U.S. Department of the Interior website provides a useful history of the Bureau of Indian Affairs and the establishment of the BIE whose mission aims to provide quality education opportunities through life in accordance with a tribe’s needs for cultural and economic well-being in order to maintain the diversity of American Indian and Alaska Native villages as distinct cultural and governmental entities:

There have been three major legislative actions that restructured the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) with regard to educating American Indians since the Snyder Act of 1921: First, the Indian Reorganization Act of 1934 introduced the teaching of Indian history and culture in BIA schools (until then it had been Federal policy to acculturate and assimilate Indian people by eradicating their tribal cultures through a boarding school system). Second, the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act of 1975 (P.L. 93-638) gave authority to federally recognized tribes to contract with the BIA for the operation of Bureau-funded schools and to determine education programs suitable for their children. The Education Amendments Act of 1978 (P.L. 95-561) and further technical amendments (P.L. 98-511, 99-99, and 100-297) provided funds directly to tribally operated schools, empowered Indian school boards, permitted local hiring of teachers and staff, and established a direct line of authority between the Education Director and the AS-IA. The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (P.L. 107-110) brought additional requirements to the schools by holding them accountable for improving their students’ academic performance with the U.S. Department of Education supplemental program funds they receive through the Bureau.

Farther before the establishment of these various acts, with the installation of these boarding schools, came a very contrary notion. The founder of these schools, Richard Pratt, believed that “all the Indian there is in the [American Indian] race should be dead. Kill the Indian in him, and save the man.” As a result, American Indians were assimilated away from their traditions using methods that have haunted them since.

Although schools have complied towards transforming this past structure into a more positive experience for American Indian students, perpetual stereotypes and myths about American Indians are persistent.

Common stereotypes are: “that American Indians are drunks, get free money from the government, are made wealthy from casino revenue…or, that Indians are at one with nature, deeply religious and wise in the ways of spirituality” [5]. In relation to these stereotypes, are myths of the American Indian.

Some examples:

1. They prefer to be called Native Americans.

2. They are given special privileges.

3. They are a dying race.

4. They are easily identifiable.

5. They all live on a reservation.

6. They are born knowing their culture and heritage.

7. They feel honored by mascots. [6] The American Indian Sports Team Mascots website addresses this controversy; as does the National Coalition on Racism in Sports and Media.

Suggestions to overcoming these common but misguided perceptions are to provide counterexamples that lead to knowing American Indian culture in a more positive light. This will not only allow us to interact with American Indians more appropriately, but it also will allow American Indian students to learn in a more comfortable school environment.

Going directly to the source is another way to debunk these common misconceptions. That is why collaboration and consultation with American Indian officials and individuals is often a priority recommendation for reforming education to better serve American Indians. These officials know, after all, that it is their young students that will pave the way in assuring authentic perceptions of their [diverse groups of] people:

“We must prepare them for active and equal participation in the global market. We must prepare them to be citizens in the 21st century. We must prepare them to be positive, involved members of our communities. And, most importantly, we must prepare them to be the future leaders of our governments. There is no more vital resource to the continued existence and integrity of Indian tribes than their children.” [7]

In the National Congress of American Indians’ summit last December, one of the recommendations was that states should be “required to enter into collaborative agreements with tribes.” [7] This, they believe will create a more welcoming and positive environment for American Indian students in which they will be more likely to thrive.

To see more American Indian led policy recommendations, go here.


[1]The Buffalo Post. 2011 Use of Geronimo Code name to be Discussed on Capitol Hill. Retrieved from http://buffalopost.net/?p=14623

[2]Bureau of Indian Affairs, http://www.bia.gov/WhoWeAre/index.htm

[3] Mmari, K., Blum R., Shone-Teufel N., What Increases Risk and Protection from Delinquent Behaviors Among American Indian Youth? Findings from Three Tribal Communities, 2009,Youth & Society, Volume 41 Number 3,  March 2010 pg 382-413.

[4] Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2008. Status and Trends in the Education of American Indians and Alaskan Natives: 2008. http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008084

[5] Fleming, Walter C. (2006, November). Myths and Stereotypes About Native Americans. Phi Deltan Kappan, 88, 213-216.

[6] Ibid.

[7] National Congress of American Indians and National Indian Education Association. National Priorities for Indian Education. Retrieved from http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/18/NCAI_NIEA_jointESEAreauth.pdf

[8] National Congress of American Indians, 2010 Education: 2010

Winning the Future, Facing the Odds

Winning the Future, Facing the Odds

Reading Time: 3 minutes


In April, a President Obama-convened White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics and the U.S. Department of Education released a report entitled “Winning the Future: Improving Education for the Latino Community.”

In it, we are given a dismal picture about the state of our nation’s largest minority group and its educational attainment.  Frankly, in order to “Win the future,” there are many odds to beat.

At more than 54 million strong, Latinos constitute the country’s largest and fastest-growing minority group.  Currently, 1 in 5 students (22 percent) in the public schools system is Latino, yet half of these students never receive their high school diplomas.  This lackluster demographic is mirrored on the other end of the continuum with less than half of Latino children enrolled in any early learning program.

Over the next decade, nearly 8 in 10 new U.S. jobs will require post-secondary training or a college degree. Latino dropout rates have lessened the advancement opportunities of a population that is set to become the majority of the nation’s labor force in less than 50 years.

Additionally, of the thirty fastest growing occupations in the U.S., half require a four-year college degree.  The fifty-percent of Latinos that do receive their high school diploma is only half as likely as their peers to be prepared for college.  In addition, just 13 percent of Latinos have a bachelor’s degree, and a mere 4 percent have completed graduate or professional degree programs[i]. Because economic progress and educational attainment go hand-in-hand, educating every American student through high school graduation and beyond is a national obligation.

Thus, it is repeatedly acknowledged in the report that these odds are not just a Latino problem; but a national one.  Latino success educationally and occupationally impacts the immediate and long-term economic and academic status of the United States because we are (as previously mentioned) a fast-growing population, and a young one.

The White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics’ Executive Order 13555 was recently re-signed by President Obama with hopes of furthering a 20-plus year movement.  Like Obama stated,

“The question then back in 1990 is the same question we face now:  How do we best improve educational opportunities and outcomes for our Hispanic students?” [ii]

That this question has not changed in over 20 years is somewhat discouraging; and although the report shares priorities with other Hispanic organizations (i.e. National Council of La Raza), the outcomes remain to be seen.

If President Obama’s leadership indeed gets us started—

Fixing what is broken in our education system will not be easy.  We won’t see results overnight.  It may take years, even decades, for all these changes to pay off.  But that’s no reason not to get started.  That’s no reason not to strive for these changes.  That’s a reason for us, in fact, to start making them right now.  It’s a reason for us to follow through.  And as long as I’m President, I will not give in to calls to shortchange any of our students[iii].

—this report could not have come at a more opportunistic time.

To see what the Obama agenda aspires to and how it plans to fulfill these aspirations, read the report here.


[i] U.S. Department of Education. April 2011. Winning the Future: Improving Education for the Latino Community. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/WinningTheFutureImprovingLatinoEducation.pdf
[ii] Ibid.
[iii] Ibid.
Fullan Challenges Reformers to Think About Whole System Reform

Fullan Challenges Reformers to Think About Whole System Reform

Reading Time: 3 minutes

Seminar Series 204: Choosing the Wrong Drivers for Whole System Reform The aspiration to “close the gap” in test scores between students of color and whites has been the focus of public policy makers for some time.  Policy makers have established the expectation that schools must do more to ensure that all students of every income, race/ethnicity, language background, and disability status graduate from high school ready for college and a career. Schools and the institutions that support schools are under pressure to improve the achievement of all students by improving teacher quality, providing information and supports to parents, establishing standards and assessments, providing intensive supports and interventions to low performing schools, and other reform strategies. There has been an increasing emphasis on closing the gap by improving the quality of teachers and leaders through reforms to educator effectiveness systems including preservice preparation, teacher and leader evaluation, and professional growth systems.  In a recent publication, Michael Fullan challenges reformers to think carefully about the way to set the course for these reforms.  Choosing the Wrong Drivers for Whole System Reform describes how school leaders and policy makers are selecting the wrong drivers to accomplish the changes needed to increase achievement and close the achievement gap. The article prescribes an alternative set of drivers that have been found to be more effective in accomplishing, what Fullan calls, the moral imperative of raising the bar for all students and closing the gap for lower performing groups. For all students to attain the higher order skills and competencies required to be successful world citizens, drivers need to be pursued as part of a coherent whole and be implemented in a highly interactive way.

As part of the recent National Summit on Educator Effectiveness hosted by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness, Fullan discussed the concept of effective drivers and the need for whole system reform in a webinar and a keynote address. He challenged the reformers in audience to think about whether the priorities they have set will:

1. foster intrinsic motivation of teachers and students;

2. engage educators and students in continuous improvement of instruction and learning;

3. inspire collective or team work; and

4. affect all teachers and students – 100 per cent?[1]

I believe that the initial response to Fullan’s presentation has been striking. Individuals who were part of the Summit and read his article are now asking questions such as, “Are we aiming at the whole system or tinkering with selected elements?” “What are the drivers we are investing our time and money in, and should these be replaced with more powerful drivers?” “How can we be more collaborative in our work?” Who are the right stakeholders?”

Some questions I thought of include: If ensuring that all students are able to compete in a global economy is really our goal, what can we learn from Fullan about designing reforms that take on issues of inequity? What would it take to launch a whole-system reform that pushes the deeper changes needed to make a difference for those students who are currently not learning at the level needed to be successful in a changing world? What might happen if we involved more teachers of color in leadership roles for designing reforms? How can we capture the voices of students of color to help design learning experiences that are more motivating and have more real world applications?  What factors contribute to collective team work in a diverse workforce?  How might implementing  the drivers Fullan talks about make a difference in the graduation rates, particularly among Black African American males?

I am looking forward to ongoing discussion about this publication. I am hopeful that it will be the catalyst for important changes in the way we go about influencing the work of policy change in the future.

U.S. Department of Education. (2010).Blueprint for reform: The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development.


[1] Fullan, M. (2011). Choosing the wrong drivers for whole system reform.

Centre for Strategic Education Seminar Series Paper, 204. East Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.

SCEE National Summit on Educator Effectiveness

SCEE National Summit on Educator Effectiveness

Reading Time: 2 minutes

Two weeks ago, several West Wind Education Policy Inc. staff were in Washington, D.C. to lead the inaugural SCEE National Summit on Educator Effectiveness, Transforming State Systems for the FutureSCEE, the State Consortium on Educator Effectiveness, was convened by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) in the fall of2010.

Nearly thirty states convened to dissect educator effectiveness from many different lenses.  With facilitation from West Wind, Council of Chief State School Officers staff, and the national Comprehensive Center network, the 28 state teams set out to think about the current “state of [their] state,” their students’ and educators’ needs, and what effectiveness looks like from many different standpoints.

For West Wind, it was rewarding to see the summit unfold after much planning, conceptualizing,  webinars, blog posts, and more than a little sweat that led up to the Summit.

West Wind was particularly proud of the work we led in four of the six breakout strands:  Teacher Evaluation; Leader Evaluation; Professional Development and Policy and Systems Change.  Deb Hansen was the strand leader for Professional Development, where she worked closely with Stephanie Hirsh of Learning Forward to design an interactive and engaging series of activities for state teams using—believe it or not—the principles of high quality professional development in their delivery.  Circe Stumbo and Deanna Hill coordinated the Policy and Systems Change strand, where we wove into the work not only our framework for Systemic Equity Leadership but also the work of Summit keynoter Michael Fullan.  Fullan’s two articles on whole-system reform helped states recognize the need for thinking broadly about their vision for education and strategically about the drivers they prioritize in rolling out reform.

Playing as a tag-team, Deanna helped Circe to represent West Wind in the set-up session to both the teacher and leader evaluation strands.  There, we were able to interject considerations of equity into the policy and technical conversations about the design of statewide evaluation systems.

All in all, the hope remains that these deliberations, which were initiated from the many discussions at the summit, can bring continued collaboration and participation.  West Wind looks forward to continuing its work with the states as they progress.


Theme: Overlay by Kaira