ERIC Identifier: ED482324
Publication Date: 2003-12-00
Author: Manuelito, Kathryn D
Source: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools
Building a Native Teaching Force: Important Considerations.
Native teacher preparation programs provide an approach to improve the
outcomes of American Indian and Alaska Native (AI/AN) students, help
raise the next generation of leaders, and contribute to the economic base
of Native reservations (Billy, 1999). This Digest reviews important considerations
in building a Native teaching force by discussing the rationale for developing
a Native teaching force, current challenges, and the Native Educators Research
RATIONALE FOR DEVELOPING A NATIVE TEACHING FORCE
The AI/AN population is approximately 2.5 million (AI/AN only) or 4.1
million (AI/AN in combination with one or more other race), with 37% under
the age of 20 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2001a; 2001b). In 2000, there were 1.2
million children and youth of school age (5-19 years), about 90% of whom
attend public schools (Swisher & Tippeconnic, 1999).
Developing a Native teacher force is essential to helping meet the needs
of this sizable group of AI/AN children for a number of evidence-based
* Learning is enhanced when teacher and student share the same language
and culture (McCarty & Watahomigie, 1999; Erickson & Mohatt, 1982).
* Native teachers enhance the teacher-student relationship for Native
increase the desire of students to remain in school (Bowker, 1993;
Kawagley, 1999; Swisher & Tippeconnic, 1999).
* Native teachers are important role models for Native youth (Cleary
& Peacock, 1998; Kawagley, 1999).
* Native teachers provide "connectivity" to Native students' community
Peacock, 1998; Deyhle & Swisher, 1997; Pavel, Larrimore, &
Van Alstine, 2003;
Swisher & Tippeconnic, 1999). Connectivity is the foundation of
preparation programs and is essential for Native people, teachers,
educational institutions (Pavel et al., 2003, p. 210-211).
* Native teachers are likely to be aware of Native learning styles and
information to improve teaching styles (Philips, 1983; Swisher &
Presently, insufficient numbers of Native postsecondary students are
meet the high demand for Native teachers. In public schools with high
Native American enrollment, 16% of the teachers are Native American (Billy,
1999). In 1997, an assessment conducted in the Navajo Nation found that
of the 1,132 certified teachers teaching in public, BIA, and grant schools
serving Navajo students, only 15% were Navajo.
In the last 30 years, tribal universities, tribal colleges in partnership
universities, and state universities and colleges have provided Native
preparation programs. Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) are the
Native language and culture, particularly in teacher education programs
such as the
Dine Teacher Education Program at Dine College (Arizona), Oksale Native
Teacher Preparation (Washington), Turtle Mountain Teacher Education Program
(North Dakota), and Leech Lake Tribal College Teacher Education (Minnesota)
(Pavel et al., 2003).
Other teacher education programs that emphasize language and culture
are at Sitting
Bull College (North Dakota), Sinte Gleska University (South Dakota),
and Haskell Indian Nations University (Kansas) (Froelich & Medearis,
1999; Leei, 1999). TCUs cannot, however, bear the major responsibility
of developing Native teachers because each institution typically graduates
less than 20 teachers a year.
Additional challenges (outlined below) must be met in order to increase
the number of Native teachers in schools serving Native students.
The assimilationist curriculum in teacher education programs and in
advances, major systemic issues remain in the development of teacher
programs. One area of concern is the assimilationist curriculum, the
American education, which continues to thrive in academia, including
in Native teacher education programs. American public education still does
not seem to recognize diversity as an asset, which raises the strong possibility
that unique heritages, dialects, and values of particular cultural groups
will be excluded with the implementation of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
legislation, state standards, and high-stakes testing. At least one observer
fears that "Native nations and the schools serving their pupils will most
likely become as assimilationistic as the pre-1928 BIA boarding and mission
schools" (Forbes, 2000, p. 8).
Lack of support in many Native communities. Native people, like other
people around the world, have been greatly impacted by centuries of
(Smith, 1999). As a result, Native people are sometimes more supportive
of non-Natives guiding their education than they are from guidance from
their own people (Cleary & Peacock, 1998). Many are even suspicious
of having their languages and cultures included in the school curriculum
because they feel it may hinder school learning.
There is often a gap between what Native people view as ideal and what
they view as realistically desirable (Cleary & Peacock, 1998; House,
2002). Too often Indian
communities proclaim the ideals of language and culture maintenance
as an integral
aspect of Native education but in practice do not support inclusion.
attitudes stemming from these perspectives often result in community
Native teachers and lack of follow-through in implementing established
regarding the inclusion of Native language and culture in education.
working among a population that still harbors the effects of colonization,
need peer and administrative support. This level of support is best assured
by an understanding school board elected by a community committed to the
importance of culturally relevant instruction.
Need for clarity in developing Native language and culture programs.
Native population includes hundreds of languages and cultures, developing
appropriate curriculum can be problematic, particularly in urban public
schools where many tribal groups are represented in one school. Native
and non-Native teachers don't know enough about students' Native languages
and cultures. For example, instruction in a Native curriculum often can
be trivialized. This can happen when the teaching of beading, weaving,
or other Native crafts are not connected to the understanding of concepts
in math, science, or other academic subject matter.
THE NATIVE EDUCATORS RESEARCH PROJECT
Presently some of these challenges are being examined in the Native
Research Project located at the Center for Indian Education, Arizona
The three-year study, which began in 2001, is focusing on how language
are included in the education of teachers in 27 Native (American Indian,
Alaska Native, Hawaiian) teacher preparation programs nationwide. It is
hoped that findings from this study will provide the foundation for sounder
models and more effective practices in Native education.
The study addresses five key research questions:
1 What are the attitudes of Native preservice teachers toward the inclusion
of language and culture in schooling?
2 How do teacher preparation programs impact these attitudes?
3 What are the standard components of programs that evidence their specific
interest in meeting the needs of Native students?
4 What factors exist in the teaching environments to support or thwart
teachers' efforts to incorporate language and culture or situate learning
within the local context?
5 Do teachers perceive that students' learning, academic achievement,
development are enhanced by the inclusion of language and culture in
Data have been collected related to the first three questions via the
use of a survey (238 of 500 were returned, for a response rate of 46%).
Other information about the teacher preparation programs was received through
program progress reports, program proposals, and interviews with program
administrators. The fourth and fifth questions will be investigated in
the second and third years of the study.
Important background information to consider in reading survey results
(reported below) include the following observations:
* Of the 27 programs reviewed, 10 are situated in colleges of education
universities; 2 are in private religious affiliated institutions, and
15 are based at tribal
* The mission statements for each program stress the intent to prepare
teachers to be responsive to the needs of Native students. Many specifically
articulate a focus on
Native language and culture. However, the course content and requirements
often do not reflect this intent.
* Nearly all of the programs used a combination of field-based and classroom
Mentoring by instructors, community members, or classroom teachers was
component in many of the programs, and distance learning was heavily
used in nine of the programs. Preliminary results from the surveys are
briefly discussed here in four categories:
Demographic profile. More than 80% of the respondents were female and
nearly half were over the age of 30. Nearly half (48%) indicated they had
prior experiences as an instructional aide.
Language and cultural aptitude or capability. Nearly half (45%) of respondents
reported that they spoke their Native or tribal language, while 59% said
they understood their Native or tribal language. About a third could write
in their Native language; 42% could read it. More than half (56%) reported
that they are "somewhat/very" to "very"knowledgeable about their own Native/tribal
cultures and traditions.
Attitudes toward the inclusion of Native language and culture in schooling.
respondents (95%) felt Native/tribal "language" should be included
in the schooling of Native children. Nearly all respondents (97%) felt
Native/tribal "culture" also should be included.
Professional preparation. Few respondents (26%) felt prepared to teach
Native/tribal language, English as a second language (25%), or bilingual
(24%). While half of the respondents felt prepared to teach multicultural
education, only about a quarter (26%) felt prepared to teach Native/tribal
culture. Respondents (61%) were more confident about their preparation
to deal with issues of parent and
Although 70% felt prepared to use cooperative/group instructional strategies,
only 40% felt "somewhat" or "well" prepared in the area of Native learning
Results of this study as well as previous research findings will help
inform efforts to
develop a stronger and more knowledgeable Native teaching force. However,
from a Native perspective, no event or process is completely finished;
it is always in a state of change and becoming. So, too, in the case of
Native education, and particularly Native teacher preparation programs.
Billy, C. (1999). A personal story: Race and education. Tribal College
American Indian Higher Education, 11(2), 10-11.
Bowker, A. (1993). Sisters in the blood: The education of women in Native
America. Newton, MA: Women's Educational Equity Act Publishing Center.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 363 486)
Cleary, L. M., & Peacock, T. D. (1998). Collected wisdom: American
Indian education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 422 138)
Deyhle, D., & Swisher, K. G. (1997). Research in American Indian
and Alaska Native Education: From assimilation to self-determination. In
M. W. Apple (Ed.), Review of research in education (Vol. 22, pp. 113-194).
Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
Erickson, F., & Mohatt, G. (1982). Cultural organization of participant
structures in two classrooms of Indian students. In G. Spindler (Ed.),
Doing the ethnography of schooling: Educational anthropology in action
(pp. 132-174). New York: Holt, Rhinehart, & Winston.
Forbes, J. D. (2000). The new assimilation movement: Standards, tests,
Anglo-American supremacy. Journal of American Indian Education, 39(2),
Special Issue 3, 7-28.
Froelich, K., & Medearis, C. (1999). Sitting Bull's vision: A collaboration
that works for our children. Tribal College Journal of American Indian
Higher Education, 11(2), 18-20.
House, D. (2002). Language shift among the Navajos: Identity politics
continuity. Tucson: The University of Arizona Press. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 463 911)
Kawagley, A. O. (1999). Alaska Native education: History and adaptation
in the new millennium. Journal of American Indian Education, 39(1), 31-51.
Leei, L. (1999). Tribal college profile: Haskell graduate dreams of
opportunity in new millennium. Tribal College Journal of American Higher
Education, 11(2), 36.
McCarty, T. L., & Watahomigie, L. J. (1999). Indigenous community-based
language education in the USA. In S. May (Ed.), Indigenous community-based
education (pp. 79-94). Philadelphia: Multilingual Matters Ltd. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. ED 432 435)
Pavel, D. M., Larrimore, C., & Van Alstine, M. J. (2003). A gift
to all children: Native teacher preparation. In M. K. P. Ah Nee-Benham
& W. J. Stein (Eds.), The renaissance of American Indian higher education:
Capturing the dream (pp. 193-211). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 469 366)
Philips, S. U. (1983). The invisible culture: Communication in classroom
and community on the Warm Springs Reservation. New York: Longman. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 226 878)
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous
New York: St. Martin's Press. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED 448 006)
Swisher, K. G., & Tippeconnic III, J. W. (Eds.). (1999). Next steps:
practice to advance Indian education. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse
on Rural Education and Small Schools. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED 427 902)
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001a). Profiles of General Demographic Characteristics
2000. (Table DP-1. Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000).
Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2001b). Census 2000 Summary File 1. (Table 4. Population
by Race Alone or in Combination and Age for the United States: 2000). Washington,
Please note that this site is privately owned and is in no way related
to any Federal agency or ERIC unit. Further, this site is using a
privately owned and located server. This is NOT a government sponsored
or government sanctioned site. ERIC is a Service Mark of the U.S. Government.
This site exists to provide the text of the public domain ERIC Documents
previously produced by ERIC. No new content will ever appear here
that would in any way challenge the ERIC Service Mark of the U.S. Government.